Should the Funeral protest law be buried?

March 20th, 2006

Dean Mundy of Musings of a Thoughtful Conservative takes an unexpected stance AGAINST the new law that prohibits protests within a certain distance of a funeral in his column in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

I agree with his reluctance to resort to a new law every time something happens that we don’t like.

And I’m somewhat of a free speech fanatic.

But I’m still bothered by these people’s intrusion into other people’s private grief.

Plus, sildenafil ed as a form of “protest, viagra buy ” their actions are unsympathetic, misdirected, and ineffective.

Logically, I have to completely agree with Dean.

Emotionally, I don’t like it one bit.

Entry Filed under: Milwaukee

8 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Scott Mehring  |  March 20th, 2006 at 7:51 pm

    I feel that the kind of speech that these people are practicing is the most hurtful kind. While I believe that hurtful speech should be protected, we should also have the right to not to be forced to listen to whatever speech we don’t want to hear. The family gathered at the funeral does not have a realistic option of leaving, nor would they want to.

  • 2. Dean Mundy  |  March 20th, 2006 at 8:26 pm

    I’m with you logically and emotionally. Logically, I wrote the piece. If I were at a funeral that was protested, I would probably commit assault and battery.

  • 3. Billiam  |  March 20th, 2006 at 8:34 pm

    I agree with the free speech issue. Yet, it is not unfettered free speech. There has to be, at some point, a line of demarcation. A point at which your right to free speech intrudes on anothers right to be let alone. If a person cannot be shown to be reasonable about this, what other recourse is there? while satisfying, kicking their collective asses off the planet would not be legally smiled upon by said authorities.

  • 4. Scott Mehring  |  March 20th, 2006 at 9:39 pm

    Dean- I am with you with the assault and battery comment, I was actually thinking that as I posted my comment.

  • 5. Clint  |  March 21st, 2006 at 3:57 am

    They should be able to protest whereever they want, as long as it is at least 10 miles from anyone who can hear.

    Scott – Dean – There have to witnesses willing to testify on the assault charges before charges can be brought up. Just leave no witnesses that would be willing to testify.

  • 6. Dean Mundy  |  March 21st, 2006 at 10:45 am

    LOL, Clint, I’ll keep that in mind.

  • 7. Tim  |  March 21st, 2006 at 11:26 am

    I hope that none of us are ever in the position to be at funeral for a son or daughter and have to deal with abuse such as that offered up by Fred Phelps and his bastard whelps (like the alliteration?).

    Ever notice they contact the police before crashing these funerals? You don’t think it’s for their own safety just a little?

  • 8. Fuzz Martin  |  March 21st, 2006 at 1:21 pm

    It’s funny/ironic that anti-war protesters are making themselves ripe for being assaulted/battered. All I know is that if someone were protesting at my son/daughter’s funeral, they would want to make sure that their own plot was bought and paid for…

    I think this legislation should also include something about banning grotesque photos of aborted babies on public roads/highways. I consider myself pro-life, but I do not want my daughter seeing aborted babies on the side of the road. It’s another version of “forced listening” that we shouldn’t have to deal with.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


About

Being in a wheelchair gives you a unique perspective on the world. This blog features many of my views on politics, art, science, and entertainment. My name is Elliot Stearns. More...

The Abortionist

Recent Comments

Categories

Meta