Given the church's delight in excess - and the readiness with which the statements and activities of its members are relayed by the mass media - it is unsurprising that church founder Fred Phelps has praised Loughner for killing six people and announced that the righteous will picket their funerals. Westboro has attracted attention for disrupting the funerals of soldiers and people who have died of AIDS.
The new law does not stop the picketing. It does however keep the picketers at least 100 metres from the funeral.
Distaste for Westboro's activity is reflected in news that 40 people wearing 3m high angel wings will stand between the funeral and church members. A group of bikers reportedly will also interpose themselves between the fans of Mr Loughner.
The Supreme Court has yet to decided on the constitutionality of restrictions on protests at funerals in a case brought by the father of a soldier killed in Iraq. restrictions have attracted substantial academic literature, including 'A Time to Mourn: Balancing the Right of Free Speech Against the Right of Privacy in Funeral Picketing' by N Rutledge in (2008) 67(2) Maryland Law Review 295-357, 'Balancing Freedom of Speech with the Right to Privacy: How to Legally Cope With the Funeral Protest Problem' by A Messar in (2007) 28(1) Pace Law Review 101-128, 'Freedom of Speech and the Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Tort' by E Volokh in (2010) Cardozo Law Review, 'Regulating Offensiveness: Snyder v. Phelps, Emotion, and the First Amendment' by C Wells in 1 California Law Review Circuit (2010) 71-86, 'The Incompatibility of Free Speech and Funerals: A Grayned-Based Approach for Funeral Protest Statutes' by R McCarthy in (2007) 68(5) Ohio State Law Journal 1469-1508, 'The Constitutionality of "Let Them Rest in Peace" Bills: Can Governments Say "Not Today, Fred" to Demonstrations at Funeral Ceremonies?' by K Ritts in (2007) 58(1) Syracuse Law Review 137-170 and 'Making Sense of "God Hates Fags" and "Thank God for 9/11": A Thematic Analysis of Milbloggers' Responses to Reverend Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church' by D Brouwer & A Hess in (2007) 71(1) Western Journal of Communication 69-90.
The latter comments that -
Through codes of religious authority, including scriptural references and common symbols of Christianity, Phelps claims the weight of God. On their protest signs and in their protest slogans, his church and his movement frequently employ the "Thank God for ..." motto, usually inserting the latest national tragedy, whether it be the death of Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist, Hurricane Katrina, or the improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that kill soldiers overseas. Phelps simultaneously defends and attacks through the use of Christianity. As a shield, religion and its constitutionally protected expression defend Phelps and his right of protest. Frequently, he has reverted to his religious rights and freedom of speech as a defense in court. As a weapon, Christianity warrants Phelps’ vexing presence at a sacred location that is particularly meaningful to military-aligned audiences. Phelps' articulations of religion inspire a riotous variety of responses about the values and meanings of Christianity, complicating any sort of ideological closure advocated in the name of Christianity.The major funeral protest in Australia of which I am aware was at the Sydney Opera House memorial service for the unlovely Kerry Packer, with the arrest of eight protestors. In 2009 Westboro foreshadowed protests at the memorial service for Australian bushfire victims, stating that -
The guilty Australians will not repent of their national sins of the flesh - (ie sodomy, divorce, fornication, adultery, etc) - even after God killed hundreds in the fires and cast them into hotter fire and brimstone in Hell. Therefore we will picket them in their hypocritical grief.Phelps and associates have been denied entry to Australia, the UK and Canada.
