Free Speech: Ex Had Abortion Against His Will

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I wish we knew more about her situation. We don't know what happened. If her life was endangered or what. She may be one of those women who just cant get and stay pregnant without complications occurring.
I guess we will just have to wait and see both sides of the story, the question then becomes is it really worth waiting for? lol

Originally posted by snowen20
Well, I don't see how he is a shmuck for protesting.

He's not a schmuck for protesting. He's a schmuck for placing his girlfriend's (probably ex-girlfriend's) PERSONAL life on a billboard for the world to see. It's tasteless, hurtful and will NOT do anything to bring his baby back or change laws. If he wants to protest, he should protest the LAW, not his girlfriend.

reply to post by snowen20


Heyyyy, you're the one that called him a tard not me. I just said he looked like it.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by snowen20
Well, I don't see how he is a shmuck for protesting.

He's not a schmuck for protesting. He's a schmuck for placing his girlfriend's (probably ex-girlfriend's) PERSONAL life on a billboard for the world to see. It's tasteless, hurtful and will NOT do anything to bring his baby back or change laws. If he wants to protest, he should protest the LAW, not his girlfriend.

Well said, that's the perspective I needed here.
2nd

reply to post by mydarkpassenger


Damn! I made my sentiment that obvious did I?
Wow. I guess the river of human nature is shallow as hell after all.

reply to post by Kali74


He should be able to protest anyway he wants. One doesn't have to agree with the message, or the method of protest, it is still his right. Just like it's your right to say he is a schmuck, or to call some one a conspiracy theorist for believing their water is poisoned , or calling someone a moron for eating turkey, whatever..

The point is he is simply protesting and I agree with protesting even if the message is a Sh***y one.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
He's not a schmuck for protesting. He's a schmuck for placing his girlfriend's (probably ex-girlfriend's) PERSONAL life on a billboard for the world to see. It's tasteless, hurtful and will NOT do anything to bring his baby back or change laws. If he wants to protest, he should protest the LAW, not his girlfriend.

Please point out where, on the billboard, anybody except his OWN personal life is on display.

Although, I am not a fan of personal disputes made public, he hasn't put anything aside from HIS personal feelings and HIS personal image up. Both are his property to do with as he wishes.

reply to post by snowen20


I think BH said it well, protest the law not the person. I'm not entirely sure where his free speech ends and harrasment and/or right to privacy begins. It really is a tough one IMO.

if all those antismoking billboards are ok then there should be no problem with that.


to condone one special interest and condemn anothers is not free speech.

both are designed to bring awareness to people who are off in their own little words

never thinking about either subject.

reply to post by peck420

Originally posted by peck420
Please point out where, on the billboard, anybody except his OWN personal life is on display.

Are you kidding? He said the mother of HIS child killed it. That's ONE person he's talking about. Not a group or a movement. It's personal. This is not an advertisement against abortion. It's a personal message to HURT someone.

reply to post by Kali74


How has he harassed her?
It is a protest. Nothing more. If he hangs outside of her house, on her property at all house of the night that would then be harassment.
If he sends her emails and phone calls about how she is a godless Nazi bastard, then that too would be harassment.
He has merely protested in a public space with a sign depicting himself as paternally disenfranchised.

It's not his body that would have to carry the child if it was an abortion. Until a man can carry a child inside them they should shut up, it is not their decision. Sure they both are at fault for the pregnancy, it may have been a mercy _ _ _ _ on her part and she got caught unprepared.

reply to post by snowen20


Like I said, I'm not sure where the line is. It's distasteful to me though personally. Someone's privacy just took the bullet for free speech.

reply to post by Kali74


Well I agree that it is distasteful as hell. No doubt there are better ways to do what has been done.
I don't know if other methods were exercised previous to this example.

reply to post by Bramble Iceshimmer


Oh GAWD!!!!
(2nd line, the line for which the 1st line is thankful.)

If a couple is married, I believe both adults need to agree before an abortion takes place.. but if the guy wasn't married, I really can't agree with his anger.. I know the courts would never side with a father married or not (fathers, husbands, we are subhuman) but just my opinion.

reply to post by Rockpuck


It has nothing to do with husbands and fathers being subhuman. It has everything to do with the woman retaining the property rights to her body upon marriage in the US.

reply to post by confreak


As vehemently as I disagree with his position the Billboard should be protected under Freedom of Speech, it doesn't mention the woman or man by name from what I can tell. The First Amendment means that even those with conflicting opinions have a voice. The only thing I can really see complaining about is in the insinuation that it was a CHILD that was KILLED might spark a backlash if someone figures out who this woman is, radical pro-lifers might do bad things to her.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Right...

property rights...

ok..

The detachment from emotion regarding abortions is absolutely disgusting to me.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Thank God I left that insane country behind and went to a place that while far more destitute has an abundance of cooler and more prevailing minds.