ManInBlack
Regular Member
I say call the national guard... Just to be a friendly barrier, let them have their stupid protest, I'll fight for their first amendment rights, but whose to say a FRIENDLY National Guard barrier wouldn't be a good idea. The family has the first amendment rights to have their peaceful service, so why not have a barrier between the two?
Sure, let's have the federal (anyone who thinks that the National Guard is still a state function in anything other than name is, to put it frankly, a fool), armed stormtroopers enact a "barrier" at a lawful protest. I'm sure Thomas Jefferson would be on board with that. [/sarcasm]
The First Amendment to the US Constitution:
"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."
From my reading of the text, I don't see how you can posit that the family of a deceased individual has a "right" to a peaceful funeral service. If held within a church, or other private property (such as a Catholic cemetery), I could see the protesters being denied entrance. However, they would still be fully within their (legitimate) First Amendment rights to protest right outside the gates.
Again, I brook no sympathy for the WBC, but using the coercive power of the government (and remember, everything that government does, by definition, is coercion) to chill their free speech is not a logical or prudent course of action for those of us who profess to love liberty.
Last edited: