Yeah, sure. Unless I declare that I believe blindly in a whole series of weird beliefs that make no logical sense whatever to me, I cannot know what it is to renounce all logic and believe weird stuff. I can agree with that.
That's actually not what Cynthia said. I would interpret her comments as approximately meaning "Unless you have been in a situation like that you cannot have the proper perspective." I am a retired soldier. As such, I was trained to always obey the laws of war. Yet I find it hard to sit in judgement of, say, those marines that killed civilians after their buddy was killed in front of them. I wasn't there. I didn't have all of the facts. I didn't experience the horror. Maybe under those circumstances I would have killed people indiscriminately too. If you have a kid killed in battle, maybe you could ignore ignoramuses like the Phelps cult. But maybe, under the emotional stress of the moment, you would decide to take off a few fanatic heads.
I think the award is appropriate, given the history of this cult and the inappropriateness of the action. I do respect free speech, and do not object to the right to express the "God Hates Faggots" message, even though I find it disgusting (and anything but Christian). But there is more to free speech than the simple right to say anything, anywhere, under any circumstances. The history of free speech in America is one of evolution, and what is acceptable today is far different from what was acceptable a century ago, or two centuries ago. A lot has happened to increase free speech beyond its original understanding over even the last 50 years. The child porn crowd was actually trying to use the first amendment to protect their product back in the seventies.
But free speech has - and should have - limitations. Aside from the "crowded theater" scenario, it is well understood that inflammatory speech under circumstances that may lead to violence is not protected. I remember a case (I cannot remember the specifics) where someone burned a gay flag at a gay pride event and was prosecuted for inciting a riot. This was compared, of course, to burning an American flag and called a double standard. I think that is a fair assessment, frankly, but there is certainly an argument to be made that burning that flag at a gay rally WAS likely to result in violence. Imagine how a U.S. flag burning would go down at a Veterans Day commemoration at Fort Bragg, NC. Posting a "God Hates Faggots" sign on your front lawn is tasteless and idiotic, but it should be protected. Telling someone that their perfectly straight, decent, Christian son who was killed in combat died because God Hates Faggots is a pretty good way to get me a "God Hates Faggots" sign in your ass.
Had this been an isolated incident, a hand-slap may have been appropriate. But the fact is, this group continues to do this. And the language they use is clearly inflammatory. "God Hates Faggots" is not the same emotionally as "God disapproves of homosexual behavior." It is not unlikely that one of these days somebody is going to make a few martyrs out of the idiots. Then, of course, that somebody will end up in jail - and rightly so. I think sucking the financial life out of these nutcases is better than having that scenario play out. And given that the organization has nowhere near that amount of money, lowering the award is unlikely to alter the reality of it. No doubt there will be someone perfectly willing to take up the issue of free speech on principle, but I think in this case the principle does not apply.
