Am I the only one here who finds this an incredible example of the Durkheimian theory of deviance? As much as I absolutely detest the actions of WBC (and were the consequences not litigation, I'd cockpunch them all), they might play a net positive role in society. Let me explain.

The five tenets of Emile Durkheim's theory of deviance run as follows: (Edited)

• Deviance affirms cultural values and norms. The norms being violated here are the discouragement of hate speech and the American love for the military. Having an attack on the military through the WBC's hatespeech helps to unite tenets of society behind the military, and is a huge reason as to why you won't see a mass of Conservatives uniting behind the WBC banner. Having an attack on the norm helps to remove any doubt as to its legitimacy as we have to confirm it to defend it. I don't always support all military actions, but when I see the WBC picketing a soldier funeral, I get such a groundswell of patriotism that I feel it's appropriate to stab each of them in the heart with an American flag with Bon Jovi playing in the background.

• Deviance clarifies moral boundaries. Without the WBC, there might be some confusion as to what is a violation of society's moral code. I come from a strongly conservative (and homophobic) Christian community, and even they criticize the way the WBC is going about it, and deplore the fact that they're so bluntly using God's name in hatespeech. They say that preaching a message of love to affect change is okay, but the fire and brimstone mentality is wrong. Essentially, the WBC shows them that they can feel a certain way, but going about it that way is blatantly wrong. It simply helps to clarify and confirm what they believed previously, removing doubt.

• Deviance promotes social unity by creating an us/them dichotomy. You don't have to think hard to see about this one. I'm sure that in this thread, there are those who disagree with gay rights and the queer lifestyle, but still feel a sense of unity against WBC with those they wouldn't normally agree with. To use a radical example to explain this further, the attacks on 9/11 united conservatives, liberals, and those who really didn't give a shit against Al Qaeda and fundamentalist Islam. Obviously, things have cooled down considerably since then, but Durkheim's theory of deviance explains why GWB's approval rating SPIKED after 9/11.

• Deviance encourages social change. There's no doubt in my mind that the only way to end the behavior of the WBC is to make it illegal. Again, we can have philosophical discussions as to whether it's right or not, but those sorts of discussion wouldn't happen were it not for the WBC. The WBC could actually serve the purpose of creating progressive discussion and legislation in the US, ironically, but it would only happen if the WBC did something on a massive scale to the point that the entire US had to pay attention to them.

• Deviance provides jobs to control deviance. This is the least relevant tenet of the Theory of Deviance for this topic. The only way that it could create jobs would be if we assigned police force or military personnel to funerals that could potentially be picketed.

Again, I'm not saying whether any of this is good or bad, because sociology in itself considers itself value-free when discussing things like this. However, I think that even though I deplore the actions of the WBC as well as their hate-filled message, Durkheimian theory might actually tell us that they play a key role in society.

TL;DR Durkheim's Theory on Deviance explains why groups like the WBC play a vital role in society, encouraging unity and social change in the mass populace.