Friday, March 4, 2011

The DC: Palin clarifies statement on Supreme Court ruling

“I wasn’t calling for any limit on free speech"
*
Sarah Palin has clarified the meaning of her tweet earlier this week in response to the Supreme Court's 8-1 decision upholding the free speech rights of members of Westboro Baptist Church who protest at the funerals of members of the military.

In a statement to The Daily Caller, Gov. Palin said that she actually agrees with the high court's decision:
“Obviously my comment meant that when we’re told we can’t say ‘God bless you’ in graduation speeches or pray before a local football game but these wackos can invoke God’s name in their hate speech while picketing our military funerals, it shows ridiculous inconsistency,” Palin told TheDC. “I wasn’t calling for any limit on free speech, and it’s a shame some folks tried to twist my comment in that way. I was simply pointing out the irony of an often selective interpretation of free speech rights.”
Encouraged by the decision in its favor, the group has vowed to "quadruple" the number of protests it stages at military funerals around the country.

For the record, we disagree with Gov. Palin and the court's majority on the free speech issue. The right of free speech is not absolute, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in 1919. We agree with Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote in his dissent:
Petitioner Albert Snyder is not a public figure. He is simply a parent whose son, Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, was killed in Iraq. Mr. Snyder wanted what is surely the right of any parent who experiences such an incalculable loss: to bury his son in peace. But respondents, members of the Westboro Baptist Church, deprived him of that elementary right. They first issued a press release and thus turned Matthew's funeral into a tumultuous media event. They then appeared at the church, approached as closely as they could without trespassing, and launched a malevolent verbal attack on Matthew and his family at a time of acute emotional vulnerability. As a result, Albert Snyder suffered severe and lasting emotional injury. The Court now holds that the First Amendment protected respondents' right to brutalize Mr. Snyder. I cannot agree.

[...]

Respondents’ outrageous conduct caused petitioner great injury, and the Court now compounds that injury by depriving petitioner of a judgment that acknowledges the wrong he suffered.

In order to have a society in which public issues can be openly and vigorously debated, it is not necessary to allow the brutalization of innocent victims like petitioner. I therefore respectfully dissent.
Does this in any way diminish our support for Sarah Palin? Of course not. This is not the only issue on which we don't see eye to with the governor. But across the board, we agree with her on the great majority of the issues. In our opinion, no other candidate or potential candidate for president comes close to matching her commitment to Reagan principles, her courage and her strength of character. And she fights for what is right harder than all of her potential rivals put together.

Analysis: Jonah Goldberg: Between Garbage and Gold

- JP

1 comment:

  1. How dare those legal and social commentators, who never miss an opportunity to praise the Jehovah's Witnesses for stretching the boundaries of the First Amendment, now condemn the Westboro Baptists, whose actions in our time are no more outrageous than were the actions of the Jehovah's Witnesses during World War 2.

    During WW2, Jehovah's Witnesses specifically targeted the homes of parents and spouses of wounded and killed soldiers -- knocked on those doors -- and told wives, mothers, and fathers that their husbands and sons had died not only needlessly and pointlessly, but in support of a government which GOD considered His enemy and would soon destroy.

    During WW2, Jehovah's Witnesses would show up at War Bond Rallies and spew the same garbage.

    1940s Jehovah's Witnesses would park sound trucks across the street from public schools and during recess and blast the school campus with pre-recorded sermons decrying the Pledge of Allegiance. There were also instances of JWs going inside school buildings and passing out anti-Pledge literature to children in the hallways.

    JWs also parked sound trucks outside of churches during ongoing services and blasted churches with pre-recorded sermons decrying church teachings.

    JWs carried phonographs with pre-recorded sermons door-to-door decrying patriotism, Christianity, etc. During WW2, a WW1 veteran and then Deputy Sheriff ran two JWs out of his gasoline station after they started playing such a recording. One of the JW "pioneers" pulled a pistol and murdered the Deputy.

    Post WW2, the WatchTower Society made a point of renting for conventions those facilities which had been named or renamed in honor of the WW2 veterans (Memorial Coliseum, Veterans Stadium, etc. etc.) so as to poke their fingers in the eyes of returning veterans and the cause for which they had fought, been wounded, or died.

    1940s Jehovah's Witnesses would specifically target urban Catholic neighborhoods with door-to-door sermons and literature which defamed the Pope and other Catholic hierarchy, Catholic theology, etc.

    The JWs of WW2 were the Westboro Baptists of today.

    Make up your minds, commentators.

    FACT SOUCE:

    http://jwemployees.bravehost.com/NewsReports/2031.html

    ReplyDelete