You miss my point. Someone can't come into my home and claim it's free speech - no matter how careful they are about not damaging my property - because my home is inviolable. That's the justification for the law. Harassment - even from public property, even private property, outside my home - can be sanctioned for the very reason that a private person has a right not to be harassed.
No, it's not that I miss your point, it's that your point was not logically sound -- it wasn't even on the same legal ground as what you're trying to compare it to. Breaking into someone's house to tell them your opinion is not the same as acquiring the legal permission to protest.
Notice that in your quote, it's your home
, where you're legally entitled to spout as much crap as you want -- even yell 'fire', if you deem it appropriate for your legal property. That's why someone can't come onto your property and do so, but that's irrelevant because not only are their protests not
happening on your -- or anyone's private property, they're protests are occurring in publically-sanctioned places. Just because you don't like what you're hearing doesn't mean it's necessarily harassment. WBC is good at riding the line on this one. Notice that WBC does not target the specific person being buried -- they don't say JOHN Q SMITH IS GOING TO HELL, they target a larger group. That's the magic grey area.
Ensurance of legality is insufficient to be justified.
I fail to see how whether or not you feel they're justified in protesting a funeral pertains to their right to do so under the law.
All law is about being protected about taking offense, whether it's being offended by being butchered to death by a psycopath, raped, stolen from, or merely annoyed. These are degrees.
I'm pretty sure being offended is not the main reason those things are a crime. We create laws to aid in the persistence of a civilized and functioning society according to what's best for people, place, and time. Being offended alone isn't enough because personal offense is subjective to all three of those things and in some instances ignores the direct result of said action. It might play a part, but I'm almost certain we don't put murderers on trial solely because the rest of society doesn't like their actions. We do it because they took a life
and thereby violated another's so-called sovereign rights that we have integrated into our law. If we only took action to protect our own delicate sensibilities, I would imagine we'd have a lot more nanny laws to coddle us.
Basically, by saying that all law is based on offense is, in my view, akin saying that we don't hold the murder trial because the person has forced another person's life to end, but because the rest of us need a way to feel better about it. It ignores certain unalienable rights. The person murdered can't be offended about being murdered. They're dead.
Some protection is offered for certain levels of offense -- libel and slander, TV/radio profanity, etc., but in general, we err on the side of free speech because it makes us all freer as a result. It's harder to reinstate rights than it is to take them away.
All law is made because many individuals perceptions converge on something, whether that thing is the sanctity of a funeral or free speech.
Such as what a funeral is. If the vast majority of Americans thought that a corpse could be thrown to the crows then this wouldn't matter.
So let's all converge and ban your right to ever speak your opinion ever again because the majority here doesn't like what you have to say and we don't feel like we need to protect the minority. Does it seem so fair now?
The vast majority of America is also Christian, but miraculously we aren't living under a theocracy. If the vast majority of Americans decided gays weren't real people and that Muslims needed Jim Crow-era separation, we would probably oppose it. We protect the minority for a reason, even if they're fringe lunatics.
There is no objective
reason that a funeral need special protection, at least none I've seen. By the logic that society has deemed a funeral day somehow special, why not protect marriage ceremonies, baby showers, birthdays, and Harry Potter releases too? Why can't I get anyone arrested who ruins my birthday?