Liberal Forum

RichClem » 21 Jan 2014 4:23 pm » wrote:Thirty five feet removes them from public property adjacent to the clinic, like sidewalks.
No one is allowed to be "at the entrance." That is trespassing, illegal and remains so.

Misty » 21 Jan 2014 7:14 pm » wrote: WTF are you talking about?
Are you saying that anti-abortion activists have never killed anybody?
Seriously?

Misty » 21 Jan 2014 7:22 pm » wrote: You don't even understand what this ruling is about do you?
You just know that if I'm against it, you have to be for it.

The court is about to rule on whether they should strike down the 35 foot buffer zone laws that are in place now Jackhole.
If they do women will once again be forced to run a gauntlet in order to undergo a valid, legal, and constitutionally protected medical procedure.
Obviously you didn't even read the editorial before you dismissed it out of hand.

The law was originally enacted in response to decades of harassment targeted at people seeking entry into women’s healthcare and abortion clinics and a 1994 shooting rampage that killed two people at a Brookline Planned Parenthood clinic.

RichClem » 21 Jan 2014 9:37 pm » wrote: Thirty five feet removes them from public property adjacent to the clinic, like sidewalks, and violates their Constitutional rights.

Misty » 22 Jan 2014 2:07 pm » wrote: ****. No one has a Constitutional right to harass someone who is just trying to obtain a legal medical procedure.

How would you like it if you had to walk through a gauntlet of people screaming at you when you tried to enter your doctor's office to seek a remedy for your erectile dysfunction problem?

Misty » 22 Jan 2014 2:07 pm » wrote: ****. No one has a Constitutional right to harass someone who is just trying to obtain a legal medical procedure.

How would you like it if you had to walk through a gauntlet of people screaming at you when you tried to enter your doctor's office to seek a remedy for your erectile dysfunction problem?

Misty » 22 Jan 2014 2:28 pm » wrote:This post was made by Huey who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

Huey » 22 Jan 2014 2:10 pm » wrote: The same as I did walking by war protestors, or military protestors when in uniform. I felt nothing. Shook my head and went about my business

Misty » 22 Jan 2014 2:07 pm » wrote: ****. No one has a Constitutional right to harass someone who is just trying to obtain a legal medical procedure.

RichClem » 22 Jan 2014 2:33 pm » wrote:Really? Where in the US Constitution is this kind of free speech excluded?

Misty » 22 Jan 2014 2:36 pm » wrote: Again, you don't seem to understand the difference between speech and harassment.
Go ahead Puss, tell me how the First Amendment is absolute. LOL

RichClem » 22 Jan 2014 2:41 pm » wrote:Where in the Constitution is disliked speech on public property allowed to be silenced?

Free speech zones (also known as First Amendment zones, free speech cages, and protest zones) are areas set aside in public places for political activists to exercise their right of free speech in the U.S..
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The existence of free speech zones is based on U.S. court decisions stipulating that the government may regulate the time, place, and manner—but not content—of expression.

Huey » 22 Jan 2014 2:49 pm » wrote:Boo!

Misty » 22 Jan 2014 2:48 pm » wrote: Again the Constitution does not specifically mention any types of speech, yet there are several we know are illegal, like threats, obscenity, or slander.

People also have a right to peaceably assemble and redress the government for grievances, yet they are herded into free speech zones blocks away from political party events such as conventions.

From Wikipedia: Did you catch that last part Puss?
Courts have decided that the government may regulate the time, place, and manner—but not content—of expression.
If they can create 'free speech zones' for political activists, then why not for anti-abortion activists?

Critics, however, suggest that such zones are "Orwellian",[1][2] and that authorities use them in a heavy-handed manner to censor protesters by putting them literally out of sight of the mass media, hence the public, as well as visiting dignitaries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

RichClem » 22 Jan 2014 4:33 pm » wrote:I would agree that if demonstrators are interfering with public figures, with business, with ordinary citizens, they should be "zoned."
But not simply for convenience or to hide their speech.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that the state of Mass. enacted the restrictions in 2007 because “there was a considerable history of disturbances and blocking the entrance.” The state “doesn’t know in advance who are the well-behaved people and who are the people who won’t behave well . . . and after the disturbance occurs, it’s too late,” she said.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that when the court in 2011 upheld the right of members of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan., to bring even outrageous protests to the funeral of a military veteran, the court noted that the protesters could be kept away from the front of the church.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html

Chicago GOP hopeful: Autism and dementia are God’s punishments for LGBT rights.

One of the Republicans lining up to challenge Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) for her seat representing the 9th District of Illinois told the Chicago Daily Herald that God is “angry” with the United States and has sent scourges to punish the American people.

Candidate Susanne Atanus believes that autism and forms of dementia are punishments sent by God because of the growing support for marriage equality in the country and the prevalence of abortion.

“I am a conservative Republican and I believe in God first,” Atanus said at an endorsement session with the Daily Herald on Monday.

God controls the weather, she said, and tornadoes are evidence of his wrath.

“God is angry. We are provoking him with abortions and same-sex marriage and civil unions,” she said. “Same-sex activity is going to increase AIDS. If it’s in our military it will weaken our military. We need to respect God.”

GOP rep.: Force women to have babies because abortion ‘robs men’ of fatherhood rights.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) told conservative activists on Wednesday that women should be forced to carry their babies to term because abortion “robs men” of their right to be fathers.

Speaking at the 41st annual March for Life in Washington, D.C., Hartzler opined that “abortion hurts everyone.”

“It ends a beating heart, it leaves emotional wounds with women that they carry for life and it robs men of the privilege of fatherhood,” she said. “That’s why we must do everything in our power to end this devastating practice.”

Hartzler asserted that if abortion hadn’t been legalized, “perhaps we would have had a cure for cancer now.”

Alaska GOP Senate candidate sings in tongues in a sauna to ‘save’ woman.

A woman who hopes to be Alaska’s next U.S. senator recently uploaded video of herself speaking in tongues while fully clothed in a steam room.

“I’m at the Alaska Club West and I’m spending a little time in the steam room with Suzie,” Republican candidate Kathleen Tonn said in the video, which was uploaded to YouTube on January 18. “Suzie doesn’t know Jesus Christ as her savior, but ironically she has a pastor/priest who is her neighbor. So, she has allowed me to sing and deliver a message in the Holy Ghost and tongues.”

Ted Nugent: ‘Subhuman mongrel’ Obama should get ‘just due punishment’ for treason.

Conservative rocker Ted Nugent said recently that he wouldn’t rest until President Barack Obama — who he called a “subhuman mongrel” — and of the all “liberal Democrats” had gotten the “just due punishment” that they deserved for treason.

In an interview with Guns.com last week, Nugent said that him winning the presidency in 2016 would be “the perfect ballet of freedom.”Nugent, who is a National Rifle Association (NRA) board member and a spokesperson for the Outdoor Channel, opined that he would be the best candidate because “our politicians check their scrotums at the door. Even Hillary. But Obviously, she has spare scrotums.”

He went on to apologize to members of the military for allowing “a commander in chief who is the enemy” to take over the country.

“I have obviously failed to galvanize and prod, if not shame enough Americans to be ever vigilant not to let a Chicago communist-raised, communist-educated, communist-nurtured subhuman mongrel like the ACORN community organizer gangster Barack Hussein Obama to weasel his way into the top office of authority in the United States of America,” Nugent continued.

“I think America will be America again when Barack Obama, [Attorney General] Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton, [Sen.] Dick Durbin, [former New York City Mayor] Michael Bloomberg and all of the liberal Democrats are in jail facing the just due punishment that their treasonous acts are clearly apparent.”

The Motor City Madman added that his rhetoric was less “inflammatory” than the so-called scandal over the 2011 terrorist attacks at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
“What difference does that make?” he asked. “Not to a chimpanzee or Hillary Clinton, I guess it doesn’t matter.”

Misty » 22 Jan 2014 7:20 pm » wrote: They are interfering with women trying to access a legal medical procedure.

Two receptionists were shot and killed and five others wounded by one of these anti-abortion activists in two clinic attacks in Massachusetts in 1994.

RichClem » 22 Jan 2014 10:17 pm » wrote:Are you just babbling, trying to ignore what the actual court case is?

The Loud Truth About Abortion Protesters

Last week, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia told us that these people are not anti-abortion “protesters.” Instead, he glowingly described them as, “counselors” who wanted “to comfort these [pregnant] women” by speaking to them, “quietly and in a friendly manner.”

Scalia offered these remarks during oral arguments in a case challenging the legality of a Massachusetts law that imposes a 35-foot buffer zone around clinics which anti-abortion protesters are prohibited from invading.
The Justice implied that a buffer zone was not needed because the people outside these clinics were not angry protesters, but rather a collection of kindly “sidewalk counselors.”

But something wasn’t adding up. Katie Klabusich, who has volunteered for years escorting pregnant women into clinics, told me a far different story. She spoke of numerous incidents where anti-abortion protesters would scream in the face of pregnant women in the hopes of shaming and bullying them to not enter the clinic.

So this past Saturday, I ventured out on a cold, snowy morning to see what was really up. What did I find? Well, upon parking my car about a block and a half from the clinic, I could hear screaming. I couldn’t make out the words but it was being directed at a woman approaching the clinic by a group of male protesters standing on the doorstep of the clinic.
New Jersey doesn’t have a buffer zone law like Massachusetts. (New Jersey does ban electioneering within 100 feet of a polling place.)

This group of men had formed an angry gauntlet in front of the clinic. They held signs bearing photos of dead babies, Biblical verses, and allegations that baby-killing was taking place at this facility.

I can’t even imagine what a woman who is likely emotionally distraught over the prospect of having an abortion is feeling as she approaches this group of men. In fact, to be brutally honest, I felt anxious as they glared at me when I neared the clinic’s entrance.

But one thing is clear, they were not there as Justice Scalia claimed, “to comfort women.” They wanted to intimidate women to not enter the clinic.
(.......)
And in the midst of this sea of people screaming, counseling and praying were a group of about eight volunteers donning yellow jackets that read, “Pro-choice clinic escort.” These people—whom one of the “sidewalk counselors” referred to as “deathscorts”—would safeguard the women entering the clinic, at times even forming a human shield around them.