# Should anti-abortion protest in front of clinics be outlawed as harassment? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 27, 2012, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791 "2012-08-27T07:01:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/61 "2012-08-27T16:48:56Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > They shouldn’t be outlawed but they should have more restrictions on them than now Can you be specific about what additional restrictions you would like to see imposed? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/62 "2012-08-27T17:26:52Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > There are numerous resources to assist victims of emotional abuse in domestic settings. But for emotional abuse to be criminal, even in a domestic violence context, it must involve a threat of physical harm – or, of course, it must cross the line into actual physical harm. > > So a wife whose husband heaps mere verbal abuse on her can get assistance in leaving him and relocating, but cannot have him arrested. That’s only partially true. Absent any physical abuse, she can still get a restraining order. And if he violates that (again, with no physical abuse) he gets arrested. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/63 "2012-08-27T17:45:35Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > That’s only partially true. > > Absent any physical abuse, she can still get a restraining order. > > And if he violates that (again, with no physical abuse) he gets arrested. Bad analogy. No one is going to get a restraining order for calling someone a slut once or twice. There has to be a pattern of abuse and harassment. If the anti-aboriton protestor followed a woman home shouting “slut” at her, and waited outside her door to yell “slut” every time she opened the door to the point where it interfered with the woman’s ability to go about her normal activities, that would be harassment and the protestor could be subject to a restraining order, too. They could still yell “slut”, but only from a distance defined by the restraining order. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/64 "2012-08-27T17:47:59Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > That’s only partially true. > > Absent any physical abuse, she can still get a restraining order. > > And if he violates that (again, with no physical abuse) he gets arrested. I did say that it could involve a threat pf physical harm, as well as actual harm. In my state, you cannot get a restraining order unless you allege a threat of physical harm or actual physical harm: > [@VA Code § 16.1-253.1. Preliminary protective orders in cases of family abuse; confidentiality](#): > > Upon the filing of a petition alleging that the petitioner is or has been, within a reasonable period of time, subjected to family abuse, the court may issue a preliminary protective order against an allegedly abusing person in order to protect the health and safety of the petitioner or any family or household member of the petitioner. > [@VA Code § 16.1-228. Definitions](#): > > “Family abuse” means any act involving violence, force, or threat that results in bodily injury or places one in reasonable apprehension of death, sexual assault, or bodily injury and that is committed by a person against such person’s family or household member. Such act includes, but is not limited to, any forceful detention, stalking, criminal sexual assault in violation of Article 7 (§ 18.2-61 et seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 18.2, or any criminal offense that results in bodily injury or places one in reasonable apprehension of death, sexual assault, or bodily injury. So in Virginia, what I said was completely correct – a protective order cannot issue unless the petitioner alleges either violence or the threat of violence. Are you directing my attention to some other state? Which one? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/65 "2012-08-27T17:50:34Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Bad analogy. No one is going to get a restraining order for calling someone a slut once or twice. There has to be a pattern of abuse and harassment. I’m not sure what point you think I was making, but I doubt if it’s anything I actually intended. I was merely replying to the implication in Bricker’s post that speech was protected - or at least not actionable - in domestic relationships, and only physical action triggered legal consequences. > [@](#): > > They could still yell “slut”, but only from a distance defined by the restraining order. Depends what the RO said. Generally ROs prohibit all contact, and not just from close up. ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/66 "2012-08-27T17:52:54Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Can you be specific about what additional restrictions you would like to see imposed? Not to speak for **Yog Sosoth** , but I could think of a few conditional restraints that might ease the burden on the patients a bit. Distance: Perhaps they should be restrained to say 25 ft from either side of the entrance. No more lining the sidewalk and forcing a gauntlet of venom. Alternatively- Behaviour code: Many cities have an off duty, or liason officer at such sites to monitor the protestors and counter protestors to ensure that things don’t get out of hand. We could under current laws (disturbing the peace, etc) enact reasonable restrictions against screaming, and foul and abusive language. Such protestors that cannot contain themselves (regardless of political side) will be asked to leave the protest and go home. No arrests, but perhaps a (very small) citation could be levied against those who do not comply with the officers? I’m not at all comfortable with restrictions on the freedom of speech, but neither am I entirely comfortable with the extremely broad definition we use in the US currently either. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/67 "2012-08-27T17:57:14Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I was merely replying to the implication in Bricker’s post that speech was protected - or at least not actionable - in domestic relationships, and only physical action triggered legal consequences. Well, to recall my words: > [@Bricker](#): > > But for emotional abuse to be criminal, even in a domestic violence context, **it must involve a threat of physical harm** – or, of course, it must cross the line into actual physical harm. I clearly said a threat was sufficient. But at the same time, mere unfriendly, ugly language is not. One cannot obtain a restraining order - at least in my state – by merely alleging hateful, vile, disgusting language. There must be, as I said, a threat of physical harm or actual physical harm. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/68 "2012-08-27T18:12:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I did say that it could involve a threat pf physical harm, as well as actual harm. > > In my state, you cannot get a restraining order unless you allege a threat of physical harm or actual physical harm: > > So in Virginia, what I said was completely correct – a protective order cannot issue unless the petitioner alleges either violence or the threat of violence. > > Are you directing my attention to some other state? Which one? It varies a lot by state. For example, according to [this website](http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=10920&state_code=CA#content-7740), “disturbs your peace” counts as domestics abuse under CA law. Similar applies to other states, again according to that website. (E.g. [causing fear or emotional distress](http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=493&state_code=DE#content-3644) in Delaware, or [harassment](http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=554&state_code=NH#content-4031) in NH. [I realize that it’s not statutes or caselaw (although they cite it for the CA example above) but it seems reputable, AFAICT, and jibes with a lot of other cites I’ve seen over the years. If you object to the source, I’ll try to find something more authoritative - let me know.] ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/69 "2012-08-27T18:35:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It varies a lot by state. For example, according to [this website](http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=10920&state_code=CA#content-7740), “disturbs your peace” counts as domestics abuse under CA law. Similar applies to other states, again according to that website. (E.g. [causing fear or emotional distress](http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=493&state_code=DE#content-3644) in Delaware, or [harassment](http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=554&state_code=NH#content-4031) in NH. > > [I realize that it’s not statutes or caselaw (although they cite it for the CA example above) but it seems reputable, AFAICT, and jibes with a lot of other cites I’ve seen over the years. If you object to the source, I’ll try to find something more authoritative - let me know.] I’ve spent a few moments going over California caselaw construing those provisions, and not really finding any examples in which people living together invoked the very broad “disturbs your peace” to justify an order. On the other hand, their courts do say that the protections are broad. ---
**Author:** ![Maastricht](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@Maastricht](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maastricht)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/70 "2012-08-27T18:44:53Z")
Broad enough to apply to verbally agressive clinic protesters? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/71 "2012-08-27T18:48:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’ve spent a few moments going over California caselaw construing those provisions, and not really finding any examples in which people living together invoked the very broad “disturbs your peace” to justify an order. > > On the other hand, their courts do say that the protections are broad. According to [this CA law firm](http://www.stolar-law.com/Domestic-Violence-Overview/Verbal-Emotional-Abuse.shtml), it’s pretty broad indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/72 "2012-08-27T18:50:50Z")
> [@Maastricht](#): > > **Stratocaster** , I agree, but then again, the case could be made that “saying mean things” has crossed the line into “verbal abuse” which has some legal repercussions. My son and I took part one year in the Pro-Life March in D.C. It was organized by our parish school, and the bus we sent down was filled with soccer moms and dads and their kids. There were organized counter-protests at several parts along the march, and some were peopled by a rather, let’s say, discourteous sort, shrieking obscenities and offensive chants at us as we passed. It was a lesson for my ten-year-old son in free speech. There were people there absolutely _enraged_ at what we believed, at what they saw as an evil imposition of will on women who knew better. And they expressed that rage as we all passed, moms, dads, and ten-year-old kids. I wouldn’t dream of supporting a law that would have restricted their ability to express their rage. Because a similar law would also mean someone could stop us from marching. That’s how it works in a free society. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/73 "2012-08-27T18:53:52Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Can you be specific about what additional restrictions you would like to see imposed? > [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > Not to speak for **Yog Sosoth** , but I could think of a few conditional restraints that might ease the burden on the patients a bit. > > Distance: Perhaps they should be restrained to say 25 ft from either side of the entrance. No more lining the sidewalk and forcing a gauntlet of venom. This. I’d move them back a bit more, maybe use the last Republican National Convention “free speech zones” as a guideline, since the GOP are obviously such proponents of personal speech and rights. It would be great if these protestors could be corralled into a little pen across the street and a hundred feet away from the clinic’s building Not to get hyperbolic here, but when it comes to a balance between the right to protest and the rights of the clinic to conduct business, in the specific case of abortion, I’d err on the side of the clinics and the women going to them. Considering that the protestors aren’t so much targeting the clinic but the individuals themselves, less leeway should be given to them. I’d consider many forms of such protest to be harassment and act accordingly > [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > Behaviour code: Many cities have an off duty, or liason officer at such sites to monitor the protestors and counter protestors to ensure that things don’t get out of hand. We could under current laws (disturbing the peace, etc) enact reasonable restrictions against screaming, and foul and abusive language. Such protestors that cannot contain themselves (regardless of political side) will be asked to leave the protest and go home. No arrests, but perhaps a (very small) citation could be levied against those who do not comply with the officers? Since a clinic is a medical facility, perhaps some sort of noise ordinance can be put into place. Shout too loud, or bringing out the bullhorns will get you kicked out ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/74 "2012-08-27T19:02:10Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > According to [this CA law firm](http://www.stolar-law.com/Domestic-Violence-Overview/Verbal-Emotional-Abuse.shtml), it’s pretty broad indeed. Indeed – but I have to say I remain skeptical. On its face, that would seem to suggest a heated verbal argument in a home could give rise to a restraining order that forced someone from the house: > [@](#): > > Some elements of an emotionally or verbally abusive relationship include: > You are manipulated into feeling guilty when you have done nothing wrong. > . > . > . > Your abuser calls you worthless, ugly, stupid, or in other ways makes you feel inferior. > Your abuser publicly humiliates you Unfortunately I don’t have time to dive in to California’s family law caselaw just now, but I would very much like to hear from any family law practitioners. I cannot believe that if I live in California and allege that my wife has made me feel guilty when I have done nothing wrong, I can get a restraining order. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/75 "2012-08-27T19:04:53Z")
> [@Maastricht](#): > > Broad enough to apply to verbally agressive clinic protesters? No, because they specify that these protections are available for domestic partners – spouses, former spouses, dating, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/76 "2012-08-27T19:17:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I cannot believe that if I live in California and allege that my wife has made me feel guilty when I have done nothing wrong, I can get a restraining order. I don’t believe it either. But I think your wife might have a decent shot. 🙂 I am not a family practitioner or any other sort of lawyer. But my understanding of the way these matters work in general is that it’s not that the judge decides if he/she believes that your spouse called you a nasty name this triggers an automatic granting of a RO. The judge has considerable latitude here, and what they would do as a practical matter, is decide if in their judgment a RO is warranted in this circumstance. And one thing they’ll consider (in addition to whether it’s likely to end up moving to actual violence) is whether the overall situation is abusive - if one spouse is being battered psychologically by the constant verbal/emotional abuse from the other spouse, and thus needs protection. That’s why your wife has a shot while you’re out of luck. Because the judge is more likely to make the judgment that your wife is a victim who needs protection from the court, than to make the same judgment about you. At any rate, for purposes of this issue here, I think the point is made, and I think your latest response to Maastricht misses the point. Yes, these RO laws are specifically for family members and the like, and not for protest situations. But the question in the OP was “_should_ anti-abortion protest in front of clinics be outlawed as harassment?”, not whether they already are. And if there are laws that protect family members in similar situations, this suggests that it would be possible to do the same for abortion-seekers. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/77 "2012-08-27T22:07:15Z")
> [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > Not to speak for **Yog Sosoth** , but I could think of a few conditional restraints that might ease the burden on the patients a bit. > > Distance: Perhaps they should be restrained to say 25 ft from either side of the entrance. No more lining the sidewalk and forcing a gauntlet of venom. I think the protestors need to be able to be within hearing/seeing distance of the clinic. Otherwise, you might as well say they have to protest in the next town over. If that fits in the 25 ft rule, OK. > [@](#): > > Alternatively- > > Behaviour code: Many cities have an off duty, or liason officer at such sites to monitor the protestors and counter protestors to ensure that things don’t get out of hand. We could under current laws (disturbing the peace, etc) enact reasonable restrictions against screaming, and foul and abusive language. Such protestors that cannot contain themselves (regardless of political side) will be asked to leave the protest and go home. No arrests, but perhaps a (very small) citation could be levied against those who do not comply with the officers? > > I’m not at all comfortable with restrictions on the freedom of speech, but neither am I entirely comfortable with the extremely broad definition we use in the US currently either. I don’t think you can have a special volume constraint above whatever noise ordinances are in place. “Screaming” isn’t a technical term. And content cannot be regulated specifically for abortion protestors. If there are local ordinances against profanities in public, so be it. ---
**Author:** ![Maastricht](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@Maastricht](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maastricht)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/78 "2012-08-27T22:38:55Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > I wouldn’t dream of supporting a law that would have restricted their ability to express their rage. Because a similar law would also mean someone could stop us from marching. That’s how it works in a free society. Yes, but both you and the contra protesters choose to march/protest in that free society. You are a match. Suppose, on the other hand, you would have to walk a gauntlet of venom on your way to work. Would that strike you as a fair exchange for your own right to form somebody elses gauntlet somewhere else on your weekends? Women visiting a clinic, don’t choose to be drawn in to a protest either for or against abortion. They are not politically active; they are on a very personal, medical errand. I don’t think I’m wrong when I say they would much, much rather be left alone by either pro choice or pro pife protesters. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/79 "2012-08-27T22:42:53Z")
That is the difference between American and (some) European Countries’ ideas of what it means to live in a free society. It’s messy and disorderly and we don’t mind it all that much. ---
**Author:** ![Maastricht](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@Maastricht](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maastricht)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2012, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791/80 "2012-08-27T23:08:09Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > OK. Just keep in mind that, in the US, we have a somewhat different attitude towards free speech and religious freedom than our European cousins. > > Laws that limit political speech (and anti-abortion protestors fall in that category) are subject to the highest scrutiny. If there is no impact on health or safety or the freedom of other citizens to go about their business, then you really can’t curtail such speech. Protestors are not allowed to block the clinics or physically touch anyone attempting to enter a clinic. They wouldn’t be allowed to lie down in the streets and block traffic. Laws that require protestors to stay a certain distance from the clinic have been upheld, but there is no way our constitution would allow the banning of the protest altogether. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > Like I said, we have a different sense of free speech than Europeans do. …When it comes to protest in the US, most social taboos go out the window. Interesting. My impression from the US, is that racist and inappropriate (sexist or sex related) language is very heavily taboo, even more so then in the Netherlands. I didn’t know it wasn’t illegal, though. The differences are a debate onto itself; for instance, about five people have been fined/imprisoned in the Netherlands in last ten years for _verbal_ attacks on our Queen. (not political, mostly just incoherent obscene hate) Still, the prison sentences for insulting the Queen surprised and worried me too. Our politicians, on the other hand, are free targets. However, I can’t think of a cultural parallel of the fiery ad-hominem protests you guys have. it seems that indeed, as you say, " When it comes to protest in the US, most social taboos go out the window." That is a difference with the Netherlands. With the current exeption of soccer hooliganism, extreme animal rights activism and extreme muslim activism, I can’t think of any mainstream political hot button topics that would cause people to behave like the abortion clinic protesters in the US. It would cause a public outrage. We seem to be much, much more lukewarm and more polite in our modern protests. In is an interesting difference, and I don’t really know what causes it. I can’t say we have more or less freedom then you guys have; just less passion, less moral outrage ? We’re seldom angry for some moral sake; we’re too practical, I think. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-anti-abortion-protest-in-front-of-clinics-be-outlawed-as-harassment/632791.md?page=5)