Westboro Baptist Church Protest And The Counter Protest Analysis

It is the person’s beliefs and it is their opinion. The United States must keep it’s freedom of expression and not become like countries like the “People’s Republic of China” which “. . .decided that citizens who peacefully express disagreement with the government policies may be slaughtered.” As long as a person keeps their expression peacefully they have all the right to express themselves and no one can do anything about

In Snyder v. Phelps, dissenting Justice Samuel Alito likened the protests of the Westboro Baptist Church members to fighting words and of a personal character, and thus not protected speech. The majority disagreed and stated that the protester's speech was not personal but public, and that local laws which can shield funeral attendees from protesters are adequate for protecting those in times of emotional

The first amendment, the right of freedom of speech is one of the most important classic fantasy to almost anyone living in the United States, building the foundation of our nation. This right gives us plenty of different opportunities to express our opinions and political viewpoints on any issues in America. But it comes with a price, people have been protesting multiple different events trying to prevent people from expressing opposing opinions or political viewpoints on that has issues in America. For the minority of people, expressing a different opinion should be protected no matter how controversial or insensitive it may be.

     Since this country was founded, we have had a set of unalienable rights that our constitution guarantees us to as Americans. One of the most important rights that is mentioned in our constitution is the right to free speech. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the

The Westboro Baptist Church is a group that has been in the spotlight for the last two decades because of their unusual tactic of picketing at soldier’s funerals. The act is motivated by the notion that America’s moral are being corrupted by their acceptance of homosexuality. The act of picketing of soldier’s funerals according to the group is motivated by the fact that it is a time when mourners are emotionally vulnerable and they think of their mortality. They believe that by picketing in soldier’s funerals their message is stronger. However, this tactic has caused much consternation from both the public and the government. In the interest of the public, state legislatures have enacted laws against the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church. The landmark case of Snyder v. Phelps would have been the deciding factor against the group, but the Supreme Court held in favor of the group because their actions were protected by the First Amendment. This then would present the notion that the First Amendment trumped public interest in the decision. However, that is not the case because the case was an IIED case among others, it was a personal one. As long as the group coordinates with public authorities and does not break laws, then their acts are nothing more than nuisances that should not get in the way of celebrating the life of the dead.

The right to freedom of expression of ones religion is at stake in this case. Mrs. Williams has a right to express her religion freely. However, based upon the Establishment Clause which prohibits any law “respecting the establishment of religion”, she does not have the right to force others to conform to her way of thinking. At the same time, students and community members have a right to express their religion, too. They also have a right not to have another person’s religion forced on them. So there is only one individual right at stake here, but it is not possible to respect this right of behalf of all the claimants. While the majority of the community, the school board, and some students will feel that it is Mrs. Williams’ right to keep the bulletin board posted, some community members, students, and ACLU feel it is their right not to keep it posted.

Funeral protests have been an issue for years. During this most recent war, as soldiers were coming home to be laid to rest, Westboro Baptist Church made headlines by protesting at the funerals of fallen soldiers. During the services, members of the church would gather outside of many of the military funerals waving signs that had offensive messages on them such as, “God Hates You”, and “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”. The members of this church believe that the death of the soldiers is God’s punishment for the tolerance of homosexuality in the United States. Last year the U.S, Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protects these groups and any others who

Americans and free speech go together like burger king. You can always have it your way, but at what cost? Free speech is something that has been around for a long time, but has involved & seen various dilemmas that make you want to question it & your own freedom. Although free speech was guaranteed in the first amendment there have been many situations that in a complex way make you think about your own rights & the whole purpose of being born in the United States with them. If I was to wake up one day & decide that I wanted to freely create a protest expressing that I support gay rights or the LGBT community then by all means I should be able to do that without any interference.

In the case of Snyder vs Phelps The family of a departed Marine named Lance Cpl, Matthew Snyder put forth legal action against parties of the Westboro Baptist Church for picketing at his funeral. According to the family the church was responsible for defamation, invasion of privacy and the deliberate punishment of emotional suffering, The members of the church held signs that read "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Fag troops" at Snyder's funeral. U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett granted the Snyder family $5 million in damages. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that the decision violated the First Amendment's protections of religious expression. Does the First Amendment defend protesters who deliberately cause emotional

Background: The (Snyder v. Phelps) case dealt with the First Amendment and what it protects. A congregation of the Westboro Baptist Church was protesting Matthew Snyder’s funeral and caused the family a lot of emotional distress. Matthew Snyder was a former Marine who died while serving a tour in Iraq. The protestors were holding up signs that said, “Semper Fi fags, God Hates the USA, Thank God for IEDS.” (Lee Epstein, Pgs 469-72). The Westboro Baptist church has picketed many military funerals. They resent that the military will allow homosexuals to fight for their country. In June 2006, the father, Albert Snyder filed the lawsuit against the Westboro Church. He claimed that the protest caused the family intense emotional distress and that the church intentionally meant to inflect the distress. The Westboro Baptist church said that what they did was protected under the First Amendment. Although this is the first court case that’s been brought up against the Westboro Baptist church and made it to the Supreme Court. They’ve done forms of protests for many years. For example they’ve picketed anything they believe to have in relation to homosexuality. They’ve even protested some of the Kansas

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Phelps family after determining that their protests met First Amendment guidelines. Hate and racial slurs are not illegal, and the Phelps family has the right to hold signs with perverse language. The protests were not threatening, and they remained within the boundaries set by time, place, and manner restrictions. Furthermore, the court ruled

Free Speech is one of the founding statutes of America, and it is interesting to be the want to paint the use of it as hate mongering. The articles given are complementary in “Free Speech Fight Now About Smearing Right as Racists” they offer the argument that all these protesters are trying to do is paint the right as racists and then in the article from CNN they claim just that. Costello does condemn the violent acts of the protesters but seats the blame clearly on the opinions and platform of the speakers invited. Massive amounts of the mainstream media dedicate all their time to painting the right as racists as if that is the sole majority of their group. These protests at Berkeley just go forward in trying to silence those with disagreements

“Thank God for dead soldiers.”(Westboro Baptist Church, 2014) individuals, groups, and organizations should not be able to protest at military funerals. I don’t think that they should be able to, for other people (Westboro Baptist Church) think that it’s legal for citizens to protest at military funerals. The Snyder v. Phelps case which was a supreme court case regarding protests, was big around 2010-2011 because courts said protesting was a,“matter of public concern.” Protests like this could be known as a form of hate speech toward the military. What they did was (Discrimination at Military Funerals) even though Westboro members don’t think it is.

In the First Amendment, it says you have the right to speak freely and protest peacefully, but as the years have gone by, certain exceptions have been made. Now, many people think this is outrageous, saying that “That’s not right, that’s limiting our rights!”, or “They’re abusing their power!”. Now, yes, the fact that they have made exceptions to the very essence may be very controversial, and I could see why people would be upset. But, if you actually read about what they are restricting, I think you would agree that they are not outrageous at all and are quite necessary to have, as most deal with very inappropriate and downright wrong topics,

I believe protesters have the right to be heard. Many people have different ideas and society is much better off when those ideas can be discussed openly. Protesters join together and participate in marches, rallies and events in order to put their concerns front and center for public opinion. When people protest, they usually share a common cause and a desire for change. Protesting and the freedom of speech is a constitutional right for all citizens. Protesting unites people together so they can voice solutions to real problems rather than doing nothing and just complaining. Protesting empowers people