To the Editor:
Re “Grass-Roots Grand Juries Become the Latest Abortion Battlefield” (front page, June 17):
Citizen-convened grand jury investigations are only the latest attacks on Dr. George Tiller and on women’s ability to have safe, legal abortions. In his three decades of providing abortion care, antichoice protesters have shot Dr. Tiller, bombed his clinic and harassed him at home.
Nevertheless, he and his staff continue to safeguard women’s health, performing abortions — safely and with great compassion — that few doctors in the country have the training to handle.
As a retired abortion provider and a friend of Dr. Tiller, I know why he presses on: women desperately need his services. Physicians like Dr. Tiller are heroes to every woman they treat. He should be honored for his dedication, not persecuted.
If Dr. Tiller can’t get the credit he deserves, I’d settle for everyone just leaving him alone. Suzanne T. Poppema
Edmonds, Wash., June 17, 2008
The writer is board chairwoman of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health.
June 23, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
June 17, 2008
Grand Juries as a Political Weapon in the Abortion Debate
NY Times: Grand Juries Become Latest Abortion Battlefield, by Monica Davey:
WICHITA, Kan. — Opponents of Dr. George Tiller and his clinic here, one of the nation’s few providers of late-term abortions, have tried many ways to stop him over three decades. They have held protests, lobbied lawmakers and complained persistently to state regulators and prosecutors. There have also been several acts of violence, including one in which Dr. Tiller was shot in both arms.
Now his opponents are using a legal tactic that some find startling and others consider inspired. They have turned to an unusual state statute, adopted in 1887, that allows ordinary citizens who gather enough signatures on a petition to demand that a grand jury investigate an alleged crime, a decision usually left to a prosecutor.
Inside a courthouse along Main Street here, 15 grand jurors have been meeting for months, convened under the statute by ordinary Sedgwick County residents to investigate whether Dr. Tiller’s clinic has illegally performed second- and third-trimester abortions. Their deliberations are scheduled to end next month.
Kansas is one of a few states that have laws that allow residents to force a grand jury investigation. Over all, the practice is seldom used, but grand juries by petition in Kansas have recently taken on new life, new targets and a host of new critics who say a law once meant to check official corruption is being twisted into a political weapon.
June 17, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement, In the Courts, State News | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 10, 2008
Anti-Choice Advocates Making Strides Without Court Overturning Roe
Chicago Tribune: Abortion foes take battle beyond Roe, by James Oliphant:
Makeup of high court is political focal point, but activists cutting access with ruling intact
Troy Newman appears to be just about the happiest person who ever set foot in an abortion clinic.
"We're winning," Newman says excitedly. "We're winning the youth. We're winning the hearts and minds of the people."
Except for his prematurely gray hair, Newman, the head of Operation Rescue, perhaps the most aggressive anti-abortion group in the nation, seems boyish and eager.
"I just want to be the best pro-lifer I can be," he said.
The organization has just moved into its new offices in Wichita, a shuttered abortion clinic that Newman helped hassle out of business. "Nothing warms my heart more than a closed abortion clinic," he said. He keeps souvenirs in his office of some of the clinics he has claimed credit for helping shut down.
Newman has good reason to feel optimistic. Through the work of groups like his, the number of places where women can obtain abortions in the United States has shrunk by two-thirds since the early 1990s, to about 700. The Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-rights think tank that has had a longtime connection to Planned Parenthood, estimates abortions are now unavailable in 87 percent of counties nationwide.
June 10, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 30, 2008
CO: Ballot to Include Const'l Amendment Defining Fertilized Human Egg As Person
Associated Press: Anti-abortion measure OK'd for Colo. ballot, by Dan Elliott:
DENVER (AP) — A proposed state constitutional amendment defining a fertilized human egg as a person was certified Thursday for the November ballot, moving Colorado a step closer to an election battle over abortion rights....
Kristi Burton, the prime mover behind the measure, said her group, Colorado for Equal Rights, will target voters who personally oppose abortion but don't want to impose their views on others.
Burton said polling shows those voters make up about 20 percent of the electorate.
"Our job is to put the truth out there for the voters," she said. "Science is on our side."
Opponents say the proposed amendment could affect birth control because the most widely used form of contraception works by preventing fertilized eggs from attaching to the uterus.
They also say the measure could deter in-vitro fertilization and s tem cell research and bar doctors from treating women with some forms of cancer.
May 30, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement, Contraception, Fertility, State News | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 27, 2008
Waning Influence of Missouri Right to Life Over State Legislature?
Kansas City Star: On abortion, Missouri senators move toward the sane center, by Barb Shelly (editorial page columnist):
There's been some good research in recent years that shows that politicians tend to be pulled toward the fringes on issues, while most Americans dwell closer to the center. In my observation, this holds most true for state legislators.
Closeted in places like Jefferson City and Topeka, the people who make laws and set policy for the state live in a world apart. They rarely have the close constituent connections that, say, a city council member does. The public generally has only a vague idea of what these folks are doing.
Ah, but the interest groups know. They keep score, and they let their clout be known at election time.
In no case has this been more true than the grip with which the anti-abortion group, Missouri Right to Life, has enjoyed over the state's General Assembly. For Republican lawmakers, a Missouri Right to Life endorsement has been regarded as a must-have in a primary race.
But as The Star's Jefferson City correspondent Kit Wagar points out in a story today, Missouri Right to Life appears to have overplayed its hand. Republican lawmakers who are very opposed to abortion have been disobeying the activist group's marching order.
"Right to Life" chapters in other states, including Michigan, exercise this same grip over their state legislatures (a fact that I find often surprises people).
May 27, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement, Politics, State Legislatures | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 16, 2008
CO Group Proposes Extending State Constitutional Rights to Embryos
Denver Post: Personhood petition garners 131,245 signatures, by Electa Draper:
A grassroots group seeking to define personhood in the Colorado Constitution as "any human being from the moment of fertilization" signed up 131,245 voters in support of the amendment....
The amendment, if approved by voters, would guarantee every person, whatever their stage of life, the right to life, liberty, equality of justice and due process of law — laying the legal foundation to challenge legal abortion.
May 16, 2008 in Abortion Bans, Anti-Choice Movement, State Legislatures | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 12, 2008
"What If Your Mother Had Aborted You?"
Frances Kissling responds, on RH Reality Check, to the question anti-choice advocates love to ask:
"What if your mother had aborted you?" It's almost always a question some frustrated anti-choicer asks after a presentation; I've probably been asked that question a hundred times. In the beginning, my answer was fairly abstract, philosophical. I'd note that the "I" who stands before them is not the "I" that was once a fetus. The I of today is the result of a mother who continued a pregnancy and the process of becoming that made me who I am today. But over time, I felt a need to give a more personal and direct answer, something about me, my mother and the relationship between children and their mothers.
I feel a need to turn that question around and to ask instead: What if your mother's life would have been significantly happier and healthier if she had not had you? If you as a fetus had the capacity to make decisions, would you have given your life for your mother's life, health and happiness?
Other Mother's Day posts on RH Reality Check: From Inside Prisons, Mothers Long for Their Children, by Christy Hall; The Politics of Motherhood, the Capacity for Choice, by Caroline Austria.
May 12, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement, Culture, Parenthood | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 05, 2008
Anti-Choice Pregnancy Center Takes Down Misleading Website
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Anti-abortion pregnancy center shuts Web site, by Ellen Gabler:
A pregnancy crisis center in Wausau that opposes abortion has shut down a Web site it was using to dissuade people from visiting a nearby clinic that offers emergency contraception and other reproductive health services.
Hope Pregnancy Resource Center, which opposes abortion and doesn't offer contraceptives, banked on the fact that some people switch up the ".com"s and ".org"s when typing in Web addresses.
Hope bought the domain name www.fphs.com about one year ago, Board Chairman Rick Orrick confirmed.
That address is very similar to www.fphs.org, which is the site owned by Family Planning Health Services, the reproductive health services clinic.
Last week Hope took down the Web site after a reporter for the local paper, City Pages, began asking questions.
May 5, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement, Contraception | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 03, 2008
New Study Examines Depression in Women, Including Effects of Abortion and Partner Violence
Via Our Bodies Our Blog:
A new study in BMJ Public Health examines depression in women and the relationship of past abortions to the condition. This new report is particularly interesting because it attempts to control for the effects of sociodemographic factors and considers the women's experiences of intimate partner violence, recognizing that multiple factors may impact a woman's mental health.
Although the study focuses on Australian women, it may be of interest to readers in other countries as well due to recent attempts by anti-choice groups to promote the existence of a so-called "post-abortion syndrome," or causal link between abortion and depression, which has thus far been unsupported by the medical evidence. Similar to unsupported and debunked claims of an abortion/breast cancer link, this tactic frames the pro-choice position as anti-women's health, despite the lack of evidence to support that framing. (For background reading, try this commentary in Ms. Magazine and a lengthy discussion of the issue in the New York Times.)
May 3, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement, Culture | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 21, 2008
The Philosophical Divide Among Anti-Choice Advocates
Wall Street Journal: Antiabortion Initiatives Divide Movement, by T.W. Farnam:
Abortion opponents are pushing ballot measures in five states this year. But the campaigns show as much division as unity in the antiabortion movement.
In California, an initiative would add that state to the long list that currently requires doctors to notify parents before giving abortions to minors. In Missouri, abortion foes are trying to require psychological examination to show the woman isn't acting under duress. State officials say the law as written would be tantamount to a ban, but advocates dispute that.
In South Dakota, activists have revived a measure defeated two years ago that directly outlaws abortion. They have modified the proposal to try to boost support, adding new exceptions for the health of the mother and cases of rape or incest. In Colorado and Montana, abortion opponents are taking a newly popular tack, promoting constitutional amendments that give legal rights to human embryos.
Behind the varying measures is a philosophical split among antiabortion groups. Some want to promote measures that ban abortion outright, directly challenging the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion. Others prefer to chip away at abortion rights by limiting the types of procedures allowed, or finding other ways to limit access.
April 21, 2008 in Abortion, Abortion Bans, Anti-Choice Movement, State Legislatures, State News | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Reva Siegel on "Woman-Protective Anti-Abortion Argument"
Reva Siegel (Yale Law School) has posted The Right's Reasons: Constitutional Conflict and the Spread of Woman-Protective Antiabortion Argument on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This Lecture investigates the social movement dynamics that produced woman-protective antiabortion argument. The Lecture explores the political conditions under which leaders of the antiabortion movement began to supplement or even to supplant the constitutional argument abortion kills a baby with a new argument, abortion hurts women - a claim that achieved widespread public notice with the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Gonzales v. Carhart.
The Lecture's genealogy of a social movement claim begins in the 1980s, when members of the antiabortion movement asserted that abortion subjects women to regret, trauma, and psychological illness, a condition they termed post-abortion syndrome (PAS). My story then follows changes in the abortion-harms-women claim as it was transformed from PAS - a therapeutic discourse initially employed to dissuade women from having abortions and to recruit women to the antiabortion cause - into woman-protective antiabortion argument (WPAA), a political discourse forged in the heat of social movement conflict that sought to persuade audiences outside the movement's ranks in electoral campaigns and in constitutional litigation.
Whereas PAS grew up as a mobilizing discourse deployed primarily among women volunteers and clients in the antiabortion movement's crisis pregnancy network - a context in which abortion-hurts-women testimonials had important expressive functions - WPAA took shape in political contexts in which the abortion-hurts-women argument had important strategic functions. In the 1990s, antiabortion advocates sought to explain to audiences that ambivalently supported the abortion right why women would benefit from legal restrictions on abortion. As they did so, they fused PAS claims and stories with traditional gender-paternalist argument, justifying restrictions on women's agency as needed to protect women from male coercion and to free women to be mothers. As a political discourse designed to rebut feminist, pro-choice claims, WPAA came to internalize elements of the very arguments it sought to counter - fusing the public health, trauma, and survivors idiom of PAS with the idiom of the late twentieth-century feminist and abortion-rights movements. As the Lecture shows, social movement mobilization, conflict, and coalition each played a role in the evolution and spread of the woman-protective antiabortion argument, in the process forging new and distinctly modern ways to talk about the right to life and the role morality of motherhood in the therapeutic, public health, and political rights idiom of late twentieth-century America.
The Lecture concludes by considering the new gender-paternalist justifications for abortion restrictions discussed in Carhart. With the spread of woman-protective antiabortion argument and its seductively modern justifications for using law to impose motherhood on women, Justice Kennedy and the nation will once again have to decide - not only how to balance the liberty of the pregnant woman against the state interest in protecting potential life - but more fundamentally, about the kind of women that constitutional guarantees of liberty and equality protect. This question is far from abstract, as South Dakota once again considers whether to adopt an abortion ban, justified by fetal-protective and woman-protective argument, in the 2008 elections.
April 21, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement, Mandatory Delay/Biased Information Laws, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 02, 2008
Michael Gerson on Obama's Abortion Stance
Wash. Post: Obama's Abortion Extremism, by Michael Gerson:
Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr.'s endorsement of Barack Obama last week -- "I believe in this guy like I've never believed in a candidate in my life" -- recalled another dramatic moment in Democratic politics. In the summer of 1992, as Bill Clinton solidified his control over the Democratic Party, Robert P. Casey Sr., the senator's father, was banned from speaking to the Democratic convention for the heresy of being pro-life.
...Obama's record on abortion is extreme. He opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion -- a practice a fellow Democrat, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, once called "too close to infanticide." Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the partial-birth ban. In the Illinois state Senate, he opposed a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of infants mistakenly left alive by abortion. And now Obama has oddly claimed that he would not want his daughters to be "punished with a baby" because of a crisis pregnancy -- hardly a welcoming attitude toward new life.
This piece is somewhat confusing in describing Obama and the federal abortion ban. Barack Obama did not vote on the federal ban. The Act was signed into law in November of 2003, and Obama was elected to the Senate the following year. (Obama voted "present" on -- the practical equivalent of voting against -- Illinois's so-called "partial-birth abortion ban," but that's another story.) Obama spoke out against the federal ban when the Supreme Court upheld it last year.
Gerson is wrong to call opposition to the federal abortion ban extreme. What's extreme is the ban itself. Its passage marked the first time Congress ever interfered with how doctors perform abortions, imposing criminal sanctions and preventing doctors from treating their patients in the way they believe is safest. Senator Moynihan, otherwise pro-choice, fell prey to the misleading and highly sophisticated public relations campaign supporting the so-called "partial-birth abortion" bans. (More on the history of and rhetoric behind the bans here).
Gerson suggests that Obama should support efforts to reduce the number of abortions. Obama has already demonstrated his support for measures to curb unintended pregnancies. For example, he is an original co-sponsor of the Prevention First Act, which aims to increase access to contraception and comprehensive sex education (education that, unlike the discredited abstinence-only approach Gerson advocates, teaches both about abstinence and safer sex).
Finally, Gerson's piece is full of the ethical inconsistencies common among those who oppose abortion: sometimes they want to treat the fetus as a complete, rights-holding person, and sometimes they don't. Gerson neatly demonstrates this when he first accuses Obama of not holding a "welcoming attitude toward new life," and in the next breath points out that "[f]ew Americans oppose abortion under every circumstance, but a majority oppose most of the abortions that actually take place -- generally supporting the procedure only in the case of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother." As I have pointed out many times on this blog, either the fetus is a "child," or it isn't. A true "child" does not lose her status as a person because she is the product of rape or incest.
April 2, 2008 in 2008 Presidential Campaign, Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement, Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
SD Attempts to Revive Abortion Ban
Too bad this wasn't an April Fool's joke:
Rapid City Journal: Abortion Ban Supporters Collect Twice the Necessary Signatures, by Kevin Woster (4/1):
Abortion opponents rolled three safes stuffed with signed petitions into the state Capitol Monday, signaling another round in the ongoing battle over whether to ban most abortions in South Dakota.
Leslee Unruh of Sioux Falls, executive director of VoteYesForLife.com, said her organization delivered more than 46,000 signatures, close to three times the number needed to put the issue on the November ballot....
The initiative this year would add additional exceptions allowing abortions in pregnancies from rape and incest, as well as for women who could suffer serious health problems from their pregnancies. Unruh said some voters wanted those additional exceptions when they rejected the 2006 ban.
But opponents of this year’s initiative say the exceptions in the proposal are too onerous and intrusive to be workable. Dr. Marvin Buehner of Rapid City, a specialist in obstetrics and gynecology, said the law would require doctors performing an abortion to collect DNA from the woman and fetal tissue, and then be responsible for the “chain of custody” to law enforcement officers. Violations could mean a Class 4 felony, which would intimidate most doctors, Buehner said.
April 2, 2008 in Abortion Bans, Anti-Choice Movement, State Legislatures | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 29, 2008
AK House Passes Abortion Ban
Daily News-Miner: Sides Hold Firm on Abortion Bill, by Anne Sutton:
Critics of a bill banning partial-birth abortion say the real intent is to ban abortion altogether. It’s a claim sponsors of the measure deny.
In a House debate on Tuesday, Rep. Wes Keller, R-Wasilla, said his bill is specific to the rare medical procedure that is used to terminate late term pregnancies.
The bill is modeled after the federal abortion ban, which the Supreme Court upheld in Gonzales v. Carhart last year. But Alaska's constitution provides stronger privacy protection than does the federal Constitution:
Rep. Beth Kerttula, D-Juneau, said the new language is vague enough to encompass all first- and second-trimester abortions. And she doubts it would survive [a] legal challenge, given the state’s strict constitutional right to privacy.
A legal opinion from the Legislature’s own counsel agrees.
March 29, 2008 in Abortion Bans, Anti-Choice Movement, State News | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 26, 2008
Senate Candidate Legally Changes Name to "Pro-Life"
Associated Press: Aspiring Pol Changes Name To Pro-Life:
Idaho Strawberry Farmer Vying For Larry Craig's Senate Seat Trumpets Abortion Stance
A Senate candidate has legally changed his name to Pro-Life and will appear on the ballot that way this year, state election officials say.
As Marvin Pro-Life Richardson, the organic strawberry farmer from Letha, 30 miles northwest of Boise, was denied the use of his middle name when he ran unsuccessfully for governor in 2006 because the state's policy bars the use of slogans on the ballot.
Now, though, officials in the Idaho secretary of state's office say they have no choice because Pro-Life is his full and only name. He says he will run for the highest state office on the ballot every two years for the rest of his life, advocating murder charges for doctors who perform abortions and for women who obtain the procedure.
Unlike many anti-choice politicians, Mr. Richardson apparently does not shy away from addressing whether women should be punished for abortions. See also this post: Republican Debate: No! Not the "Should the Woman Be Punished for Abortion" Question! Run away!
March 26, 2008 in Abortion, Abortion Bans, Anti-Choice Movement, Politics, State News | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
US DOJ Sues to Protect Mississippi's Only Abortion Provider
The Clarion-Ledger: Abortion Foe Admits Breaking Rule to Remain 25 Feet from Local Clinic, by Rebecca Helmes:
Longtime anti-abortion protester Roy McMillan admitted in court Friday that he had twice broken a federal agreement to stay 25 feet from Mississippi's only abortion clinic.
But the instances, he said, were times when he was moved by compassion to comfort a woman he assumed to be upset about getting an abortion and to help a friend who had passed out in the street.
When U.S. Justice Department attorney Julie Abbate asked McMillan if it would be morally justifiable to kill an abortion provider, including Jackson Women's Health Organization physician Joseph Booker, McMillan said he couldn't answer.
"I think there are times you can break a law for a higher good," McMillan said. But he said he doesn't admire people who commit violence against abortion providers.
A decision on whether he will be held in contempt for breaking the 1996 federal consent decree prohibiting him from approaching the State Street clinic and threatening or intimidating clinic workers could come as early as Friday.
March 26, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement, In the Courts | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 24, 2008
Wisconsin Anti-Choice Activists Accuse College Newspapers of Censorship
La Crosse Tribune, UW-L student newspaper accused of censoring, by K.J. Lang (3/14):
Pro-life Wisconsin has accused three college newspapers — including the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Racquet — of censorship because they have not run an ad warning against emergency contraceptives.
The ad, showing a college-age male and female, reads “Be good to yourself over spring break. Make smart choices the night before ... that way you won’t have any emergencies to deal with the morning after!”
It also states that “emergency contraception is a powerful, high dose of steroids that tricks a woman’s body into thinking it is pregnant” and can cause “chemical abortions and deadly blood clots.”
March 24, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement, Contraception | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 20, 2008
Giveaway of emergency contraception angers anti-abortion group
Via the Associated Press:
MISHAWAKA, Ind. - A free giveaway of emergency contraception doses at Planned Parenthood health centers in Indiana cities with large college populations has angered an anti-abortion group, whose leader calls it "irresponsible."
The giveaways are timed to remind young adults of the importance of responsible sexual behavior as spring break nears for many colleges and universities, said Steve Carr, a spokesman for Planned Parenthood of Indiana.
He stressed that emergency contraception should not be relied on as a main source of birth control, just for emergency situations to prevent an unintended pregnancy.
February 20, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement, Contraception | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 19, 2008
Hundreds of anti-abortion protesters hold gathering in Madrid
Via the Associated Press:
MADRID, Spain: Hundreds of anti-abortion demonstrators gathered in Madrid Saturday to protest against government plans to strengthen legislation protecting the confidentiality of women who consult abortion clinics.
People carrying Spanish flags and waving images of aborted fetuses filled the capital's central Sol square to listen to speakers and chant anti-government slogans.
Spain's Socialist government said earlier this month it would rush through legislation to enhance confidentiality for women who have had abortions and pledged to further improve abortion laws if re-elected next month.
Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero's government took the decision after police arrested at least 13 people in November raids on four clinics suspected of carrying out illegal abortions in Barcelona.
Later around 25 women were visited by police at their homes and called in for questioning by judges.
February 19, 2008 in Abortion, Anti-Choice Movement, International News, Politics, Reproductive Health & Safety | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 13, 2008
Calif. Teacher Shows 8th Graders Graphic Anti-Abortion Film, "The Silent Scream"
San Jose Mercury News: Milpitas teacher screens anti-abortion clips in 8th-grade class, by Sharon Noguchi:
A Milpitas science teacher has been placed on leave after showing parts of the graphic anti-abortion film "The Silent Scream" to five eighth-grade classes.
On Jan. 23, after students at Russell Middle School finished a chemistry test on acids and bases, first-year teacher Randy Yang showed clips from the controversial film, which depicts an 11-week-old fetus being dismembered during an abortion.
Some students did not like what they saw. "They're like, 'Ewww, that's gross, why do we have to see that?' " said eighth-grader Xhynah Cabugao. "Everybody was kind of disgusted."
When some students asked why they had to watch, Xhynah said, the teacher told them to avert their eyes if they didn't want to see it.
February 13, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement, Teenagers and Children | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 28, 2008
Ninth Circuit: Arizona Must Allow "Choose Life" License Plates
Reuters: Anti-abortion slogan OK'd on Arizona license plates:
An Arizona agency wrongly denied an anti-abortion group permission to print their message "Choose Life" on license plates, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday.
The Arizona License Plate Commission allows nonprofit groups to highlight their cause on license plates, but the commission in 2002 and 2003 denied the Arizona Life Coalition permission for a specialty plate with the "Choose Life" slogan.
Howard Bashman (How Appealing) thinks that "Choose Life" license plates are headed to the Supreme Court.
January 28, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement, In the Courts | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 25, 2008
Anti-Choice Rally in Washington, D.C.
Washington Post (1/23): A Youthful Throng Marches Against Abortion, by Sue Anne Pressley Montes:
Tens of thousands of abortion opponents took to the cold, gray streets of Washington yesterday, buoyed by a recent report that the number of abortions in the United States had hit the lowest level in years and vowing to continue the fight.
Many of the participants in the March for Life were young people, many from religious clubs and church-run schools from as far away as Ohio, Texas and Tennessee. The march has been held each year since 1974 to protest the Supreme Court's Jan. 22, 1973, decision that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy.
In many ways, the march resembled a gigantic pep rally, with smiling teenagers in matching scarves or sweat shirts holding school banners high as they moved along Constitution Avenue NW toward the Supreme Court. But the individual signs they clutched told of their commitment to a cause: "Give Life, Don't Take It" and "Your Mother Was Pro-Life."
January 25, 2008 in Anti-Choice Movement | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 24, 2008
Antiabortion Activists in Mass. Challenging Expanded Buffer Zone At Abortion Clinics
Boston Globe: Clinic buffer zones face legal challenge:
Antiabortion activists have filed a legal challenge against a new state law that expanded the buffer zone keeping protesters away from abortion clinics, saying the 35-foot zone violates their free-speech rights.
The law is "an unconstitutional regulation designed and intended to ban virtually all citizens from engaging in fundamental rights and liberties on significant portions of public sidewalks and streets" adjacent to abortion clinics, the lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court, charged....
A spokesman for the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, which runs three clinics in the state where abortions are provided, defended the new law