Charleston BANS Funeral Protests

Ok, this, to me, is HUGE: Charleston is banning funeral protests of the victims.

The Charleston City Council has unanimously passed a temporary ordinance that bans protests or picketing at funerals in advance of services this week for the nine people slain at a historic black church.

The ordinance passed Tuesday evening states that no one may protest or picket within 300 feet of a church or other building holding a funeral, memorial or burial for one hour before and one hour after the service.

Link

Now, the SCOTUS has already sided with the Hate Group Westboro, and even though I find them sickening, I think that free speech needs to be protected. It's unpopular speech that needs protecting, no matter how offensive to some.

And while protesting the funerals of those killed in Charleston would be utterly disrespectful and completely tasteless, temporarily banning them sets a dangerous precedent. While the protests are only banned "within 300 feet," it seems, that *might* make it more acceptable (there were free speech zones in certain political conventions), this still has me very concerned.

Now, it seems, we're throwing away the right of free speech in certain places out of respect, and this is why it sets a dangerous precedent.

Again, while I find such a protest disgusting, the right to have a such a protest—even if we disagree with it—is what makes our country great.

I'm almost hoping someone will challenge this.

If they can decide when and where and how far we can protest, it's all downhill...

What say you, ATS?

Maybe it *is* a good idea? A bunch of white supremacists protesting such a funeral might *just* push some of the black community over the edge, thereby doing just what Roof wanted.

So what's the price?

Westboro have planned to picket these funerals since the moment the attack became news...

I follow their Twitter for the lulz...
It's not always lulz though.

Sometimes it's enraging...
This is one of those times.




"God sent the shooter" is their motto...

I hope God sends a few shooters their way.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I say let them protest. Then let the black panthers or a biker gang, or a raceless group come counter them.

But then maybe that would give the coward Roof his wish?

If the people are willing to 'peacefully assemble' then they should have the right to communicate whatever they wish...even at a funeral. There is no excuse for curtailing our right to free speech.

a reply to: Liquesence

It is a slippery slope, isn't it.

Free speech is great...
Harassment isn't.


So "protest" isn't necessarily the terminology I'd use.
This cult will picket the wrong funeral in the wrong area one day.



As for Roof, I can't imagine he has many ardent supporters.

That's a direct violation of the 1st Amendment.

:/

On the other hands this may be aimed at Al Sharpton types

I think the "orders" came from the Administration.

originally posted by: Kali74
That's a direct violation of the 1st Amendment.

:/

No its not.

People are free to protest provided their actions don't interfere with the rights of those who aren't protesting. People are free to protest a business so long as they dont block access to that business or prevent people from entering or leaving the business.

A funeral is a private event....

What the hate groups like west boro are doing is not protesting. They are happy innocent people died while pushing their ignorant idiotic moronic howl at the moon stupid propaganda that contradicts the very religion they claim to represent.

Going to a funeral with signs that claim God killed these people for whatever bs reason they use is not protesting.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I preface this by saying: Westboro is scum, and their actions and beliefs undoubtedly contradict the religion they claim to represent. True.

What rights are you talking about? The "right" to be left in peace, the" right" to not be offended, to not feel harassed? By their tasteless "protesting" are they really truly interfering with anyone's rights? Unless the line becomes the right to not be harassed, and then we'll have to keep drawing the line.

Even if they aren't directly interfering with the funeral, don't they have the right to publicly spout their idiotic moronic hate that they use religion to hide behind? Isn't that the point of the first amendment? Hate speech is protected. Even if it's utterly disgusting...

True funerals are generally private events, but doesn't this funeral (like the funeral of a president, etc) almost become a public funeral?

And yes, westboro is using first amendment protection to spout their BS, but the point is...it's still protected regardless of how disgusting it is.

Obama will be there on Friday to deliver the eulogy for the Senator, as such, more protesters. Seems reasonable to take the appropriate measures.

a reply to: Liquesence

If you read the supreme court decision with regards to Westboro you would see the lawsuit against them involved a claim of emotional distress by there actions, which the supreme court said no to.


Scouts has not ruled on the right to protest balanced against the right to peace during a funeral where the participants are considered a captive audience subject to bate speech that they cannot respond to.

a reply to: Liquesence

Westboro show up and get mauled (as they should) they are all white are they not?

What would be the difference if the Klan showed up and got mauled (like they should)?

I don't see how you condone one and condemn the other.

No group should "protest" a funeral. What are they "protesting"? If a loved one died and the funeral was used as a focal point for a protest movement I could understand. I can not in any way understand nor accept people "protesting" a funeral.

They twist the rights we are given to suit their needs even though they could not care less about rights. Some things are not covered by speech, some things are not covered by right to assemble. Westboro falls under the umbrella of "not covered" by any civilized society.

No group should "protest" a funeral. What are they "protesting"? If a loved one died and the funeral was used as a focal point for a protest movement I could understand. I can not in any way understand nor accept people "protesting" a funeral.

a reply to: 200Plus

I have a lot of anger towards WBC, but I still don't like this decision.

I would never protest a funeral, I can't begin to imagine how brainwashed and ignorant you would have to be to do something so despicable.

It's something you have to accept in America, the good with the bad, the bad with the ugly.

What you see as twisting rights, I see it as lucky that we still have some rights to twist.

You ban protesting in one instance, it opens the door for the next time, and on and on.

a reply to: rockintitz

Normally I would agree with the slippery slope argument but in this case the complaint is specific and it involves a private event verse a public protest.

Private funerals should be an exception to a right to protest. Especially when the protest is based on the groups idiotic personal opinion and not something substantiated.

In this instance I think the funeral verse protest should be viewed as a baseball game where the batter hits the ball and their is a tie at first base. The tie should go to the runner (funeral).

Secondly considering the leader was a lawyer I think their actions revolved more around creating scenarios that allowed for frivolous lawsuits than any religious outcome.

a reply to: Liquesence

If Charleston was going to ban anything, why couldn't it have been a ban against any legal action towards people who attack Westboro protesters?

The area has just suffered an unimaginable tragedy and loss, I don't care what your precious amendments say, NOBODY has the right to cause those people any further grief. When you add the race element, it's even worse...white guy killed your loved ones, white people now saying God deemed it so? It's a recipe for disaster and further separating whites and blacks.

How can anybody in a modern civilised society say that it is OK for these people to spout their hate when nobody agrees with it, and it has the potential to cause so much pain and anger? All because you think it is protecting the right of free speech to all???

Oh come on, please......

a reply to: Xcathdra

It is private, that's true.

But the solution is a government one.

The church and cemetery could have banned them, as well as any other local businesses in the area.

I'm sorry but it's black and white in this situation.

You can't "normally" agree with fundamental rights.

a reply to: Liquesence

If they want to picket, fine. Put in place an ordinance or a federal statute stating that any protest or picketing may not take place within 1500 feet of an active funeral.

This becomes very complicated because you have measure where one persons rights harm another persons rights. For example your right to free speech does not allow you stand outside a persons home with loud speakers yelling in the middle of the night. Where a persons right privately bury their dead in peace and another persons right to try and disrupt that meet is not an easy problem to solve. Like so much about the Constitution the Founders left it open to interpretation. It is both the documents greatest strength and greatest weakness.