When Albert Snyder had to bury his son, a U.S. Marine, he wanted nothing more than to bury him with the dignity that is deserving of all fallen military troops. Instead of being greeted by bereaved family and friends, Snyder was met with the protestors of Westboro Baptist Church.

The congregation of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan., has a strong anti-homosexual message. Just Google their name and you will immediately be faced with their central message: “God hates f—-.” Now they are protesting at military funerals, claiming that the death of soldiers is God’s way of punishing America for supporting homosexual rights.

Snyder sued the church group, initially receiving $11 million in damages for intention of emotional distress, but the ruling was overturned in an appellate court. Unwilling to settle, Snyder has fought Westboro Baptist all the way to the Supreme Court.

I was hesitant to even give them further publicity because they do not merit the attention they are getting. Their message is distasteful, angering and just plain idiotic. Wielding signs that exclaim “God hates America” and “Thank God for dead soldiers,” Westboro Baptist has incited our nation with outrage and frustration. I do not agree with what they say, but is there a way to prevent them from their protests?

In a nation that prides itself on its First Amendment rights, Westboro Baptist has wedged their controversial message into mainstream media and has caught the attention of Americans.

This case is reminiscent of the Supreme Court case Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, which pinned conservative pastor, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, against the publisher of the pornographic magazine, Larry Flynt. Falwell claimed that Hustler was indecent and unacceptable for publication, citing the magazines lewd photographs and crude content. As graphic and disturbing as the magazine was, Hustler won the case on the grounds of the First Amendment.

In situations such as Hustler v. Falwell, the major discrepancy comes from a matter of taste. The vulgar content was not agreeable to many Americans; however, they had a choice to either read the magazine or ignore it. Furthermore, the publication was not inciting violence and had no intention of inflicting harm.

In the case involving Westboro Baptist, there is not a choice. The messages displayed on the signs are shoved in the faces of military families nationwide on television and in the newspaper. Moreover, their message is intended to provoke anger and inflame the U.S. public. They want their message to be heard. They want us to get angry, and now they have our attention.

The Supreme Court is in a difficult situation. On one hand, they have an opportunity to extend further the liberties of the First Amendment. If this is the case, then radical groups may become more audacious, both in their message and means of communicating that message. Westboro Baptist’s message is one of hate. If we give them a microphone to make their outrageous claims against homosexuality, then we must be prepared to give everyone that opportunity.