Tuesday, February 28, 2006
I'm not sure how I feel about the Supreme Court's decision today to allow abortion protest. I haven't been following the case (which uses extortion and organized crime legislation to ban protests at abortion clinics) that closely but I understand that it has been kicked around a variety of courts since 2003 and that the consistent ruling is that pro-life protesters are well within their legal rights. Groups like the AFL-CIO are sympathetic to the pro-life legal argument as they are afraid limited protest in any form will lead to a silencing of pro-labor groups. I have supported social protest for as long as I can remember. My grandmother still has picket signs in her attack from the General Motor's strikes of the 1930's and many of my relatives organized the sit in's. But I think protests (even the non violent kinds) outside abortion clinics inherently limit a woman's right to choose. If you read the moving words from women who suffered through the "walk of shame" into a clinic while strangers were shouting at her, praying for her, crying out in anger about her, you realize that many women choose not to put themselves in that situation. I think there are distinct differences between labor protests and pro-life protests. Ever the supporter of the first amendment, I am uncomfortable with my willingness to limit demonstrations and social discourse. However, it seems to me that if we are a "pro-life" country (at least legally and for the time being), we should do all we can to ensure that women really do have a right to choose.


Anonymous Kourt said...

Mt. Pleasant still has protesters outside of our Planned Parenthood...they were bad this week and when you pull in you get yelled at (even though you could be going to about 5 other places) because I am going to hell since I go there I MUST have had or would not mind having an abortion

Post a Comment

<< Home