Oregon Debates New Funeral-Protest Bill

By Michelle Cole
Religion News Service

SALEM, Ore. -- A day after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of an anti-gay church to picket funerals, Oregon legislators discussed a bill that would put distance between protesters and mourners.

On Wednesday (March 2), the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution protects the right of Westboro Baptist Church to protest funerals and declare their stance on matters of public debate, such as society's tolerance of homosexuality.

The Oregon bill proposes restrictions around funerals, burials and memorial services. Protesters engaging in "activities that are disruptive" would be required to stay at least 300 feet away for an hour before and after the funeral.

Rep. Patrick Sheehan, a Republican who sponsored the bill, said he is aware of the need to balance mourners' privacy with protesters' free speech rights.

"We'll allow them free speech but they don't have to have that in the face of people who are grieving," he said on Thursday (March 3).

The American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon said the Oregon bill would be unconstitutional on several fronts.

The Oregon Supreme Court has interpreted Oregon's Constitution to give even more protections than the First Amendment, said Andrea Meyer, ACLU's legislative director.

"Free speech and the right to protest peacefully extend to all Americans," she said, "even if their messages are unpopular, distasteful and even hateful."

The committee took no action on the bill Thursday but Sheehan said he's confident he has the votes to move it to the floor.

Comments

[daytrader2]

09:18 AM on 03/12/2011

"would be required to stay at least 300 feet away for an hour before and after the funeral."

I think than they should be no less than 1500 feet away from families.

To be left alone to grieve, in Peace,
is a Human & Religious Right.

[thereisonlyoneparty]

03:05 AM on 03/08/2011

Just stop it.

The right to expression is more important than people having a good time at some stupid religious ritual.

Stop wasting people's time trying to silence unpopular views.

[danmorrisphoto]

07:41 PM on 03/07/2011

Pious Picketing – Portraits of the Westboro Baptist Church:

http://www.danmorris.com/2011/03/07/pious-picketing-portraits-of-the-westboro-baptist-church/

[The JillyBean]

10:47 AM on 03/07/2011

I knew there was a reason I still liked Oregon.

[Bobbi2664]

09:12 AM on 03/07/2011

Ok the one issue I have is where were the voices of critisim when these people and I use the term loosely were demonstrating the funerals of those that died of the complications of HIV/ AIDS?

[fishnetdiver]

06:49 AM on 03/07/2011

maybe we should dust-off the 'Free Speech Zone' cages that were so popular with the Bush administration...

[LJIESQ]

09:17 PM on 03/06/2011

In my view the USSC really screwed up on this one. Does this now mean that free speech does protect the one who yells "fire" in a crowded theatre? I hope all you right-winged fruitcake Scalia, Thomas, Roberts lovers are happy now; you have the legal result you've been screaming for.

[Jacob Black]

11:25 AM on 03/07/2011

By protecting the speech of odious people like Phelps, your right to express unpopular opinions is protected. You may not like some of the justices that joined in the opinion, but they are right about this one.

[LJIESQ]

07:42 PM on 03/07/2011

From a strict constructionist standpoint, you are corrrect. But they should have explicity overturned a zillion of their own cases but then that would say "stari decisic" is meaningless. Trouble is, this type of zero tolerence strict constructionist approach becomes a stiffling stumbling block in the path of efforts to raise the level of consciousness in mankind in America.

[raker]

09:14 PM on 03/06/2011

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The issue isn't funerals, it's the harassment of innocent people by nasty, pathological narcissists. Outlaw this behavior at funerals and they'll move it to weddings or christenings, or they just might set up camp at the end of your driveway, no occasion necessary.

[The JillyBean]

10:49 AM on 03/07/2011

then the laws will follow. The point is to start with one and if that doesn't drown out the idiots, move on to the next step. Everyone has the right to express their 1st amendment, but no one should be forced to be persecuted by it.

[raker]

02:20 PM on 03/07/2011

I think that's a lousy way to make policy, crafting a hundred laws when one would do. And I don't think anyone wants those nuts sanctioned by the government for expressing nutty ideas, it's their harassment of innocent people as a means to get their nasty faces on TV that ought to be stopped. Hell, anti-Bush protesters weren't even allowed to stand within a mile of that cretin, so why not put these super-christians in protest pens too—a mile away from the nearest pair of ears will do.

These are low acts by low people that do not call for loud and proud declarations of fidelity to the first amendment.

[Neets101]

12:24 PM on 03/06/2011

Yep, keep yer distance, just like the porno shop has to stay away from the school.

Also, WBC, is guilty of harassment.

[zwyziec]

12:06 PM on 03/06/2011

When I protested against the Iraq war and GWB, we had to stay a distance from the speakers in a separate zone. The Secret Service does this all the time when politicians are picketed.

[zwyziec]

12:04 PM on 03/06/2011

As an Oregonian I'm pleased with this.

It's also a rare occasion I agree with a republican.

[supportamerica]

11:55 AM on 03/06/2011

As a Christian, I try and live under the "judge not, lest you be judged". I may not agree with war, I may not agree with the gay movement but I wish not to judge them. God said, it is not up to me to judge, but up to him. As far as freedom of speech goes, the Supreme Court of the United States made a ruling, which all must follow now. Does it hurt the families, sure it does, and no one should have to experience any more grief than they have to, and any one helping to alleviate that grief should be allowed to do so. Every town has zoning issues and require permits to assemble when it comes to public protests and these should be followed, if not, then arrest them for improper assembly with out a permit. Make them follow the rules as any other protest group. I have no problem with that, and would stand shoulder to shoulder with anyone to put myself between them and the grieving family. Keeping them x number of feet back is not violating their freedom of speech.

[Nopinky]

11:36 AM on 03/06/2011

Sounds like reasonable time/place/manner restrictions to me. I think this would hold up.

[schildpad]

03:59 AM on 03/06/2011

Hmmmm.... make it kind of zoning issue? That may fly. It'll be interesting to see.

Personally, I'd rather see entire cities turn out to fill up the available space before the Westerboroboobs show up.

[lasjazzman]

03:25 AM on 03/06/2011

Interesting - this sounds like an attempt to find middle ground between the two poles of bats*** crazy and idiotic.