I think it is frequently bad for public relations and does more harm than good, but I support the right of churches to protest. But this is so outrageous I hope the church loses.

Dateline Baltimore…

The father of a Marine killed in Iraq took the stand in his invasion of privacy suit against a fundamentalist church that pickets soldiers’ funerals, saying protesters carrying signs at his son’s burial made him sick to his stomach.

Albert Snyder said Wednesday he had hoped for a private funeral for his son, Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder.

“They turned this funeral into a media circus and they wanted to hurt my family,” Snyder testified. “They wanted their message heard and they didn’t care who they stepped over. My son should have been buried with dignity, not with a bunch of clowns outside.”

Snyder is suing the Westboro Baptist church, whose members have picketed the funerals of military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming the deaths are punishment for the country’s tolerance of homosexuality. The York resident is seeking unspecified monetary damages in the case for invasion of privacy and intent to inflect emotional distress as a result of the Topeka, Kan., church’s protest at his son’s funeral in Westminster in March 2006.

…..

Asked Wednesday about a sign that read “Thank God for dead soldiers,” Snyder said he thinks about it daily.

“I see that sign when I lay in bed,” Snyder said.

…

Church members said they are motivated by the fear of God and their need to warn America about its moral decay, rather than a desire to hurt anyone.

Katz told jurors Tuesday the protests took place 1,000 feet away from St. John Catholic Church, where the funeral was held, down a hill and out of sight and hearing from participants.

….

The church’s founder and pastor, Fred Phelps, took the stand after Snyder and prompted a strong admonition from Bennett when the pastor said he had not considered whether children would see a sign carried by protesters with the words “Semper Fi Fags” and two stick figures that appear to be engaged in sodomy.

“No, it’s an irrelevancy,” Phelps said.

Bennett then interjected sharply.

“Just answer the question, sir. Don’t determine what’s relevant or not relevant. You just answer the question,” Bennett said.

Phelps said he chose to use the term “fag” in the group’s signs because it comes from scripture but could also have used Sodomite or dog. When asked by Katz why the group made a “Semper Fi Fags” sign, Phelps said it was in response to the need for a warning to the country “that your wicked ways are going to be your doom shortly.” (Source, Italics added.)

Okay, first of all, where does the term “fag” show up in scripture?

Secondly, do you really think that this will accomplish anything other than getting people more entrenched in their position on this issue?

Thirdly, this case has huge 1st amendment implications. Though this clearly seems over the line, we always have to be extremely careful shutting someone down with respect to speech. I hope they lose a bunch of money over this outrageous protest….I hope they lose so much money they have to sell their church’s assets. But we have to consider the implications for shutting down free speech. In the long run it hurts the cause of Jesus, as much as I would like to never hear from these people again.

That’s my two cents.