Nine Idiots in Black Robes

Illustration from http://politicallyillustrated.com/index.php?/news_page/lpnh/2414/

Today I'm barking at The Supreme Court of The United States ("SCOTUS").  They handed down a real doozy this past week.  In a 8-1 decision handed down on March 2, 2011 in the case of Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. ____(2011), SCOTUS determined that Fred Phelps and his band of inbreeds (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Westboro") has the right to annoy and harass grieving families at funerals.  This ruling gave us a glimpse at what to expect from Obama appointees Sotomayor and Kagan.  No surprise that Roberts, Thomas, Kennedy and Scalia came down on Westboro's side.  The surprise was that Breyer and Ginsberg ruled in favor of Westboro and Alito was the lone dissenter. 

I promise to try to keep this reading as a blog and not a legal brief, but considering the topic and what I do for a living, I apologize in advance if I don't meet that goal.  For those of you not familiar with the case, Fred Phelps, pastor of Westboro Baptist Church, was sued by Albert Snyder for emotional distress after Westboro picketed the funeral of Snyder's son.  Matthew Snyder was a US serviceman who was killed in action in Iraq.  Westboro's claim to fame is picketing funerals, particularly military funerals and the funerals of any high-profile person, holding up signs proclaiming "God Hates Fags," "Fags Doom Nations," "You're Going to Hell," and "Thank God For Dead Soldiers."  They get as close to the funeral as the law of the municipality in question will allow, and they make it a point to never get any closer than local ordinances allow.  I point this out because the madness is quite methodical.  They keep themselves from being arrested for trespass or for any violation of local law, thus making the fight about their alleged right to berate the bereaved.

Much has been printed and discussed about not only this case, but about Westboro's actions in general.  Westboro commits all of its acts hiding behind the shielding cloak of the First Amendment.  The majority members of SCOTUS opined that Westboro was within its First Amendment rights.   Alito, in his dissent, took the position that a family's right to grieve in peace takes priority over Westboro's right to run their mouths.  I'm not known for agreeing with Alito.  In fact, I'm known for considering him one of the pirates of the Constitution, but I'm with him whole-hearted on this.  His dissent reads as though it came from my fingers.  This is about First Amendment rights, but somewhere along the way, my right to be free from your religion and free from your opinions takes priority over your right to practice your religion and run your mouth.  Certainly, a family's right to bury their dead in peace should take priority over a pack of baboons telling the family that their deceased loved one is in hell.  The oft repeated phrase "your right to swing your fist ends at my nose" no longer seems to hold true.  Pursuant to this ruling, you are free to swing your fist square into my nose, and my nose's right to be free of being hit has to take a back seat. 

Free speech is a delicate balance.  The simple fact is that someone, somewhere is going by be offended by something I say.  The only solution to avoid offending someone is to remain silent.  That's not a viable option.  Should free speech necessarily encompass allowing groups to set out with malice aforethought to annoy, harass, distress and cause emotional pain on others, particularly to those who are strangers to the offending party?  Westboro sets out to show up at the funerals of soldiers killed in the line of duty to spew their venom.  They do not know the family of the deceased.  They did not know the deceased.  They do not know the moral beliefs of the deceased or his/her family, and yet they feel compelled to force their message of their own moral superiority on a grieving family during their darkest hour.  Where does the bereaveds' right to be free from this fit into this picture?  Certainly, it has to have a place somewhere.  The message I take from this opinion is that freedom of does not equate to freedom from.  I've feared for quite some time that was the direction we were headed, but we're dangerously close to it now. 

It's just a matter of time before some grieving parent snaps and unloads a clip or two on Westboro.  That's a crying shame.  It's a shame because the aforementioned grieving parent will spend the remainder of his/her life incarcerated, and because the inbreeds killed will become martyrs for their cause.  It's a shame because I believe that the inbreeds want it to happen so that they can cry martyr for their god.  I'm not advocating the act of violence at all.  I'm just being realistic.  At some point, someone is going to snap.  When it happens, call me hypocrite, but I plan to be at the baboon's funeral, holding up signs conveying my own hatred for Inbred Fred and his inbreeds, and shielding myself in the cloak of the First Amendment.