My point is, as I said “if you’re going to get an abortion, take a president with you so you can get some peace.” It’s apparently the best way to get a free speech buffer zone since the security is protected.
Then I suggest you work within the process to achieve your goals. Screaming at people about to do what they have every right to do is the mark of a USDA Prime Certified Asshole.
It’s not being done to prevent abortions-it’s being done to harass and scare safe abortion providers into shutting down.
Does this ruling intersect with the perversely named “free speech zones” ?
I am skeptical if these sort of protests are an effective method in fighting abortion, but I’m glad they are legal.
This ruling isn’t about making the legality of the protests, it’s about the 35’ distance screaming protesters had to keep back so people could access a legal medical procedure.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but you’re not entitled to force your religion on others. You ascribe something significant to an embryo. Fine, as long as it’s your embryo. I ascribe no special status to an embryo; killing it is not murder. Legally, I’m right and you’re wrong. Don’t use a bogus legal interpretation to justify someone’s awful behavior.
If you want to say “According to my religion, …” then fine. But remember that’s just your religion. It’s not the law. If you want to change the law, well, it’s your right to do your best.
Bingo. If you expect to have your rights respected, you must respect the rights of others. Harassing those who disagree is not respectful.
Does it bother supporters of those who yell “baby-killer!” into the faces of young women that some of these young women are not going into the clinic for abortions, and some of these young women are victims of rape?
Would you respond the same way of we were talking about antislavery protesters at slave markets?
And yes, yes, I know, abortion isn’t the same thing as slavery. (Hint: it’s worse).
Good luck with this argument. Nothing speaks to the other side like explaining that their position is worse than the worst thing America has ever done.
Put me in a time machine and I would work within the political process to end slavery. Cursing and screaming at people buying slaves wouldn’t help my cause one bit.
I saw an op-ed somewhere that argued that the current Court is the most pro-First Amendment Court in history. This decision gives support to that argument.
Of course not. It also doesn’t affect the large no-protesting area around the Supreme Court building itself.
I have to agree with BobLibDem. If you want to stop something, even something you find incredibly repugnant, you go about it in ways that actually work. Intimidation of those who seek or provide abortions seems like the kind of thing that’s more of a salve to the conscience of the anti-abortion folk than a means to get what they want. I think it’s the temptation coming from the closeness of the action that gives the false impression that it’s actually helping the cause. It’s difficult to think if you’re mailing off a check to an organisation that you support that you’re having some demonstrable effect, but if someone’s yelling at the target of their ire while carrying an in vitro photo on a placard, it can feel more like they’re on the front lines defending those which need defending even though it’s entirely counter-productive.
Perhaps even better would be to write “cursing and screaming at people entering a market where many things are sold, including slaves, without knowing what business the people are there to transact.”
This seems awfully credulous of SCOTUS:
Some protesters aren’t protesters, therefore they have to be allowed to get close to women entering the clinics. Oh, and the protesters who are protesters have to be allowed to get close, too.
I love the image of going up to a slave, who has been beaten, separated from those he loves, forced to work on a plantation for at least 16 hours a day, and pointing out a pregnant woman to that person. “Oh, you think what they’re doing to you is bad, that woman might be choosing what to do with her own body.” I’m sure the slave would agree, probably because they’d have to.
Ah. The well known SCOTUS Hypocrisy Zone.
And of course it’s reasonable to wonder how much of the energy that fuels the protesters at reproductive health centers is simple misogyny. I would guess it’s the primary source. Not that any anti-choice advocate would ever admit to that.
The fact that this post was even needed in the first place is amazing.