Senators Try To Bar Military Funeral Protests By Westboro Baptist Church

WASHINGTON -- The controversial, gay-hating Westboro Baptist Church would be restricted from holding its inflammatory protests outside the funerals of U.S. service members under a new bill being offered by a bipartisan group of senators.

The Kansas-based church often sends members to attend final rites for service members killed at war, waving signs that claim God hates the deceased because America tolerates homosexuality.

Earlier Thursday, five church members protested such a funeral in Florida, and were met by a much larger counter-protest, Patch reported.

Drawn up by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), the Sanctity of Eternal Rest for Veterans Act -- or SERVE Act -- would mandate two hours of quiet time before and after funerals, and set a 300-foot buffer zone around the funerals and a 500-foot buffer around routes to and from the memorials.

It sets fines ranging from $25,000 to $50,000, and jail sentences of up to two years.

"Those who fight and die in the service of our country deserve our highest respect," said Snowe. "Their families have earned the right to bury their loved ones in peace."

Senators are pursuing the legislation after the Supreme Court ruled recently that such protests could not be barred because doing so would violate the First Amendment's protection for free speech.

“This common-sense legislation will ensure our heroes are buried with the honor and dignity they deserve,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), one of more than a dozen senators to back the measure.

“Our men and women in uniform bravely put everything on the line for our country. It is our duty to provide service members and their families with the support they need while deployed overseas and after they have returned home,” added Gillibrand, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Comments

[John The great]

08:53 AM on 06/04/2011

I don't think they should make it illegal for them to protest at funerals, They should just make it legal for the Marines, Soldiers and Sailors there to react as they see fit. I'm in the Marine Corp and I know if they showed up at one of my buddies funerals I would mess some of them up.

[garumphul]

09:19 AM on 04/17/2011

Defending the indefensible is never easy, but the WBC are within their constitutional rights and have successfully defended their rights in court. You can agree or disagree with their point of view, but it is the duty (!) of every citizen to defend their right to express that point of view. You cannot glibly expect to have your own rights upheld if you refuse to defend those of other people - even if you vehemently disagree with their point of view.

Making it illegal for people to protest peacefully is bad. Making it illegal to protest against *ONE GROUP* is outrageous. The feelings of a dead soldier's family are no more or less important that anybody else's family. It is perverse in the extreme to violate the constitution in the name of a soldier.

These senators should be ashamed of themselves.

[Spontini]

03:43 PM on 04/18/2011

There are all sorts of laws that impose judicially-upheld, Constitutional, time-place-manner restrictions on exercises of speech. There's no "shame" in these Senators exploring a possible law that balances the interest of all parties involved.

[PrometheusMing]

09:24 PM on 04/15/2011

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Please not this little phrase, ... that among these are...

Among these, implying there are others. Among these includes the right to die with dignity, to self determination, and to burial and mourning in peace.

Free speech and separation of church and state much be protected, but no group large or small, empowered by the people or self anointed has the right to deny an individual their unalienable rights.

What this group is doing is unconstitutional.

It must end.

[Larry Aleshire]

12:36 PM on 04/15/2011

funny how elected officials are now beginning to speak about the despicable behavior brought on by a few kooks hiding behind the banner of the church. i remember going to an event honoring randy shilts in which the westboro posse made their presence know and began their protests with so much hate-filled language. they were surrounded by San Francisco police who shielded them, but that did not stop a group of drag queens from pelting the "minister" and his bidding-doers with eggs. it was a glorious sight. Q. why are politicians now seeing the hate-filled minister as an agent provocoteur and the supreme court couldn't? as a gay man i want my rights protected too as much as the right to privacy for the families of fallen soldiers. i know... it is a screwy system.

[DavidMG]

11:54 AM on 04/15/2011

Why did I loose a fan? I had 99.

[PlayTOE]

07:59 PM on 04/15/2011

While you were defending Westboro's right to free speech you went from 99 fans to 98 ...
While I was explaining that free speech can be misused and some reasonable limitations may be indicated I went from about 1450 fans to, well, more than that ...
It was an interesting discussion.

Perhaps at least some readers of HufPo do not agree with what Westboro is doing.

[padrushka]

11:47 AM on 04/15/2011

well damn olympia..good for you! now go take care of the gop version of debt control..

[Kansas1]

11:19 AM on 04/15/2011

They need to extend the bill to cover "EVERYONE'S" funerals not just our soldiers. These parasites from the Westburo Cult started their fiasco long ago just protesting funerals of homosexuals but weren't getting enough attention so they moved to military funerals obviously knowing they would not only get more attention but a better atmosphere for lawsuits when they are attacked...."everyone" should have the right to bury their loved ones in peace...or punch out Westburo Members, I'm good with either....

[Mise]

11:14 AM on 04/15/2011

Expressions of abject hatred by the most certainly damned Westboro coven is, sadly, subject to the "free speech" provisions of the Constitution. However, someone explain to me how spending mega-bucks of secret money to purchase political power is a matter of "free speech" as per the Roberts Court.

[pinkindie]

11:07 AM on 04/15/2011

These so-called "Christians" are quite literally anti-Christs in every sense of the word.

[DavidMG]

10:52 AM on 04/15/2011

I’ve said it before: Get some canvas and some poles and hold up a temporary wall (covered with the starts and stripes) between the funeral and these animals. That will substantially cut down on their presence. Simple, effective and not unconstitutional as this law is

[schnauzergirl]

11:36 AM on 04/15/2011

Here's a question, and its truely just a question, not disagreeing with you.

If we can have anti-bullying laws in schools and over the internet, etc, could similar sort of reasoning apply here? Those have held up in court, people have even been convicted of it (like after a kid who commited suicide because he was bullied on Facebook). I understand why the courts said it is their 1st amendement right to have these protests, but is it that since they are not techincally speaking about the deceased, that makes it not like bullying?

[DavidMG]

12:05 PM on 04/15/2011

This is one of the hardest questions to answer.Firtst, you have children involved which gives courts greater rights in protecting them.. Second, once you ahve a physical act the free speech issue is not aspowerful. These are VERY difficult legal questions and I (as a lawyer) undersand your frustration.

[Billy2]

04:54 PM on 04/15/2011

Read Snyder v. Phelps. It's discussed at length. Although they appear at a specific person's funeral (or event), their protest is more generally geared toward a larger issue and not the individual. That and the fact that at 1,000 feet away, there's no immediate threat or harassment of any kind.

[Chico41]

04:45 PM on 04/15/2011

Screw unconstitutional. I say buy a can of gas, pour it on these religitards, light a match and enjoy the show.

[PlayTOE]

10:12 AM on 04/15/2011

It is about time that some limits were placed on expressions of hatred by bigots hiding behind their church and the first amendment.

[Jacob Black]

10:43 AM on 04/15/2011

What do you think prevents limits being placed on your freedom of speech when the opinion you wish to express is not popular?

[PlayTOE]

11:21 AM on 04/15/2011

There is a big difference between an opinion that is unpopular, and pure bigoted hatred.
Freedom of speech does need limits and has some, even in the most open societies you cannot yell FIRE in a crowded theater.

Not all rights are worthy of preserving. The right to spread hatred while destroying the sanctity of mourning and grief for those who have given their lives for your country is a very unworthy right.

[DavidMG]

10:55 AM on 04/15/2011

I share your feelings but its the price we pay for our "open" society. You woulnt want it any other way.

[PlayTOE]

11:13 AM on 04/15/2011

Canada wouldn't tolerate people as hateful as Westboro, and doesn't. Their laws restricting hate speech are reasonable and fair, and not at all restrictive to important discussions.

So, yes, there are other ways that work, and work well.

[zizizzi]

11:30 AM on 04/15/2011

We hardly have an "open society" when protesters at the RNC & DNC are hearded into cages and kept out of sight of these conventions...

America's values are twisted.

[Bob Wood]

10:08 AM on 04/15/2011

Our senators and congresspeople have enough to do without wasteing time on a few loonies that nobody in their right minds take seriously anyway. IMO there are far more important things...such as the economy, jobs, a couple of wars...than Fred Phelps and his circus of mental dwarves. Hold permanent gay pride demonstrations against WBC in front of their " Church "...and homes...demonstrate in front of their funerals...ridicule them for the ridiculous people that they are...but don't waste time on them in the halls of gov't. The insults of fools aren't insults at all. IMO the WBC are all a bunch of fools...(sigh)

[zizizzi]

11:40 AM on 04/15/2011

I’m guessing that you have never buried a son or a daughter...

Our senators and congress people are capable of doing more than a few things during a legislative session...
Standing up for the rights of the families of our fallen soldiers is something I would expect them to do.
Attacking women and their health care (which I'm sure they spend much more time on) is not something I would expect them to do.
Writing bills that congress knows have no chance of passing in the senate or being signed by the president (which I'm sure they spend much more time on) is not something I would expect them to do.
Talk about a waste of time…

Sigh...

[Bob Wood]

03:36 PM on 04/15/2011

I quite literally cry for those people who lose sons or daughters. When I broke my wrist a few years ago...I had to wait in the emergency room for several hours before anyone could look at my wrist. They had cardiac cases and people who were severely bleeding that needed care first. My wait was painful, but not life threatening. The nation is facing severe problems...that need immediate attention. WBC...while annoying and painful...are not life threatening. The first amendment right to free speech is very, very important. The only speech that EVER needs protecting...is speech that most of us don't like. As emotionally draining as the speech of WBC is...it isn't life threatening. It can't break bones. I detest every word they utter...but recognize that it's most important that they be free to utter them. Their freedom...is our freedom...(sigh)

[DavidMG]

12:13 PM on 04/15/2011

I understand your concerns about these real events, but there are no rights more important than First Amendment - which is why it comes first. Let this one fall ,and just about evrything else falls.

[Bob Wood]

03:37 PM on 04/15/2011

I agree with you. That's why I say...let them speak, and point out how ridiculous they are. Their freedom of speech...is our freedom of speech. Denying them...denies us. WBC is a minor problem in the scheme of things. The real events that require attention are far more important...(sigh)

[Chrystal Ji Davey]

08:25 AM on 04/15/2011

Not just soldiers, but every family deserves a quiet, unbothered funeral - they've already gone through so much.

[Billy2]

05:00 PM on 04/15/2011

That's what private property and "free speech zones" are for. And they are already in place. And they are already used when WBC shows up.

[kenny17104]

07:27 AM on 04/15/2011

I remember a while back when they were at some college. Some frat boys stripped down to their undies, played some music and started dancing. It was hysterical. I would hope the fire department doesn't react too fast if their church burns down.

[Chrystal Ji Davey]

08:26 AM on 04/15/2011

I can totally picture a bunch of firemen going: "Meh. All right. We'll put it out. Just so it doesn't spread..."

[missmanners]

07:18 AM on 04/15/2011

How does their “free speech” trump the mourners “free expression” of grief?

[Jacob Black]

09:57 AM on 04/15/2011

While the WBC's speech is despicable, it doesn't actually prevent anyone from holding a funeral or expressing their grief.

[tim33ny]

10:48 AM on 04/15/2011

how can you be sure of that?

[DavidMG]

12:15 PM on 04/15/2011

They don't. They exist side by side.