# Abortion clinic "Buffer zones" in Massachusetts not legal, says unanimous SCOTUS **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 26, 2014, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698 "2014-06-26T14:58:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/121 "2014-06-26T20:07:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > This fealty to the state of the law is refreshing. > > Of course, it vanishes when you find yourself supporting a position the law doesn’t. Then you discuss the importance of moral commitments, and how the law has been used for immoral purposes, and you’re quite comfortable demanding that your position be elevated based on personal preference. Not at all. The topic you’re mentioning, using Voter ID as a method of keeping poor people from voting, is a bad idea for a myriad of reasons. Among them that it does not make the problem it purports to solve better, it makes it worse. It’s bad policy, \*and \*morally repugnant. Note that I am in agreement in both threads, I think things should apply equally. Free speech for one, is free speech for all. You shouldn’t abridge one group in particular. Just like the voting laws I disagree with, you shouldn’t make it harder for one group in particular. Especially when it undercuts democracy itself. [But that’s a discussion for the other thread, you know, the one where you are losing the argument so utterly that you’re looking to litigate it in unrelated threads.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=655025) ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/122 "2014-06-26T20:08:41Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > I certainly _hope_ they’re ignorant of what it is they’re really doing How sure are you of who the ignorant one really is? And why are you sure? :dubious: > [@](#): > > I’m charitable enough to assume most of them _don’t_ truly understand what it is they’re doing. How condescendingly generous of you. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/123 "2014-06-26T20:09:04Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Good for you. I hope you’ll join me in considering volunteering as a clinic escort, so that women who choose to enter certain buildings will have people on their side, offering support for their right to enter any building they choose. Wait what? I would not personally protest outside of a clinic (and on the few occasions I’ve chatted with those folks I thought it was a tasteless, rude and counterproductive means of activism), but I wouldn’t escort someone who wanted an abortion either. I’d consider both of them morally wrong. Escorting someone to have an abortion would mean enabling and supporting them in their behavior, and that’s not something I could ever in good conscience do. Would you escort someone to a slave market? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/124 "2014-06-26T20:09:18Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’ll let you hash it out with this guy: That guy sounds to me like a cool, hep cat; someone who’s got his shit down. A hoopy frood who knows where his towel is. His post is not remotely inconsistent with mine. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/125 "2014-06-26T20:11:26Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Not at all. The topic you’re mentioning, using Voter ID as a method of keeping poor people from voting, is a bad idea for a myriad of reasons. Among them that it does not make the problem it purports to solve better, it makes it worse. It’s bad policy, \*and \*morally repugnant. Note that I am in agreement in both threads, I think things should apply equally. Free speech for one, is free speech for all. You shouldn’t abridge one group in particular. Just like the voting laws I disagree with, you shouldn’t make it harder for one group in particular. Especially when it undercuts democracy itself. In other words, you’re demanding that your position be elevated based on nothing but personal preference. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/126 "2014-06-26T20:12:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > His post is not remotely inconsistent with mine. Correct! Since I read it, perhaps you could assume I am also aware that the First Amendment exists. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/127 "2014-06-26T20:13:21Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > What if you were to condition your escorting on “women who want to enter that building over there for reasons that are none of your damn business”? > > Further, would you concede that it is a morally positive thing to do to act as moral and physical support for women who want to enter that building over there for reasons that are none of your damn business? Or is it a morally bad thing to do? When they involve killing people, they’re everyone’s business. Even when they don’t, actually: if someone wanted to enter a building to engage in some activity that I strongly disapproved of, I wouldn’t necessarily want to support them in doing I, either, even if it didn’t involve human life. Part of having strong moral beliefs involves witnessing to them to other people. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/128 "2014-06-26T20:15:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In other words, you’re demanding that your position be elevated based on nothing but personal preference. While \*your \*demands to do likewise are based on God’s Unquestionable Teachings, huh? BTW: Welcome to Great Debates, n00b. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/129 "2014-06-26T20:19:48Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Because we don’t consider _natural_ deaths to be a big problem in need of a solution. Homicide or suicide are a very different thing than death from natural causes. There is no homicide involved in this issue, and accusing someone of homicide when there is no legal basis to do so is very serious. Tell me something, though-Do you have some sort of paranormal ability that allows you to tell why someone is walking into a building? ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/130 "2014-06-26T20:19:57Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > I admit that they’re different, but why aren’t you concerned with the natural ones? It’s still a life lost! > > If it’s the life you’re concerned about, you’d be concerned about the natural causes, too. Or do you think it’s OK for people to die of cancer, and that we shouldn’t do cancer research? > > Like I said: you’re all up in arms about the abortion, but don’t really care about the lives you claim to be saving. > > Now, if you say it’s God’s will that the natural terminations happen, well then, you’re entitled to your religion, but your beliefs shouldn’t give you the right to harass people doing perfectly legal things that I do not find shameful or worthy of blame. > > I’d like to see whether you’d protect the free speech rights of Islamic groups who shouted insults at you whenever you tried to go to church. But you already conceded that it’s not about free speech, since you think Westboro shouldn’t be able to play havoc at funerals. It’s about your religion. > > Well sorry, your religion doesn’t dictate the law. (Thank God!) Are you under the impression that people do not try to prevent miscarriages or take heroic measures to save fetuses? Miscarriages are tragedies and abortions are tragedies. Miscarriages happen for a myriad of reasons, most of which are not currently preventable. Abortions could be prevented with a simple change in laws. You think it is immoral to raise your voice trying to be heard in attempting to convince women to not have their children killed. You’re entitled to your opinion but that does not give you the authority to outlaw other people from exercising their rights to do so. Saying you only believe in free speech you agree with is the same as saying you don’t believe in free speech. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/131 "2014-06-26T20:20:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. I was rebutting the implication in **iiandyiii** ’s post that seemed to suggest the phenomenon was far more common. > > And again, “a few thousand” is not a measure of how common the phenomenon is. 1% of all abortions are for rape-related reasons. That is, I think you’ll agree, _uncommon_. Nonsense. Total bullshit, actually. Something isn’t uncommon just because some other thing happens more frequently. ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/132 "2014-06-26T20:21:00Z")
I don’t have a problem protesting an event but “protesting” a single person is harassment. And if we had harsher laws against harassment maybe we could nip these so called “protesters” in the bud. ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/133 "2014-06-26T20:20:35Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > I’m a little more concerned about the lives of the unborn children that the mothers are planning to kill, then about the feelings of the mothers. Just a little. > > Sorry, not sorry. Are you concerned about gestational diabetes? Pre-eclampsia? Holding down a job so you can feed your existing family while throwing up sixty times a day? Because I sure was the last time I got pregnant! > [@Bricker](#): > > Anecdote: twenty-odd years ago, a good friend of mine was outside an abortion clinic, and a young woman passed him; he asked her to reconsider what she was doing. She said angrily to him, “Yeah, you’re here now, but where will you be when the baby is born and I can’t take care of it because I have no money? If you’re so serious about this, why don’t you take this baby?” > > He said, “Let me call my wife.” > > Not only did he and his wife adopt the baby, but they kept her mother in her life, and all three of them recently watched that young woman graduate from college. > > One starfish. Adorable. Now let me introduce you to my friendly neighborhood anti-abortionist. He has all sorts of anti-abortion signs on his lawn. He also has other signs on his lawn. Quite a few were also in opposition to efforts to improve our local schools. He also handed my poor daughters a rather vile chick-trakish piece when we mistakenly trick or treated his house last October and made a tacky insult to her for collecting money for UNICEF. He’s far more typical of the anti-abortion brigade in my experience. > [@BobLibDem](#): > > I’m a little skeptical of such statistics. Seems to me a lot of rape victims who seek abortions would rather not bring it up. For many, it will have been too recent to want to mention to anyone. My mom was raped in 1963. No official report on that rape or on the abortion she had later. > [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Would you escort someone to a slave market? I wasn’t aware slaves caused gestational diabetes, huge weight gain and lots of other unpleasant and potentially life threatening side effects. The things they left out when I was learning social studies! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/134 "2014-06-26T20:25:28Z")
> [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > Nonsense. Total bullshit, actually. Something isn’t uncommon just because some other thing happens more frequently. That’s true. If “some other thing” is totally unrelated. In this case, of course, the things are related, so, you’re wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/135 "2014-06-26T20:27:03Z")
I have to wonder, when are we going to see cultural liberals criticize this ‘protest’? > **[VIDEO: Violent pro-abortion protesters attack Cathedral of Buenos Aires -...](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/video-violent-pro-abortion-protesters-attack-cathedral-of-buenos-aires/)** > > The protesters assaulted a protective contingent of riot police, but were eventually repulsed to cheers of "Viva Cristo Rey!" ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/136 "2014-06-26T20:29:26Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > I have to wonder, when are we going to see cultural liberals criticize this ‘protest’? I have to wonder if you think Argentina is a U.S. state. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/137 "2014-06-26T20:30:15Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > I have to wonder, when are we going to see cultural liberals criticize this ‘protest’? > > [VIDEO: Violent pro-abortion protesters attack Cathedral of Buenos Aires - LifeSite](http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/video-violent-pro-abortion-protesters-attack-cathedral-of-buenos-aires) I have to wonder, do you know what country you live in and what the topic of this thread is? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/138 "2014-06-26T20:30:49Z")
Anyone taking the view that abortion is murder, but allows it in the cases of rape and incest anyway, can be dismissed. If you allow that there are cases where it can be permitted, then guess what? You’re pro-choice! Welcome aboard! All that’s left to discuss is why \*your \*personal judgment about what is acceptable should supersede that of the person most directly involved. If it’s OK to murder a person before he’s born because of the circumstances of his conception, why is it not OK afterward? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/139 "2014-06-26T20:32:59Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In other words, you’re demanding that your position be elevated based on nothing but personal preference. No, I’m saying that law is ineffective and a cynical attempt to keep undesirables from voting. I’m not saying it should be overturned by my fiat. I’m saying people should support its overturning. ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/140 "2014-06-26T20:33:40Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > I have to wonder, when are we going to see cultural liberals criticize this ‘protest’? > > [VIDEO: Violent pro-abortion protesters attack Cathedral of Buenos Aires - LifeSite](http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/video-violent-pro-abortion-protesters-attack-cathedral-of-buenos-aires) Okay, now cite about a hundred different instances where this happened. Then I’ll express my outrage that something needs to be done about these violent prolifers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698.md?page=8)