In class we started an interesting discussion on the topic of freedom of speech. The examples that we cited which had limitations on speech were ones that threatened the safety of others. One example was of a person screaming that there was a fire in the movie theater when there actually wasn't. The line between harming the safety of others and not with speech is sometimes hard to distinguish. What if you harm somebody emotionally, without putting their physical self in danger? That situation was played out by the Westboro Baptist Church and the Supreme Court. The Westboro Baptist Church is known for protesting the funerals of soldiers and gay people, since they believe that God hates America and "God Hates Fags"One father of a soldier had had enough with the Church.When Westboro decided to protest his son's funeral with these signs, Albert Snyder sued them for causing emotional trauma to him and his family. The supreme court decided that the Westboro Baptist Church had the right to protest the funerals, with only one judge opposing the ruling. They declared that even though the language was offensive, it is protected by the first amendment as long as it doesn't put anybody in danger. (Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/02/westboro-baptist-church-w_n_830209.html)
I think that the judges were right in this decision. The signs were the opinion of the Westboro Baptist Church, and they were nonviolently protesting. However, there are certain exceptions to the idea that you can say anything that doesn't put anyone in danger. For instance, high school students can cause huge emotional trauma with some of the things they say. There are many instances of kids who commit suicide because of verbal abuse from fellow classmates. In these cases, the abusers should obviously be punished, since they caused violence with their words. What if the abusee didn't hurt themselves? What if they just lived emotionally damaged lives with newly developed social issues because of their ridicule? What do you think? Should the abusers be able to be sued for emotional damages?
I have to disagree with you in saying that the judges were right in their decision. I think the posters those people hold up were horrible and I would argue that they do put other people in danger. Every attendee of the funeral would obviously be emotional at that point, and seeing those signs could put someone over the edge and they could make a rash decision and put themselves or someone else in danger. Even if no person was physically harmed, those signs are cruel enough to effect someone emotionally for the rest of their lives. I think the Westboro Baptist Church should be punished for what they did, because they probably hurt families emotionally more than they ever could physically. Emotional damage can be just as damaging as physical harm, so I believe that abusers should be punished for their actions.
ReplyDelete