# Ex-BF erects billboard claiming ex-GF aborted their baby. His free speech vs her privacy rights **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 7, 2011, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595 "2011-06-07T04:30:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/61 "2011-06-07T16:46:27Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Since when does what “a lot of people” think matter for defamation? How many is enough for it to not be defamation? These are exactly the kinds of questions that are asked in the context of a defamation lawsuit. The whole point of a defamation claim is that it changes the way people think about you. Thus, the question of what members of the public will believe when they see an allegedly defamatory statement is relevant. If most people will see that statement and believe “X murdered a child,” then it may be a false statement that is subject to a defamation claim. If most people will see that statement and believe “X had an abortion,” then it may be defamation if she really had a miscarriage, but it might not be defamation if she really did have an abortion. Remember, Jerry Falwell’s defamation claim against Larry Flynt ultimately failed because the Supreme Court concluded that no person who saw the offending cartoon would actually believe that Falwell had engaged in sexual intercourse with his mother. So, in a defamation claim, the public’s belief is very relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/62 "2011-06-07T16:47:54Z")
> [@Death\_of\_Rats](#): > > More to the point it says "…decided to Not KILL Our **Child"** , not ‘baby’. The wording could easily be construded as ‘murdered a living child’ instead of ‘aborted a developing embryo’. I dunno. Its pretty clear to me from all the other stuff on the bilboard, that this is about abortion. ---
**Author:** ![pbbth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f9ae1b/32.png) [@pbbth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pbbth)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/63 "2011-06-07T17:00:08Z")
> [@astro](#): > > Interesting. Where do modern Pagans generally stand on the abortion issue re right to life vs choice? IME pagans tend to be very liberal in most ways including being pro-choice. I can’t speak for all of us, of course, but the ones that I see at local events and such tend to be more liberal. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/64 "2011-06-07T17:04:16Z")
He is making a much deeper statement to anyone, male or female who has lost a child to abortion. It will hit every heart who suffered the loss of family through abortion. Unfortunately it is written in a way to condemn women in the process. From how the OP phrases it, she is not identified, so her claim for personal harm is a bit of a stretch. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/65 "2011-06-07T17:10:50Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Since when does what “a lot of people” think matter for defamation? Here is what I am saying, and this is not a hill I feel like dying on: a significant number of people believe abortion is murder. It follows that they believe people who perform and have abortions are committing murder. It’s an implication of what they already believe and say - in some cases, loudly, outside abortion clinics as young women go in - and I don’t think a court is going to determine that that description is defamation because of its implications on the abortion dispute. If the woman had a miscarriage that says even more about what a fuckwit Fultz is. It sounds like they had a brief relationship (I wonder why!) or possibly none (I guess he’s funny?) and he flipped out when he found out she didn’t want anything to do with him. This is about revenge, not abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/66 "2011-06-07T17:11:50Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > He is making a much deeper statement to anyone, male or female who has lost a child to abortion. It will hit every heart who suffered the loss of family through abortion. Yes, here’s hoping some of the fanatical ones take a moment to think “Wow, do I sound like that much of a heartless, possessive asshole? Maybe I should rethink my position.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/67 "2011-06-07T17:12:36Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Since when does what “a lot of people” think matter for defamation? How many is enough for it to not be defamation? > > Used to be a time when people thought black people were “lesser” than white people (still some of them around). > > Does that mean you cannot defame a black person because some people think they are lesser than white people? Wow. This post reveals a couple of critical analytical errors. The crux of defamation is that your reputation has been damaged – that a falsehood has been believed by people, and as a result, your reputation has been worsened. I could, for example, falsely say that you starred opposite Julia Roberts and Helen Hunt in a major motion picture, and even though that’s a lie, it’s not defamation, even if you manage to find a couple of people who genuinely believe that this is a bad thing. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/68 "2011-06-07T17:13:42Z")
Maybe not libel but how about this: > [@](#): > > Public Disclosure of Embarrassing Private Facts > > ``` > Public disclosure of private facts, one of the four common law invasion of privacy torts defined in the Restatement (Second) of Torts, is the publicizing of a private matter that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person and not of legitimate concern to the public. To win on such a claim, the plaintiff must prove that the media defendant's statement: > > (1) Was highly offensive to a reasonable person > (2) Contained private facts about the plaintiff's life > (3) Was a public disclosure of private facts, and > (4) Was not of legitimate concern to others > > ``` > > Media behaves poorly in these cases, but they almost never lose because the defenses are so strong. > > Defenses > > 1. Newsworthiness. The information is of legitimate public concern. This is defined broadly by the courts. > > 2. Consent. > > 3. Information found in public records > > 4. Doesn’t outrage community notions of decency. It’s not highly offensive to a reasonable person. > > 5. Event took place in public. > > SOURCE: [School of Media and Strategic Communications | Oklahoma State University](http://journalism.okstate.edu/faculty/jsenat/jb3163/publicdisclosurereading.html) Seems a case could be made under this. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/69 "2011-06-07T17:18:12Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > The only people who could identify her are people who knew she was sleeping with him, and I don’t see how having people know you had an abortion could possibly be more mortifying than having people know you had sex with that guy. For the win! Maybe his real motivation was to establish that he has had sex with a woman. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/70 "2011-06-07T17:20:14Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > For the win! > > Maybe his real motivation was to establish that he has had sex with a woman. Best “sneak bragging” EVAR! This guy is slick. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/71 "2011-06-07T17:26:05Z")
> [@astro](#): > > Interesting. Where do modern Pagans generally stand on the abortion issue re right to life vs choice? Ask 12 neopagans anything, and you’ll get 13 answers. Neopagans skew liberal and pro-choice, I think, but we certainly have our share of conservatives and pro-lifers. A list of Pagan Pro-life resources: [http://people.tribe.net/mind-n-magick/blog/888c0a34-a1c2-4058-897d-8e2eae5e8ede](http://people.tribe.net/mind-n-magick/blog/888c0a34-a1c2-4058-897d-8e2eae5e8ede) ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/72 "2011-06-07T17:37:55Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Now, having seen the billboard, I don’t think the woman has any real case. Neither she or he are identified by name. Presumably the only way she knows it’s him is by recognizing his picture. Now having seen his picture in the billboard, I wonder if there was actually a woman. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/73 "2011-06-07T17:46:03Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > Post-abortion syndrome is a hoax. Then the women in question shouldn’t be bothered by the public revelation. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/74 "2011-06-07T17:49:16Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Then the women in question shouldn’t be bothered by the public revelation. Unless she doesn’t like her medical information being splashed on a big billboard by an angry idiot. I realize most of us would enjoy having all the details of our latest physical plastered next to the interstate highway, but her fringe view deserves protection, too. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/75 "2011-06-07T17:50:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Wow. > > This post reveals a couple of critical analytical errors. > > The crux of defamation is that your reputation has been damaged – that a falsehood has been believed by people, and as a result, your reputation has been worsened. I could, for example, falsely say that you starred opposite Julia Roberts and Helen Hunt in a major motion picture, and even though that’s a lie, it’s not defamation, even if you manage to find a couple of people who genuinely believe that this is a bad thing. All well and good. Where did I say or imply differently? How is this case covered by your example? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/76 "2011-06-07T17:58:26Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Remember, Jerry Falwell’s defamation claim against Larry Flynt ultimately failed because the Supreme Court concluded that no person who saw the offending cartoon would actually believe that Falwell had engaged in sexual intercourse with his mother. > > So, in a defamation claim, the public’s belief is very relevant. It is my understanding that public figures have less expectation of privacy than non-public people. Further, parody is a protected form of speech. Further still the claim by Flynt is so over the top as to be unbelievable by most on the face of it. None of that applies in this case. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/77 "2011-06-07T18:09:32Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Unless she doesn’t like her medical information being splashed on a big billboard by an angry idiot. I realize most of us would enjoy having all the details of our latest physical plastered next to the interstate highway, but her fringe view deserves protection, too. An abortion, assuming this is what happened, cannot be glossed over as a medical procedure. This wasn’t a bunion removal, it was someone’s child. I cited a court case about a man who tried to force a woman to have an abortion. She has the legal right to kill her child but she can’t possibly expect to hold the father of the child to some kind of invisible gag order. This all academic to the idea that she had an abortion and not a miscarriage. but by going to court she should expect the light of day to burn brighter if it was an abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/78 "2011-06-07T18:11:53Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > All well and good. > > Where did I say or imply differently? You asked: _Since when does what “a lot of people” think matter for defamation? How many is enough for it to not be defamation?_ As I explained, it’s highly relevant what “a lot of people think,” since the key question is whether the plaintiff’s reputation is damaged, and reputation is, in essence, what people think of you. You then asked: \*Used to be a time when people thought black people were “lesser” than white people (still some of them around). Does that mean you cannot defame a black person because some people think they are lesser than white people? \* And the answer to that is obvious. Even if we accept that a black person is “lesser,” that doesn’t remotely imply that a black person can’t be defamed; the question is what damage was done to the reputation. It has nothing to do with starting out as “lesser” than someone else – the key question is, “Are you ‘lesser’ now than you were before the defamatory comment was published?” > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > It is my understanding that public figures have less expectation of privacy than non-public people. Yes. But not helpful here, because for a public figure, the standard is that the defamation must have been known to be false, or recklessly and maliciously disregard for its truth must be evident. Falwell, even though he was a public figure, could meet that standard with respect to the claim that he had sex with his mother in an outhouse. Because Falwell’s case met the standard for defamation for a public figure, the fact that he had a higher standard to reach isn’t relevant. > [@](#): > > Further, parody is a protected form of speech. > > Further still the claim by Flynt is so over the top as to be unbelievable by most on the face of it. Yes, and yes. It was for these reasons, not the heightened standard, that Falwell did not prevail. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/79 "2011-06-07T18:11:54Z")
Erm… an abortion is a medical procedure. That is not “glossing”. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it not true, dear. ---
**Author:** ![Maggie\_the\_Ocelot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@Maggie\_the\_Ocelot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maggie_the_Ocelot)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2011, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595/80 "2011-06-07T18:17:09Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > An abortion, assuming this is what happened, cannot be glossed over as a medical procedure. This wasn’t a bunion removal, it was someone’s child. I cited a court case about a man who tried to force a woman to have an abortion. > > She has the legal right to kill her child but she can’t possibly expect to hold the father of the child to some kind of invisible gag order. > > This all academic to the idea that she had an abortion and not a miscarriage. but by going to court she should expect the light of day to burn brighter if it was an abortion. Oh please. There is NOTHING MORALLY WRONG with having an abortion. NOTHING. It is no more immoral than the above-mentioned bunion removal. It is between _her_ and her doctor, and she didn’t even have to tell Captain Pwecious Baybeez about the decision. **long passage excised as I belatedly realized this isn’t the Pit** [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ex-bf-erects-billboard-claiming-ex-gf-aborted-their-baby-his-free-speech-vs-her-privacy-rights/584595.md?page=5)