Supreme Court: Anti-gay funeral protests OK

Earlier today the Supreme Court ruled that anti-gay protests outside military funerals is okay because it is still within First Amendment rights and that protesting is freedom of speech. The majority of members said that even though protesting can be a very hurtful way of expressing oneself, the Constitition does protect them and their rights. Chief Justice John Roberts tried to explain that if they were to rule protesting outside military funerals illegal it may cause an uprising saying that the Constitution says that everyone has the right to say what they want. He also said that if they did decide to make it unlawful it would stir up much debate and who knows what would happen to our great nation then. In response to Roberts claims Justice Samuel Alito argued that what the protesters were doing was a "vicious verbal assault." These people protesting military funerals are members of the Westboro Baptist Church. They believe that the soldiers deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan is God's way of punishing America for tolerating homosexuality. They put phrases like, "Thank God for dead soldiers," "God Hates the USA," and "Thank God for 9/11," on their signs. Shortly after his son died in the Middle East, Albert Snyder was completely sick of these people protesting the funerals of soldiers who are trying to protect our freedoms, so he decided to sue Rev. Fred Phelps for all the emotional distress he and his congregation has caused him and his family. Snyder won this case getting $5 million out of Phelps but it wasn't enough. Snyder wanted to protect the members of other families from going through all the hardships he suffered so he filled a new case against protesting at military funerals. This case went to the state government, the federal government and it ended up in the Supreme Court. There, as stated earlier, the court sided in favor of keeping freedom of speech.

When I read this article I honestly couldn't believe it right away, but as I let the information sink in and discussed it with other people I realized just how hard this was to judge for the justices. On one hand you would be siding with a grieving father who recently lost his son who wasn't gay and was basically disgraced during his funeral. And on the other is a church who are simply expressing their rights to freedom of speech. Right after reading this article I would have most definitely sided with Snyder because I think it is completely and morally wrong to protest someones funeral. I mean this person has just died so their family is obviously grieving the loss of their loved one, so why can't we just respect them and leave them in piece. One question that came into my head was what if it was one of their children, a brother, sister, mother, father, etc. in that funeral, how would they react then? Would they still disgrace who ever died by protesting their funeral? I simply think that everyone deserves the right to a peaceful funeral and that is the one thing that should be kept sacred. On the other hand as I let this information set in I understood why the justices ruled the way they did. If they ruled and took away the Westboro Baptist Church's right to speak that might cause a huge uprising and would basically cause more harm than good. I believe that they should be able to express themselves because everyone should have the right to express themselves freely. In terms of abiding by the Constitution they ruled correctly because freedom of speech is one of our First Amendment rights and they can never be taken away. But even then, I still think that these people shouldn't be allowed to express their opinions at a funeral. Funerals should be kept sacred to honor and mourn those who have past.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41868004/ns/politics-more_politics/