November 01, 2007
How Much Free Speech Can You Handle?
Amendment I
I can think of very few things in this world more reprehensible than the desecration of a funeral. To me, it is even more appalling, as if that were possible, when family and friends are paying their last respects to any member of our armed forces, but especially so for one of our Marines. Yes, I was a sailor, but that had a lot to do with the advance knowledge that being on an aircraft carrier would keep me far away enough away (in the middle of an ocean, that is) from any battlefield as to effectively eliminate even the remotest possibility of any stray bullets finding their way into my body. Now Marines, on the other hand, know full well from day one that they will, regardless of their actual job title, be a rifleman first and by definition they will be the first ones going to the fight. In my book, that buys a LOT of respect points, even though it does not mean that all Marines are "respectable". I met some real gems back in tha day, but each one of them knew the score and accepted the responsibility.
So back to the question at hand: does standing outside a funeral acting the way those people do fall under the protection of Amendment 1? As far as I know, they've never been unpeaceful. All of the news reels I've seen show them standing outside the church or cemetery with their signs smiling and waving at the folks passing by. If their signs, and doctrine for that matter, weren't so disgusting one could almost mistake them for the folks standing on the intersection on election day, beating the drums for their favorite candidate. Until now, I don't expect this has ever been a question anyone had to ask. In fact, the State of Oklahoma had to add a statute specifically addressing this practice, while still protecting free speech. This is taken from Oklahoma Statutes, title 21-1380, known as the Oklahoma Funeral Picketing Act:
To be honest, I hope this judgment puts such a financial strain on those people that they can no longer afford to travel or even operate their "church". In my opinion, these are the absolute worst kind of people for many reasons, but the one which really makes me angry is knowing that for some folks this is the kind of behavior which will forever be associated with "Christianity", which is just not true. I find it no different than those who automatically associate Muslims with homicide bombings. I can't dispute, nor would I even try, that some of the most heinous things ever done by man have been done in the name of religion but this, I assure you, is NOT what Christianity is all about and I really hope that someday soon, they'll see what they are doing for what it is and just stop. I'm not expecting that any time soon, but maybe this judgment will force them to take a long hard look at how they're doing business.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The preceding text is, of course, the first amendment to our constitution--the foundation of our Bill of Rights, if you will. Read it. Now, read it again.
I can think of very few things in this world more reprehensible than the desecration of a funeral. To me, it is even more appalling, as if that were possible, when family and friends are paying their last respects to any member of our armed forces, but especially so for one of our Marines. Yes, I was a sailor, but that had a lot to do with the advance knowledge that being on an aircraft carrier would keep me far away enough away (in the middle of an ocean, that is) from any battlefield as to effectively eliminate even the remotest possibility of any stray bullets finding their way into my body. Now Marines, on the other hand, know full well from day one that they will, regardless of their actual job title, be a rifleman first and by definition they will be the first ones going to the fight. In my book, that buys a LOT of respect points, even though it does not mean that all Marines are "respectable". I met some real gems back in tha day, but each one of them knew the score and accepted the responsibility.
So back to the question at hand: does standing outside a funeral acting the way those people do fall under the protection of Amendment 1? As far as I know, they've never been unpeaceful. All of the news reels I've seen show them standing outside the church or cemetery with their signs smiling and waving at the folks passing by. If their signs, and doctrine for that matter, weren't so disgusting one could almost mistake them for the folks standing on the intersection on election day, beating the drums for their favorite candidate. Until now, I don't expect this has ever been a question anyone had to ask. In fact, the State of Oklahoma had to add a statute specifically addressing this practice, while still protecting free speech. This is taken from Oklahoma Statutes, title 21-1380, known as the Oklahoma Funeral Picketing Act:
...full opportunity exists under the terms and provisions of this section for the exercise of freedom of speech and other constitutional rights at times other than the period from one hour before the scheduled commencement of funeral services until one hour after the actual completion of the funeral services.Notice the crafters of this legislation made certain they couldn't be misconstrued as to be infringing on anyones first amendment rights while making it perfectly clear that this type of stuff won't fly 'round these here parts. The statue goes on to say that the primary intent of the statute is to:
Preserve the peaceful character of cemeteries, mortuaries and churches from one hour before the scheduled commencement of funerals services until one hour after the actual completion of the funeral services.The penalty when one is convicted of this misdemeanor is a fine of not more than $500, or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 30 days or both. But wait--there's more! The final section of the statute goes on to say:
Notwithstanding the penalties provided in subsection E, any district court may enjoin conduct proscribed by this section and may in any such proceeding award damages, including punitive damages, attorney fees or other appropriate relief against the persons found guilty of actions made unlawful by this section.Now I'm not an attorney, although we did stay at a Holiday Inn Express while on vacation, but that sounds to me like the legislature were trying to make sure that we here in the Sooner state are able to make the same kind of judgment, should the need arise. It would seem, at least in Oklahoma, that their behavior is indeed protected, but only inasmuch as it does not interfere with the peaceful nature of the funeral, grounds or the privacy of the family.
To be honest, I hope this judgment puts such a financial strain on those people that they can no longer afford to travel or even operate their "church". In my opinion, these are the absolute worst kind of people for many reasons, but the one which really makes me angry is knowing that for some folks this is the kind of behavior which will forever be associated with "Christianity", which is just not true. I find it no different than those who automatically associate Muslims with homicide bombings. I can't dispute, nor would I even try, that some of the most heinous things ever done by man have been done in the name of religion but this, I assure you, is NOT what Christianity is all about and I really hope that someday soon, they'll see what they are doing for what it is and just stop. I'm not expecting that any time soon, but maybe this judgment will force them to take a long hard look at how they're doing business.
Labels: Constitutional Issues
// posted by wayne @ 11/01/2007 02:59:00 AM 
