Today’s Washington Post is reporting on some legislation moving through state houses:
At least five Midwestern states are considering legislation to ban protests at funerals in response to demonstrations by the Rev. Fred Phelps and members of his Topeka, Kan.-based Westboro Baptist Church, who have been protesting at funerals of Iraq war casualties because they say the deaths are God’s punishment for U.S. tolerance toward gays.
Though the soldiers were not gay, the protesters say the deaths, as well as Hurricane Katrina, recent mining disasters and other tragedies are God’s signs of displeasure. They also protested at the memorial service for the 12 West Virginia miners who died in the Sago Mine.
While I agree with most people that Phelps’ protests are a demonstration of the most vile, insensitive, horrible taste I’ve ever seen, and I can understand why seeking to ban protests at funerals is a natural reaction to such revulsive behavior…. I think the states might be going too far if they’re seeking a blanket ban.
I think it would be a more appropriate balance between free-speech and sensitivity towards the bereaved to ban disruptive protests…but still allow protestors some access to express their thoughts. A group of sign-holding individuals standing silently/quietly across the street from an entrance to cemetary, or within sight of (but a respectful distance away from) a funeral home would (IMO) be less problematic. Yes, such a demonstration would still be bad taste… but “free speech” doesn’t mandate good taste.
Your thoughts, anyone?