Phelps’ opinions are opinions that do not contain provable facts; Such as “God hates fags” or “You’re going to hell”. No one will be able to prove such opinions. Therefore, they are protected constitutionally.
Snider considers that his right to privacy was violated since he is not a public image. He also says that the first amendment has been misplaced and that it can be only used against public figures. In addition, to that Snyder says that Phelps’ picketing caused him emotional distress.
In my opinion, the Supreme Court and the members of the Congress should agree with the senators supporting Snyder’s position in the case. Because what Phelps did and has been doing on funerals of fallen heroes, is something that many people in the United States specially will not tolerate no matter how insane you are.
Something that I don’t agree within this case is that Snyder is have qualified these opinions as offensive, when the first amendment should be applied depending on how angry or insulted the audience is.
.The Slippery of Censorship
I am not necessarily in favor of censorship but I do believe that everything has a point in which we could all agree or disagree with something. Censoring media such as movies, music lyrics and video games will not help because that helps us understand human nature more in-depth. This allows us see how far a human or a group of people can go to get the attention they want and more. But then again, everything has point and I think that the Supreme Court and the Congress should make exceptions, depending on how bad the case or the hate expressed is and punish them if necessary. That will all help prevent such hate speeches from being express to the public and help people have a more open mind towards different races and sexual orientation.
