We can call it a reaffirmation of the First Amendment, but just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s right.
I'm talking, of course, about the U.S. Supreme Court's decision that those shitheads at the Westboro Baptist church can protest at military funerals.
I totally agree that speech should not be restricted just because it's offensive. The whole reason for the First Amendment is to protect offensive speech. Nobody needs a First Amendment to protect mundane speech.
But my God, Fred Phelps and his hateful little family of rainbow sign-making lawyers disgust me. Shortly after the Supreme Court announced this ruling, a leader of the Westboro church said they will now "quadruple" the number of funeral protests. Well, I hope the counter-protesters can septuple their efforts with their angel wing shields.
However, how is this ruling compatible with the "free speech zones" used at political gatherings? Remember how these secluded zones, surrounded by chain-link fence, would be setup half a mile from anywhere George W. Bush was speaking? Remember how the Secret Service instructed local police to use the zones to quarantine anybody who disagreed with Bush?
Much Orwellian rationale has been offered as explanation for these zones, but it's censorship pure and simple -- keep political protesters out of sight of the MSM so their message doesn't get out.
I guess our country is very "selective" about supporting the First Amendment.
However, it's nice to know I can protest at burials. Now I'm dreaming up creative sign slogans as I'm patiently waiting for a Phelps family funeral to attend.