Does no one see that WBC is the good guy in this story?

An "activist"?

No, you're being an apologist for Westboro. The case you cite above has the Phelps family kept an 'almost-respectable' distance from the funeral procession, and that puts the Supreme Court in a position where they did not have much choice in their ruling.

That does not make what they do any more-acceptable.

The only thing that can be admired from outside the US looking in, is that there has not been dramatic physical violence against the Phelps for their , ... 'fucktardery'. They are a hate group, clothed in old odd ends stolen forth from holy writ.

Thank you for reading Snyder v. Phelps (2011).

>> An "activist"? No, you're being an apologist for Westboro.

This is just more name calling. It is disrespectful and distracting.

>> That does not make what they do any more-acceptable.

What makes it acceptable is that this is a contest between those who would speak and those who would silence them. In the U.S., more than in any other country in the world, it is recognized in law, if not by the general population, that the freedom to speak and for all to hear what would be spoken is the freedom upon which our entire system of liberty, justice, and self government is built. It is this logic that compels us, in the U.S., to say to those mourners, "Be strong. Stand strong. You, like us, must tolerate this speech, because speech cannot be silenced."

> They are a hate group

That is debatable. Even if it is true, it is irrelevant. In the U.S., speech that is motivated by hate is fully protected, as it should be. Creating a "hate speech" exclusion would have the practical effect of gutting the First Amendment of much of its protection of controversial speech.