Maybe the end isn't near enough

For all you First Amendment junkies out there: There's a fascinating case coming out Pennsylvania that pits what I can only describe as the most despicable form of hate speech with the time-tested, ever-evolving right to protest, preach, decry, rave and rant in America.

It involves the Westboro Baptist Church, a vile, mouth-foaming band of degenerate religious honkies from Kansas who take some sort of sick pleasure in the further suffering of families of dead U.S. soldiers. The church -- which I would venture to guess any self-respecting Christian in this country agrees gives the whole faith a bad name -- attends the funerals of troops who died in Iraq and Afghanistan, bearing signs with such mournful platitudes as "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for 9/11" in pretty rainbow colors.

Their general, eh, belief is both mind-boggling and laugh-out-loud hilarious: That dead soldiers symbolize God's punishment for homosexuals. If you were to dignify that argument with a response, you might ask a few vital questions for clarification, such as: 1) Why wouldn't God just punish gay people instead of soldiers (which leads to the obvious follow-up: Why doesn't God ever get to the point on these matters?)

Also: Why are Kansas baptists so bat-shit crazy?

Anyway, on to the fun part: A parent of a soldier actually sued the group, claiming they invaded his privacy and inflicted emotional distress (From the Baltimore Sun):

The father of a Marine killed in Iraq took the stand today in his invasion of privacy suit against a fundamentalist church that pickets soldiers' funerals, saying protesters carrying signs at his son's burial made him sick to his stomach.

Albert Snyder said he had hoped for a private funeral for his son, Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder.

"They turned this funeral into a media circus and they wanted to hurt my family," Snyder testified. "They wanted their message heard and they didn't care who they stepped over. My son should have been buried with dignity, not with a bunch of clowns outside."

It's clear that defacing the funeral of a soldier, arguably somebody who gave their life for what he or she believed was a noble cause, makes you the lowest form of dog shit. Far be it from me to condone violence, but if it were my son or daughter being buried, I would break some fucking heads wide fucking open. Then I would piss on their signs. And go to jail as a martyr for decency and good old American retribution.

But I think we should take a step back and consider what kind of precedent this case sets. At the very least, what we're talking about is punishing a group for voicing their beliefs -- insane as they may be -- in a lawful manner in a public space. Sure, it probably offends just about everybody in existence outside the church, but so does a show like South Park. Again we're faced with the slippery-slope question that always tags along on these free speech questions: Where do we as Americans draw the line?

The judge in the case outlined as much to jurors:

U.S. District Richard Bennett instructed jurors at the start of testimony Tuesday that the First Amendment protection of free speech has limits, including vulgar, offensive and shocking statements. Bennett said the jurors must decide "whether the defendant's actions would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, whether they were extreme and outrageous, and whether these actions were so offensive and shocking as to not be entitled to First Amendment protection."

As much as it pains me to say this, I think the church losing this case would be a disaster for free speech. I just can't fathom any situation that would merit punishing a group for peacefully protesting, even if the message is juvenile and incredibly offensive. That said, should they be barred from delivering this message at funerals? Absolutely. Let them sit in their church and tell fairy tales to each other about God and the evil gays; hell, even let them march around town like a bunch of evangelical buffoons, a walking argument for the merits of breeding limits (starting with the South.)

But there is a point where common decency kicks in -- like when somebody is trying to honor the dead. Keeping these crazies away from funerals would not deter from their right to speak out. It simply would arrest their ability to insult people who didn't do anything to deserve, or invite, insult.

By the way, I might add this sentiment, for what it's worth: These people make me want to lose all hope in humanity. But it also makes me respect the many Christians who practice their faith in a respectable manner, a few of whom I consider close friends. I don't have a problem with Christians who are outspoken about their beliefs (in fact, I kind of rely on it for content!), but are these people actually conscious of their own message?

I just have a hard time believing that Jesus was the kind of guy who would go to a funeral with a sign that says "Semper Fi Fags." I seem to remember something about love and understanding.