Because the purpose and value of speech are subjective, speech must be protected even when it appears to have no purpose. That was the principle at stake in Syn

Because the purpose and value of speech are subjective, speech must be protected even when it appears to have no purpose. That was the principle at stake in Synder vs. Phelps. Consider the facts of the case. Members of the Westboro Baptist Church protested on public property, over 1,000 yards away from the funeral of Matthew Snyder. Although the signs were certainly offensive, they did not mention members of the family by name so as to start a fight. And they did not urge people to commit acts of violence. In other words, the protest clearly did not meet the standards of fighting words or incitement to violence — categories of speech that are unprotected by the First Amendment. I agree that the protest was morally despicable. So did the justices. Still, Westboro members participated in a peaceful protest on public property. To ban that behavior would set a very dangerous precedent.