Allow me to state, for the record, that I’m a strong advocate of Free Speech as a stimulus to civil discourse.
My professional career and my personal interests have always come down on the side of allowing anyone to say just about anything of concern to the Commonweal – so long as what is being said causes no undue harm, or undue anxiety, to any party.
We are indeed fortunate to be able to live in a country where such Speech is protected by the Constitution’s First Amendment. Numerous Supreme Court opinions have been handed down over the years to re-enforce and to clarify our basic right to speak our minds without fear of government retaliation.
The fundamental reason underlying High Court opinion always rested upon the belief that Free Speech – including Inciteful Speech – must show minimal concern to the person, or to the object, or to the institution -- as the antecedents -- concerning whatever ‘s being said in public.
Public statements must bear some semblance to the truth. They must not be unduly directed at private individuals. And they must not cross the line into what is now commonly referred to as “Hate Speech.”
Even in the event that a speaker or a group of speakers (read “protesters here) employs lies to make a point, and if what is said or written invades someone who cherishes privacy, and even in the instance where racial or other “hurtful” epithets are used against someone else, the speaker can usually escape a cause of action by issuing an apology for whatever what was said.
This was the law of the Land, that is, until the US Supreme Court handed down a recent ruling involving the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas.
According to an Associated Press story, The Rev. Fred Phelps and family, who make up most of the congregation of the Westboro Baptist Church, like to picket military funerals in their quest to draw attention to a certain Core Belief of theirs.Grieving families became their backdrop, or foils, to promulgate a message of extreme hate.
Here's a Belief, in the Name of Jesus, embraced by the folks at the Westboro Baptist Church.
As an article of faith, they preach that our soldiers' deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq are God's punishment for “the nation's tolerance of homosexuality!”
Instead of waving “John 3/21” signs, the Phelps’ show up at soldiers’ funerals with ones that proclaim these alternative Messages:
"Thank God for dead soldiers!"
"You're Going to Hell!"
"God Hates the USA/Thank God for 9/11!"
The High Court got this “Nut Case” when a lower court reversed verdicts and monetary judgments against these Church-Goers, brought against Phelps et.al. by the family of a slain US Marine.
At this point, I invite you to don your Judicial Robes and ponder a few of this case’s key points.
You be the judge:
· Were the Phelps’ signs “hateful?”
· Did any of these signs contain even one nanogram of truth?
· Can there be any act more private than when a family mourns the tragic death of a loved one?
· Was it even relevant that the police kept demonstrators 1,000 feet away from the mourners at this particular funeral?
· Was hateful, hurtful, Gay-Bashing language – even shrouded in a “religious message” composed by a fringe church, to be hurled in the face of those grieving the loss of a loved one in war -- worth the Constitution’s blanket protection?
This ruling, most certainly, will open the Door Wide to a slew of cases in which fringe religious sects will assert their rights to say anything and everything they want on any number of issues -- in hurtful, malicious and hateful ways.
All with the Full Blessing of our nation’s Highest Court.
Permit me to take a quick look at the Westboro sect.
But first, I'd like to offer my general review of Christianity.
Christians invariably align themselves along two distinct tenets: those who believe that they will be "saved" by their good acts performed here on Earth; and those who believe that they will be "saved" by faith alone.
There's quite a bit of debate on how Jesus rewards his followers down here on Earth: some denominations believe that their reward will come in Heaven as a result of sacrifice; others believe that they reap His rewards materially in this Life, as a manifestation of The Lord's Blessings.
The Westboro Baptists no doubt fall into a category: their faith saves them; and Jesus rewards them here.
The Dark Side of this, however, is the obverse of what they believe: anyone who lacks faith is damned; and anyone who lacks wealth or material possessions is cursed.
I've been told, personally, and by a Baptist, that my cancer diagnosis was a result of God's curse on me.
All I have to do to shed the curse? Be Baptised and embrace Jesus as My Lord & Savior.
If I do, I Will Be Saved and All Will Be Fine.
The concept boggles the mind of a metaphysician such as I ...
I also know a couple, one with a Down's Syndrome child, who were told by one of the Saved that their son was a result of God's punishment upon them for sins-past.
I cannot comprehend how hurtful this Judgment of The Lord sounded to Ricky's parents...
But I digress.
As I mentioned earlier, I'm all for Free Speech to encourage civil discourse.
I draw the line when speech becomes hateful, hurtful and meant to degrade another -- and especially when it comes all wrapped up, like a Taco, in the Name of Religion.
Planned Parenthood, Gays & Lesbians, The Handicapped, People of Color:
Be Warned!
PS: Topeka? Brown V. Board of Ed? Is there something in the water there?
Just a little follow-up ...
ReplyDeleteI got around to reading Roberts' majority opinion on the Westboro Case. I am stunned by the multi-level flaws in his reasoning.
The Chief Justice bent over backwards to assert that his opinion was crafted around the "narrow" interpretation" of the 1st Amendment -- as if Hate Speech, bashing Gays or anyone else, uttered in public, falls upon deaf ears.
Roberts' rationale also placed emphasis on his interpretation of one very important fact: that members of the Westboro congregation obtained permission to conduct their protests at military funerals (permissions gleaned in what I will very charitably call "Red Communities.")
He also put significant weight on a fact that sect members kept their activities at a significant distance away from those who grieved.
Which raises this question: if a fundamentalist sect targets handicapped individuals as foils for their Hate messages(let's assume the antecedents, or those who are aggrieved by Hate Speech, are wheel-chair bound,deaf, dumb and blind): would it matte to Roberts if the Hate-Rant took place two feet away from the antecedent?
The most disturbing matter to me about this whole mess of a decision is: seven other justices concurred with Roberts -- only Alito dissented.
If you're going to pray for anything, direct your intention to the Hope that a similar Hate Speech case will get before the Court soon -- one through which the High Court, upon further reflection, can reverse this travesty.
And furthermore ...
ReplyDeleteAre Phelps et. al. from Westboro Baptist using their "faith" as a cover to taint and smear the Commonweal?
I have no problem when Phelps takes to his "Church" Pulpit to rant and rave about America's Demise for tolerating Gays & Lesbians -- that's his belief stated within the confines of his own church and we are not compelled to sit in the congregation and listen.
But when Phelps et. al.take to a public street corner, to spit anti-Gay venom, it's quite another matter.
Seems as though Roberts condones Hate Speech by anyone who claims he has a "Vision," starts a "Church," and then uses the Cover of "Religion" to spew Hate.
Will it be just a matter of Time before the KKK re-defines itself as a "Religion" and uses this cover to assaunt People of Color with full 1st Amendment Protection?