Has Free Speech met it's end?

At what point do the natural rights to speak and the right to disagree with something become so volatile that their right must be repressed or obliterated? This is a question that I ask when I hear people lamenting the Westboro Baptist Church's ability to protest.

     Does speech, no matter how pleasant or unpleasant, infringe on the rights of others? Do we have a right to only hear things that we find pleasant or agree with our views? Are we required by some unwritten social rule that we must speak only things that the majority has favored as acceptable?

    

     My opinion would be No that is a ridiculous idea of what we could call our inherent rights. That would be the ultimate example of a Utopian idea. The idea of a list of words and phrases, subjects or topics that can be expressed is frightening but I believe we are inching ever closer to that end.

    

     So why do so many want to limit the free speech of groups such as this? The condemnation of the self-prescribed church is everywhere, and the call for some sort of legislation to limit or abolish the free speech has been drafted. But where will we be when the gavel falls and “Hate speech” has been denounced and criminalized?  The answer is one foot on that slippery slope and the other getting pulled by the “political correctness” crowd.  That next step will be a swift fall down the ever growing cliff of PC. A fall that we will never recover from, for when you restrict the right of one you have set into motion the machine to destroy the rest. As in all cases you cannot legislate morality, or the understanding of right and wrong.

     

     When this country was founded, the thinkers and leaders of the time tried to protect that right as the first in their first organizational rules of order, The Constitution. This natural right now seemingly protected by a piece of paper and the idea that it should in all cases be protected have been ingrained in the people of this country, but as we see now that inherent right is now threatened.

The case against speech coming from the Westboro Church is that is hateful, derogatory or would incite violence against any other being, those being subjective feelings towards he speech I understand that take, but does that feeling mean we can take that right away from people we deem not using it correctly?

     I do not want to be construed as to accept or endorse their behavior or their message. I find it appalling and ignorant personally, but I also understand the individual rights of all human beings and the right to free speech is a foundational one.  While I do not under any circumstances endorse their actions I will under all circumstances remain committed to protect their right to think as they think, speak as they speak and protest in their own way so long as that does not destroy the personal property or life of another. In any instance that property or life is threatened, I will protect that life or property so long as the rightful owner agrees to the outside help.