President Bush signs Fallen Heros Act, threatens free speech
Ali Qari
Issue date: 6/2/06 Section: Ed-Op
- Page 1 of 2 next >
On Memorial Day, President George Bush signed the "Respect for American Fallen Heroes Act," banning protests at military funerals. This law directly endangers the First Amendment rights of all Americans. The Fallen Heroes Act "prohibits a person from carrying out a demonstration at a cemetery under the control of the National Cemetery Administration or at Arlington National Cemetery... if such demonstration includes any individual making noise or a diversion that disturbs the peace or good order of the funeral or service."
The law came into effect after the House voted 408 to 3 to pass the bill and the Senate unanimously passed it. These startling numbers, along with other recent Bush Administration trespasses, such as the Patriot Act and the recent NSA wiretapping scandal, leave questions as to just how much our lawmakers care or even think about the civil liberties of the American people.
The Fallen Heroes Act was a reaction to the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church, which protested at funerals of American soldiers slain in Iraq. The group believes that God is striking down American soldiers because of the United States' tolerance of homosexuality. The church also made national headlines in 1998 when they protested at the funeral of Matthew Sheppard, a young gay man from Wyoming who was beaten to death because of his sexual orientation. (The Westboro Church protests gay, lesbian and AIDS-related funerals all over the country to this day.)
At that time the national government took no steps in protecting the rights of funeral-goers. Lawmakers have not taken the time to protect the loved ones of homosexual murder victims, but they have decided now to protect the well-being of the families of slain men and women of the military. This leads one to question the motivation of this bill. Perhaps it was only a ploy by the Republican Party to slow the free fall of President Bush's dismal approval ratings. The public finds it difficult not to support comforting the families of troops, but that does not stop this law from infringing on our constitutional rights.
The law came into effect after the House voted 408 to 3 to pass the bill and the Senate unanimously passed it. These startling numbers, along with other recent Bush Administration trespasses, such as the Patriot Act and the recent NSA wiretapping scandal, leave questions as to just how much our lawmakers care or even think about the civil liberties of the American people.
The Fallen Heroes Act was a reaction to the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church, which protested at funerals of American soldiers slain in Iraq. The group believes that God is striking down American soldiers because of the United States' tolerance of homosexuality. The church also made national headlines in 1998 when they protested at the funeral of Matthew Sheppard, a young gay man from Wyoming who was beaten to death because of his sexual orientation. (The Westboro Church protests gay, lesbian and AIDS-related funerals all over the country to this day.)
At that time the national government took no steps in protecting the rights of funeral-goers. Lawmakers have not taken the time to protect the loved ones of homosexual murder victims, but they have decided now to protect the well-being of the families of slain men and women of the military. This leads one to question the motivation of this bill. Perhaps it was only a ploy by the Republican Party to slow the free fall of President Bush's dismal approval ratings. The public finds it difficult not to support comforting the families of troops, but that does not stop this law from infringing on our constitutional rights.
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 5
Anonymous
posted 6/02/06 @ 2:02 PM EST
"The group does not attempt to provoke violence or significantly disturb the peace."
Having a group of condemning protestors waving banners stating "Thank God for IEDs" as family and friends are laying to rest a young man or woman who has been killed in action is certainly a provocation of violence. (Continued…)
Anonymous
posted 6/03/06 @ 8:24 AM EST
I BELIEVE IN THE FIRST ADM. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD EVER GIVE UP ANY OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES. I WOULD STAND BHIND YOUR ARTICAL
Anonymous
posted 6/03/06 @ 7:50 PM EST
Go F--k yourself.
Anonymous
posted 6/08/06 @ 11:15 AM EST
It's Kaighin. I couldn't agree more with this article. "Sticks and stones" people... the words are meant to be a protest, not a provocation of retaliatory violence. (Continued…)
Anonymous
posted 6/09/06 @ 12:04 AM EST
Just to clear something up, these protest are meant to incite violence. By looking at the history of the WBC, you find they put themselves into positions hoping a hothead will act on their emotions. (Continued…)
Post a Comment