Legislation would restrict picketing at funerals

[The Straight Story]

Legislation would restrict picketing at funerals

SACRAMENTO, CA - The state Senate unanimously approved a bill that would prohibit protests within 500 feet of funerals.

The bill was introduced in response to demonstrations at military funerals by a religious group that claims war deaths are punishment for the country's tolerance of homosexuality.

Gov. Brown vetoed a similar bill in September. That bill prohibited protests within 1,000 feet of a funeral. Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, cut the distance to 500 feet and hopes Brown will find that distance to be more reasonable. Forty states already have restrictions on protests near military funerals.

"Since the beginning of time we have always respected the sacredness and dignity of funerals and of grieving families at funerals and this is a place to let people bury the dead in peace and to have funeral protestors to me is really offensive. And if they are going to protest it, at least have a buffer zone so they don't actually disrupt the proceedings," Lieu said.

http://www.news10.net/news/article/175381/2/Legislation-would-restrict-picketing-at-funerals?odyssey=tab|topnews|bc|large

[MadHound]

1. As much as I despise the Phelps freaks,

Limiting our civil liberties in order to combat them is simply not the best solution.

[X_Digger]

2. Agreed. n/t

[frazzled]

5. Do you also oppose buffer zones around abortion clinics for protests?

Question two: is it possible for the "free speech" rights of one group infringe upon the rights (assembly, privacy, etc.) of another group? And if such a conflict of rights occurs, how should it be adjudicated?

Is there ever a case when limitations are appropriately placed on the right to free, unfettered speech?

[MadHound]

6. Abortion clinic buffer zones and Phelps picketing are two different things

Before clinic buffers, protesters were allowed right up to the door due to lack of property rights, etc. Also, the protesters were getting up closer and physical.

At the funerals, the Phelps clan is kept outside of the actual cemetery, since otherwise they would be coming onto private property. Also, they can't get up close and physical with the mourners, again because of private property restrictions. All that they can do is wave signs and shout from outside the cemetery.

Sorry, but this can, and will lead down a slippery slope. What's next that can become unprotestable? Today, funerals, tomorrow inaugurations? What?

This is not a path we should go down. Yes, it has the best of intentions, but it is still going to lead to a nasty end.

[frazzled]

7. Why can't they walk up right to the door outside a funeral home or church?

The sidewalk is public. Why can't they shove their signs and shout things in the faces of the mourners entering the funeral space?

(Of course, I oppose their being able to get so close to the mourners). This isn't about cemeteries necessarily, unless it's a graveside service.

[izquierdista]

3. This is good

Allowing people some temporary private space in their moment of grief is not an undue restriction of other people's use of public space.

[JustAnotherGen]

4. I agree with this

At that time and place (lost my dad in August - Army Veteran) no one really cares about their jesus, their god, their penis, their wife, their kids, their heaven, their hell.

500 feet for the priviledge of people that PAID around $10K for funeral services is not unreasonable. It's not like funerals are free. They are very expensives - Veterans or not. We paying to pray over their grave.


Now see - had they picketed my father and I found out about it - I would have gone to the media and said that they can actually come into the church itself - if they give me $2K towards costs. Since my dad was buried in a private cemetary - I would have let them come right up to the grave for $5k.

I think if people realized the true costs of funerals they would say - wait! Would we let the Phelps family come into the Rockettes Christmas spectacular to protest as part of free speech? As a civil liberty? Even when people paid money to see them?

People would be up in arms. Funerals aren't for the dead person - they are for their familys who spend a lot of freaking money to bury them. His freedom of speech impedes a family's ability to spend money and help the economy.