When Public Discourse "Crosses The Line"

           Today, the Supreme Court ruled in an 8:1 decision that anti-gay protests and picketing at military funerals is protected by the First Amendment as a form of public discourse. Those of the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas have subjected the nation to major debate and controversy surrounding their radical protests at funerals for their extreme stances against homosexuality. We know protests are forms of free speech, protected by the First Amendment, but are the Westboro Baptist Church members crossing the line from free speech to illegal activity? Chief Justice John Roberts holds that Westboro’s protests relate to the public, and not private matters, which thus is a matter of public and political discourse. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito Jr. has a different opinion. He was the only person in the Supreme Court to object against Westboro’s protests. Obscene language is not protected by the First Amendment and Alito suggests that the Westboro Baptist Church uses personally painful and publicly offensive language during their protests. The debate with this issue plays upon the matters of when to restrict political and public discourse, and when that speech is “crossing the line”. John Roberts contends that once you start banning offensive speech, you start banning other forms of speech until you lose the rights protected by the First Amendment—a fundamental right of being an American citizen.

            Being a student as a Crime, Law, and Justice major, you’d think that I would have agreed with the ruling toward the First Amendment’s protection on “political” protests. However, I honestly think this is completely absurd. An 8:1 ruling? One dissenter? I first watched a video about the Westboro Baptist Church about two years ago and I was blown away by it. HOW CAN YOU PROTEST AT SOMEONE’S FUNERAL? Are they kidding? Talk about a lack of morality and concern for fellow American citizenry. The Constitution is the foundation of American law and the larger American society in general. The Westboro protests are held at funerals of military soldiers who DIED FOR OUR COUNTRY, and yet, the Constitution is allowing the protestors to call this American hero a “homosexual” and that “he deserved to die”. It simply is too contradictory to be realistic. Personally, I do not think that protests are forms of public discourse. Public discourse is about sharing your opinions in a responsible and civil manner, allowing for the growth of our democracy in a healthy way. I think that the Westboro protests are offensive, insensitive, and do not add anything to the progression of our civilization. Yes, everyone should be entitled to free speech. However, if the free speech publicly subjects others to the degree of personal hurt that the family members attending the funeral must feel, I absolutely think that it crosses the line for protection by the Constitution.