While I find the Westboro Church's speech reprehensible, I defend their freedom to express themselves in this manner as it does seem in keeping with the first amendment. Further, I do not believe them to be insane or stupid, perhaps brainwashed, but no more so than your typical Tea Bagger.

I spent most of the night trying to figure out why this just didn't set well with me .... and I guess in the end I just don't believe that "legal" authority should be considered the end-all and be-all aspect of governance.

I believe there should be (and in fact there is a great NEED for there to be) a "moral" authority adhered to, in some sense, coupled with what is right 'legally' ... in order to have a better societal balance .. and a more righteous and dignified society, at that.  And  that that lack of moral consciousness and the deferment of what is fundamentally right and just to a shaky-at-best and ever-changing sense of 'legality'  is one of the biggest reasons why this country - and indeed the entire globe - seems to be going to hell in a handbasket at rapid speed!! 

Having a constitutional right to "free speech" doesn't mean that what you have to say is the right thing to say...  or a good thing ... or that you should say it, or that it should be deemed acceptable.  Just because it's right "by law" doesn't mean it's not wrong in other ways.

Those people and their signs should be deem disgusting, reprehensible and unacceptable by any standard of decency.  And, IMO, should not be able to hide behind "law" to be able to do something that is clearly repulsive in the eyes of anybody with even a shred of humanity in them.

And though arguments can and would be made as to what is "moral" ... it's really not that hard to discern (except to those who keep the proverbial 'bug up their ass' and live just to be unreasonable, trivial and contrite!  But that would be a whole 'nother discussion entirely ). 

At any rate ... I am not a proponent of "free speech" under it's present interpretation.  I believe it's flawed and lacking ... and that those people should be locked away - either in jail or in a mental institution - and not allowed to spread their message of ignorance and hate among the masses.

Kresge, such an automated answer.  I think that it was a private event, due to the fees involved in burying the son. Therefore, they should've been held responsible for the disruption.
On the free speech piece, most people invoke this freedom in lieu of the responsibilty of thinking out their actions. So I think they are idiots.

Westboro was on public property and adhered to all the laws governing public protest (they were the legal distance from the event and did not violate ordinances with respect to unruly behavior. Protecting free speech is imperative for any society that aspires to be just, IMO.

fox4kc.com/news/wdaf-cjsadell-funeral-westboro-church-protest-110610,0,3649584.story

WDAF

Supporters Block Funeral Protest in Weston

Reported by: Meredith Hoenes

FOX 4 Web Producer

November 6, 2010

WESTON, MO.