I humbly disagree.
I do not have to put up with this crap under the guise of free speech.
I also have a right to own property, and so do others. When I'm at a cemetery, I've rented it if they've accepted my cash, and I can keep others out. It is no longer a "public" area.
In fact, many cemeteries are privately owned in the first place. Even when they're not, once they've accepted my cash for a given event, then I get control.
Happens all the time in public parks. If you rent the big pavillion for a family reunion, your contract enables you to kick squatters out.
You are absolutely right. If you own a piece of property, or if the owner of a piece of property grants you control over it, you should have the right to restrict admittance or behavior on the property however you want. I support property rights just as much, if not more, than as I support free speech.
The problem then becomes, what if the message isn't being sent from your property? For instance, suppose someone across the street from the cemetary is holding a protest sign. How should the law address that situation...or should it even try?
Personally, I think it might be permissible to enact certain "place" restrictions on these protests. I could see a law requiring protesters to stay back far enough so that they could not drown out funeral services with their shouting. People at a funeral service can choose not to look at the protest signs, but they can't turn off their hearing, especially if they want to hear the eulogies. Such a restriction could be seen as protecting the cemetary owner's/renter's right to the enjoyment of their property, while still allowing the protesters to put out their message to the public and to those attending the funeral (on the way in and out). It would be the same as restrictions on "disturbing the peace" in a neighborhood.
Xzins is absolutely right. The reason I say this, is that he is BIBLICALLY Right (and really, there is no True Standard of Morality apart from the Bible).
God positively sanctifies every Human Being's Right to Life in the Sixth Commandment ("Do Not Murder"), and positively sanctifies every Human Being's Right to Property in the following Seventh, Eighth and Tenth Commandments ("Do Not commit Adultery; Do Not Steal; Do Not Covet/Abuse/Despoil* thy Neighbor's Goods").
The Seventh Commandment against Adultery, incidentally, does not imply that Wives are "property" (anymore than Husbands are "property"); but it DOES Sanctify the Divine Ordination of Voluntary Binding Contracts, of which the Marriage Contract is the most Socially-Fundamental of all (my Evolutionist rival, "Right Wing Professor", says that Marriages are not Voluntary Binding Contracts. Ha! My wife would disagree with that, and so would I. I suspect that he is either not married, or has not really studied Marriage as a societal institution, or both).
The Ninth Commandment is thence included in the Decalogue primarily to Protect Life and Property Rights, and to Enforce Voluntary Contracts. (At the extreme, a Perjuror in a Murder Trial could be put to death himself, so severe is the Biblical Law against False Witness).
And then, ULTIMATELY, AFTER the Right to Life and the Right to Property (together with the commensurate Right to Voluntary Contract) are fully established and defended by Law (allowing only the Exception for Tresspass on private property to prevent Aggression, such as the actions of "Operation Rescue" and the "Underground Railroad") -- THEN Human Beings enjoy Liberty upon their own Property, and also in the few remaining "Public" spheres (such as Law Courts and Village Councils).
Thus, according to Biblical Law, a Private Property-owner (provided that he erected an inclusive fence or wall, Exodus 21:29,36) could allow such Vices upon his own Property as pornography, gambling -- even intoxication and prostitution, which (generally) are Biblically considered Sins, not Crimes... but NOT Abortion, which actually kills a Human Life.
HOWEVER, Public Harm upon the Public Commons is regulated by normative Biblical rules of Property, and is thus (as long as "Public Property" exists) therefore Corporative -- and Corporate Owners (the Community) have the Right to Prohibit Drunk Driving, Public Intoxication, Pornographic Displays, and indeed all kinds of Public Nuisances upon their own Corporate Property.
The Supreme Court has ruled, for example, that Prostitution may be prohibited upon Private Property, and also that Christmas Displays may be prohibited on the Public Commons... while at the same time upholding the supposed "Right" of the Ku Klux Klan to march down city streets, and upholding the "Right" of Fred Phelps' repugnant "God Hates Fags" Cult to defile the Burials of dead US Servicemen.
Personally, I think that the USSC have got it all wrong (just like they've been getting it Wrong all-too-often ever since Roe-v-Wade).
BIBLICALLY, the State has NO Right to regulate Private Vices upon a Fenced-in Private Property (even including Voluntary Sins such as intoxication and prostitution); HOWEVER, as long as TaxPayer-Owned "Public Property" exists, then the Community has EVERY Right to allow Christmas Displays, prohibit Ku Klux Klan marches, and prohibit the Defilement of Military Burials upon our own TaxPayer-owned Corporate Property.
Ultimately, "Biblical Law", as commissioned by God and recorded by Moses, is PROPERTARIAN, not LIBERTARIAN.
It all comes down to whether you believe in PRIVATE PROPERTY, or NOT.
According to the Bible, Private Property is Sacrosanct -- BUT, as long as "Public Property" exists, you must acknowledge TaxPayer Sovereignty thereof.
That is the Virtue of "Biblical Libertarianism" -- by correctly ordering Basic Human Rights on the basis of Life-Property-Liberty, the Bible strikes the proper balance between Private Liberty and Community Rights.
And Biblical Wisdom... is the Only Wisdom.
best, OP