On Wednesday, an angry crowd was packed into a corner of King Memorial Commons. From a distance, it was difficult to see what the commotion was about. But from 100 feet or so, it became clear — there were banners, threatening most of the population with damnation.

Students of different races and creeds were facing off against the sign-holders, trying to understand and be understood. There were Muslim students, Jewish students, homosexual students, feminist students and a team of others — all of whom the sign condemned. They all seemed perplexed at the ranting men, and justly so. The demonstrators, however well-intentioned they claimed to be, were spreading nothing but blatant hate speech.

The two men held the large signs and claimed they were demonstrating to save students. But their very actions were, at the very least, unethical and quite possibly illegal.

Robert Breaud and Jeremy Sonnier of the Open Air Proclaimer arrived midday and proceeded to unfurl their banners. By the time I arrived on the scene, only one of the two banners remained open and visible, but its message was clear: It cried out to “Rejecters of Christ,” demanding they repent or face harsh judgment in the hereafter. Directly below “Rejecters of Christ” was a list of the potentially damned.

First and foremost were the “homos and lesbos,” as the intolerant twosome chose to label homosexuals. Underneath these, barely anyone else was left out. Muslims, Buddhists, Mormons, Roman Catholics, lazy Christians, “unsubmissive wives,” “rebellious children,” fornicators, “porno freaks” and “baby-killing women” all were attacked.

The first blindly vile problem with the sign was the use of “homos and lesbos.” These words only could have been used to promote hate and intolerance. While it could be argued that both terms have been reclaimed by the gay establishment and are therefore no longer offensive, this is simply not the case. If a member of a minority can use certain terminology to refer to him or herself, it does not make the word any less offensive when used in the form of bigotry.

Their declaration was most certainly bigoted. Breaud admitted freely that the words were used as “attention-getters” to bring people into discussion. At the same time, he allowed that few homosexuals would likely be drawn.

For the record, it is nearly impossible to call what went on for those long hours a discussion. Any rational dialogue quickly dissolved into droning repetition of the same point: “Sinners will be punished.”

Of course, these men have the right to practice their beliefs and speak their opinions — the Constitution guarantees it. The Supreme Court long has held the First Amendment protects “hate speech.” When their presence was questioned, both men quickly cited the freedom of religion guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Oddly enough, they spent a great deal of their time fighting against religious freedom by attacking other faiths, even Christian ones. Both Mormonism and Catholicism are based on the belief that Christ is the Messiah (which is the definition of Christianity, by the way).

But the First Amendment does not protect everything the men said. Words inciting violence certainly are illegal. The two men were nothing if not combative. The backs of their fiery red T-shirts read, “Repent or Perish,” an ultimatum that is difficult to call peaceful. Shortly after the crowd formed, two police officers arrived to maintain the peace. When police guards are necessary, there undoubtedly is something dangerous taking place.

No matter how vile the men were, they could not and should not have been forced to leave. How can any American advocate the limiting of free speech? It is absolutely impossible. On public property, the men should be able to say whatever they like, no matter how closed-minded or derogatory.

Ironically enough, Breaud and Sonnier chose the MLK Commons to hold their little rally. The Reverend King also was fond of rallies, but he advocated a slightly different sort. Like these men, King was deeply religious, but he preached equality and brotherly love, not hate and intolerance. If the men choose to come back, hopefully they’ll bring a message more fitting for Dr. King and less for frightened ideologues.