Sad to say, I agree with the free speech concern in this case.

A funeral is a private venue, not public. Therefore it doesn't involve "public" free speech. To say it's free speech would be like saying a group has the right to enter your home and protest in your livingroom without your permission.

The protesters, to the best of my knowledge, were outside the funeral home/church on public property. I can't stop people from walking past my house on the sidewalk.

If they were on public property, then that's a different story. However, it would bring into question a person's right to privacy, in the specific case of an individual that is NOT a public figure. Who knows?

I worry that the free speech angle will only serve to allow future believers the ability to hamper secular arguments against their activities.

Instead, why not deal with this for the problem it is -

• Attacks against individuals/families
  
• Intent of emotional harm
  
• False Advertisement
  
• False Claims
  
• Public disturbance of Private Matter
  
• Disturbing the public peace
  

I'd really love to see the False Claims one handled in particular because it would provide precedence for dealing with other theological issues.

I'm not a lawyer, so I apologize if I used terms incorrectly and hope that the point of my comment comes across rather than specific legal usage.

Ah, I didn't see that. I'm still picking up various points on the matter from various sites and I felt the focus on free speech was being misplaced. Can you show me a link to CrazyRedHead's comments so I can familiarize myself with that? Thanks!