{"id":7180,"date":"2010-10-08T17:30:11","date_gmt":"2010-10-08T21:30:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/?p=7180"},"modified":"2013-05-10T15:18:41","modified_gmt":"2013-05-10T19:18:41","slug":"october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/","title":{"rendered":" Snyder v. Phelps"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

BOB ABERNETHY<\/strong>, host: The US Supreme Court opened its new term this week, and on Wednesday (October 6) dueling protests took place on the court steps as oral arguments began in a closely watched First Amendment case. The dispute centers on the highly controversial Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas, a small religious group that travels around the country protesting at military funerals. Members carry signs that millions find repulsive. They preach that America is being punished for its toleration of homosexuality. In 2006, Albert Snyder, the father of a Marine killed in Iraq, sued Westboro, claiming the church violated his privacy and inflicted emotional distress on his family by demonstrating near his son\u2019s funeral. At the court on Wednesday, Synder called Westboro\u2019s actions intolerable:<\/p>\n

Albert Snyder: \u201cAll we wanted to do was bury Matt with dignity and respect.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

But Margie Phelps, counsel for Westboro and daughter of the church\u2019s founder, Fred Phelps, argued that restricting their protests would have serious ramifications for free speech:<\/p>\n

Margie Phelps: \u201cThere\u2019s no line that can be drawn here without shutting down a lot of speech.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

We talk now about the major issues in the case with Kim Lawton, managing editor of this program, and Tim O\u2019Brien, who covers the Supreme Court. Tim, the most despicable speech imaginable: no limits on it?<\/p>\n

TIM O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong>, correspondent: Well, there are limits on free speech. There can be time, place, and manner restrictions. You can\u2019t go through someone\u2019s neighborhood at four o\u2019clock in the morning with a loud speaker. This is a content-based restriction, and that\u2019s different. Even content\u2013based restrictions are sometimes allowed. For example, you can sue somebody if they defame you. Obscenity is not protected by free speech. Fighting words are not protected. But here the words, the comments, the demonstration, as despicable as it was, might still be protected.<\/p>\n

ABERNETHY<\/strong>: No matter how upset or sick it might make somebody else?<\/p>\n

O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong>: Consider this is an important issue. The rights of gay people, gays in the military\u2014it\u2019s a discussion. We might not like the way people come to this discussion or what they have to say about it. It\u2019s still a legitimate discussion about an important public issue. Courts are loath to interfere with that kind of conversation.<\/p>\n

KIM LAWTON<\/strong>, managing editor: And it\u2019s always the question, too, of who draws the lines and on what basis do they draw the lines? And so what might be offensive to some people may not be offensive to others, and so it\u2019s a very tricky thing for the courts to get into.<\/p>\n

ABERNETHY<\/strong>: And Kim, there\u2019s a religious angle to it too, isn\u2019t there?<\/p>\n

LAWTON<\/strong>: Well, this speech is religiously motivated, and this is a small church in Kansas\u2014less than seventy members. Most of the people who go there are all from the same family. It\u2019s an independent Baptist church, so it\u2019s not affiliated with any other denomination or other movement, and in fact the Southern Baptist Convention, which is the largest Protestant denomination in the country, has taken great pains to say they are not related to us. The Southern Baptists also preach that homosexuality is a sin, but they say it\u2019s a forgivable sin. So this Westboro church says God is punishing America for being tolerant of homosexuality. They\u2019ve also picketed the Southern Baptists for being too liberal on the issue.<\/p>\n

O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong>: I don\u2019t think the courts going to really care very much that it happens to be religious-inspired speech or how offensive it is. I think that what they are going to look at is what about this family\u2019s privacy interests, what about the harm that it does to them emotionally to have this kind of a demonstration at this terrible time in their lives, and balance, try to balance those competing interests.<\/p>\n

ABERNETHY<\/strong>: What about in a time when there\u2019s, you know, the television and Internet and all kinds of ways that speech can be spread around the world. What\u2014does that make any difference, should that make any difference in the content of what\u2019s said?<\/p>\n

O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong>: Well, the Supreme Court has addressed that question as well. It says television, for example, and radio\u2014they are entitled to the least First Amendment protection because it\u2019s so uniquely accessible to children in the privacy of the home. The Internet, newspapers, demonstrations on the street, however\u2014they\u2019re entirely different, and the Court has accorded them the greatest protection.<\/p>\n

ABERNETHY<\/strong>: And what about the feelings of people about, for instance, an Islamic center right near Ground Zero?<\/p>\n

O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong>: Bob, I think that is very similar to what we have here. We have something that many of us find offensive, and it may in fact be in bad taste. Perhaps it shouldn\u2019t be there, but to say it may not be allowed there is an entirely different matter. We might not like it, but our Constitution protects it.<\/p>\n

LAWTON<\/strong>: Well, and just to get back to the religion point, though, while this case is not directly about those issues, a lot of religious groups have found themselves in this case before the Supreme Court in an uncomfortable spot, because on the one hand they don\u2019t want to be associated with the message of this group, and religious speech doesn\u2019t get a special place in law so, yes, they haven\u2019t spoken on it. But they are concerned. The notion of somebody restricting a religiously motivated speech makes them uncomfortable privately even though they don\u2019t want to necessarily say that, and that\u2019s not what may happen in this case, but it\u2019s sort of out there\u2014religious people worrying about what we can say in the public forum and what we can\u2019t, and so that is one of the things they\u2019ll be watching.<\/p>\n

ABERNETHY<\/strong>: And does it bleed over into what might be said in a pulpit?<\/p>\n

LAWTON<\/strong>: Well, obviously there\u2019s some concern about that as well, although that\u2019s certainly not what\u2019s at stake here, and I think the courts have always given special protection, you know, to religious practice. But there is some worry about, you know, again, free speech when it comes religion on these tough issues.<\/p>\n

ABERNETHY<\/strong>: And Tim?<\/p>\n

O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong>: As offensive as you find this conduct, the fact that it happened may make us all cringe, but that it\u2019s allowed to happen is another matter. When you are in a country that doesn\u2019t have anything like this, where everyone behaves, where discourse is always civil, where the press is always responsible\u2014well, that might be the scariest scenario of all. You\u2019ve left a democracy and entered a place that\u2019s much less.<\/p>\n

ABERNETHY<\/strong>: Tim O\u2019Brien, Kim Lawton, many thanks.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Should hateful and offensive speech that is religiously motivated be accepted as legitimate public discourse protected by the Constitution? More →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":72,"featured_media":17163,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6569],"tags":[3862,6451,6723,2222,1787,2315,26,8793,1184,8795],"class_list":["post-7180","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-videocast","tag-constitution","tag-first-amendment","tag-free-speech","tag-freedom-of-speech","tag-homosexuality","tag-privacy","tag-religion","tag-snyder-v-phelps","tag-supreme-court","tag-westboro-baptist-church","topics-politics"],"yoast_head":"\nOctober 8, 2010 ~ Snyder v. Phelps | October 8, 2010 | Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly | PBS<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Should hateful and offensive speech that is religiously motivated be accepted as legitimate public discourse protected by the Constitution?\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"October 8, 2010 ~ Snyder v. Phelps | October 8, 2010 | Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly | PBS\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Should hateful and offensive speech that is religiously motivated be accepted as legitimate public discourse protected by the Constitution?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/PBS.ReligionEthics\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-10-08T21:30:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2013-05-10T19:18:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"100\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Fred Yi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@ReligionEthics\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ReligionEthics\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Fred Yi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Fred Yi\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#\/schema\/person\/0576fe5f06986bc0418635994a2bcd47\"},\"headline\":\"Snyder v. Phelps\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-08T21:30:11+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2013-05-10T19:18:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/\"},\"wordCount\":1156,\"commentCount\":6,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Constitution\",\"First Amendment\",\"free speech\",\"Freedom of Speech\",\"homosexuality\",\"privacy\",\"Religion\",\"Snyder v. Phelps\",\"Supreme Court\",\"Westboro Baptist Church\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Videocast\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/\",\"name\":\"October 8, 2010 ~ Snyder v. Phelps | October 8, 2010 | Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly | PBS\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-08T21:30:11+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2013-05-10T19:18:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#\/schema\/person\/0576fe5f06986bc0418635994a2bcd47\"},\"description\":\"Should hateful and offensive speech that is religiously motivated be accepted as legitimate public discourse protected by the Constitution?\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg\",\"width\":200,\"height\":100},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/\",\"name\":\"Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly\",\"description\":\"An examination of religion's role and the ethical dimensions behind top news headlines.\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/search-results\/?q={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#\/schema\/person\/0576fe5f06986bc0418635994a2bcd47\",\"name\":\"Fred Yi\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/author\/yif\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"October 8, 2010 ~ Snyder v. Phelps | October 8, 2010 | Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly | PBS","description":"Should hateful and offensive speech that is religiously motivated be accepted as legitimate public discourse protected by the Constitution?","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"October 8, 2010 ~ Snyder v. Phelps | October 8, 2010 | Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly | PBS","og_description":"Should hateful and offensive speech that is religiously motivated be accepted as legitimate public discourse protected by the Constitution?","og_url":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/","og_site_name":"Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/PBS.ReligionEthics\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-08T21:30:11+00:00","article_modified_time":"2013-05-10T19:18:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":200,"height":100,"url":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Fred Yi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@ReligionEthics","twitter_site":"@ReligionEthics","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Fred Yi","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/"},"author":{"name":"Fred Yi","@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#\/schema\/person\/0576fe5f06986bc0418635994a2bcd47"},"headline":"Snyder v. Phelps","datePublished":"2010-10-08T21:30:11+00:00","dateModified":"2013-05-10T19:18:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/"},"wordCount":1156,"commentCount":6,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg","keywords":["Constitution","First Amendment","free speech","Freedom of Speech","homosexuality","privacy","Religion","Snyder v. Phelps","Supreme Court","Westboro Baptist Church"],"articleSection":["Videocast"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/","url":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/","name":"October 8, 2010 ~ Snyder v. Phelps | October 8, 2010 | Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly | PBS","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg","datePublished":"2010-10-08T21:30:11+00:00","dateModified":"2013-05-10T19:18:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#\/schema\/person\/0576fe5f06986bc0418635994a2bcd47"},"description":"Should hateful and offensive speech that is religiously motivated be accepted as legitimate public discourse protected by the Constitution?","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/2010\/10\/08\/october-8-2010-snyder-v-phelps\/7180\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/files\/2010\/10\/thumb02-snyderphelps.jpg","width":200,"height":100},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/","name":"Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly","description":"An examination of religion's role and the ethical dimensions behind top news headlines.","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/search-results\/?q={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/#\/schema\/person\/0576fe5f06986bc0418635994a2bcd47","name":"Fred Yi","url":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/author\/yif\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7180","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/72"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7180"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7180\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17163"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7180"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7180"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wnet\/religionandethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7180"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}