A particular Kansas church has garnered some notoriety for its hateful protests at military funerals. And during the past week, the Supreme Court ruled that these hateful protests at military funerals were protected by the First Amendment by an eight to one majority. My question to you all is; is it okay to hurt someone just so you can be heard, and is it legally justifiable? I am neither condoning the actions of the protesters nor bashing the Supreme court’s decision, in fact I believe that the court got it right.
The simple fact is that once we start stopping people from saying whatever they want where does it go from there. I realize that I am beginning to sound like some ridiculous radical whose only voice in the world is on internet blogs. Oh the irony. But as someone who has witnessed countless debates and read of dozens of case on the issue of censorship, I must ask; who are we to decide what others get to say? Who are we to decide what others think? Where is the line between protection and control. I do not claim to hold all the answers, but I do think that ,despite what any decent person would think, these hateful, despicable and horrid protests must be allowed to continue.
Definitely agree with you. I've always been annoyed by people refusing to defend unpopular speech. It's probably why I seem to be one of the few people who respects the ACLU. "Obscenity" cases in the 1950s and 1960s regarding books have also always pissed me off.
ReplyDelete=( this is just sad. no matter your view people have DIED over there. if nothing else show some respect for the family's loss. those people go too far >=(
ReplyDelete