Speech and conduct

[Hamilton02 at aol.com]

I strongly disagree with Eugene here.  It's not the speech per  se, but 
rather the location of the speech that is outrageous.  And this  speech in its 
chosen location in particular is not "allegedly"  outrageous, but rather 
outrageous on every meter known to civilized  individuals.  Death is when families are 
most vulnerable, desperately  need privacy, and operate in deep communion with 
their own  religious worldview and faith.  That's why this group has chosen  
these funerals -- to get the most attention and be the most  destructive.  
 
Picking up on Alan's point, I don't think there is any question that there  
is a compelling interest in keeping these speakers away from families during 
the  funeral. Another point is that a person only has one funeral, so a  
funeral-related restriction is extremely limited in time and  place.   There is no 
less restrictive means than  restricting the location of such speech vis-a-vis 
the time and place  of the funeral itself.  
 
Marci     
 
 
In a message dated 11/2/2007 8:00:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu writes:

What  makes the behavior allegedly outrageous
infliction of severe emotional  distress (or for that matter an
actionable invasion of privacy) is  precisely the speech.

Eugene







************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20071103/f836313b/attachment.htm