Phelps clan hijacks NOH8 campaign

Leave it to the Phelps clan to use Adam Bouska’s NOH8 campaign to further propagate their particular brand of religious-based lunacy.

The New Civil Rights Movement reported earlier this morning that the Topeka-based bigots posted a 25-minute video to their Web site late last night that mocked the successful anti-Proposition 8 campaign—I received an error message when I clicked on the YouTube link from Bushwick. Their Web site also appears to be down.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 last month that the First Amendment protects the Phelps clan’s right to protest military funerals. The images of young Westboro Baptist Church members that accompany the so-called GodH8s video, however, simply speak for themselves.

The freak show goes to the U.S. Supreme Court

The visual of members of the Westboro Baptist Church spewing anti-gay rhetoric outside the U.S. Supreme Court earlier today was almost certainly bizarre for anyone who witnessed it, but the case for which the justices heard oral arguments raises some fundamental questions.

“I think the church of the Lord Jesus Christ got to stand in the highest court of the world and say that soldiers are dying for your sins and we’re committed to the proposition that Americans can say that and not be penalized,” said Margie Phelps, as Kerry Eleveld of The Advocate reported.

The facts in Snyder v. Phelps stand for themselves—Fred Phelps and a handful of other WBC members held anti-gay signs as they protested outside 20-year-old Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder’s funeral in Westminster, Md., in March 2006. Albert Snyder, Matthew’s father, sued the Topeka, Kan.,-based church for emotional damages. A lower court awarded Albert Snyder $5 million, but a federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., overturned the decision.

(The story is the top story on WJLA’s 6 p.m. newscast here in Washington, D.C., as I write this blog.) It goes without saying the Snyder family has suffered unimaginable heartbreak over their son’s death, and the WBC’s antics have only exacerbated this anguish. Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler described Snyder v. Phelps as “fundamentally about wrongs and the law’s imperfect ability to redress them” in an op-ed published in today’s Washington Post. The newspaper, however, editorialized differently.

“If Westboro’s vitriol is deemed unworthy of First Amendment protection and a private citizen can sue to silence the church—or shut it down—then everyone’s rights will be eroded and made dependent on the sensibilities of others,” the Post wrote.

The First Amendment guarantees all Americans—including Westboro members who choose to spew their odious vitriol—are entitled to freedom of speech. The primary takeaway from Snyder v. Phelps, however, should remain anyone who opposes the church can exercise their constitutional right to counter their odious messages with those of love and acceptance.



The media scrum outside the U.S. Supreme Court earlier today.

Campaign seeks to ban protests at military funerals

The Phelps clan’s idiotic theatrics remain one of the movement for LGBT rights’ most valuable assets to change hearts and minds, but a campaign to ban protests at military funerals has certainly piqued my interest.

More than 467,000 Facebook members have expressed their support of the effort, which emerged after an appeals court ordered Albert Snyder to pay the Westboro Baptist Church more than $16,000 in legal fees. The Phelps clan protested outside Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder's Maryland funeral in 2006. And a federal court in Baltimore ordered the WBC to pay $11 million in damages after it concluded the group's members had deliberately inflicted emotional distress against the Snyder family.

The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the case, but Fox News host Bill O’Reilly has pledged to pay the legal fees the appeals court ordered Albert Snyder to pay.

“Let’s hope that they will see the serious error in allowing these [sorts] of protests to be held at a funeral,” Demonstration for Memorial Day 2010, the group that has organized the effort to ban military funeral protests, said.

The Facebook group’s moderators further discredits the WBC’s justification for its pickets under the heading “Let me set the record straight.”

“Matt Snyder WAS NOT gay,” they said. “The Phelps twisted “logic” if you will, is that God is killing our military members because they are fighting for a country that is okay with homosexuality. RIDICULOUS, right?”

They continue.

“For those of you who need clarification: It wouldn’t make this any less of an issue than… if he was gay, but he was not,” the moderators said. “This is only added so people can clearly understand, as many are confused.”

This clarification certainly carries a bit of irony in relation to the ongoing debate over the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but this campaign highlights an underlying question: Why has this groundswell of outrage against the Phelps clan emerged only after an appeals court ordered Albert Snyder to pay the WBC’s legal fees after its members protested outside his son’s funeral?

As the son of a Vietnam veteran, I certainly appreciate the sacrifice of those who serve in the armed forces--and their families--make. The Snyder family should continue to receive praise and support for standing up to the Phelps clan and their hateful theatrics, but those who support the campaign to ban protests at military funerals must remember fallen soldiers are not the only ones this group continues to put in their cross hairs.