Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Supreme Court will consider whether abortion patients have too much privacy   ( divider line
    More: Asinine, abortions  
•       •       •

2547 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Jun 2013 at 2:38 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-06-24 01:44:29 PM  
4 votes:
The justices on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from abortion opponents, who wanted the law thrown out. The law allows individuals to enter the buffer zone only to enter or leave the clinic or reach a destination other than the clinic.

Abortion opponents who regularly stand outside clinics in Boston, Worcester and Springfield claimed the law unfairly keeps them from physically assaulting patients, shouting in their faces, spitting on them, or slapping them. Opponents also said that it interferes with their ability to shoot patients or set off bombs to kill them, as greater accuracy or firepower is required, and that the law is therefore unconstitutional under the second amendment.
2013-06-24 03:50:19 PM  
3 votes:

skullkrusher: KhamanV: Corvus, I'm going to be taking your C&P listing for use and safekeeping.

That list pales in comparison to the total people murdered by abortion doctors since Roe v Wade.

/someone had to do it

Oh yeah? Name them.
2013-06-24 03:00:54 PM  
3 votes:

what_now: The Planned Parenthood on Commonwealth Ave is basically on BU's Campus. I can't tell you how many times I walked down the street trying to get to class, and had some asshat yell at me about my baby.

You should totally troll those people with dozens of fake baby bumps walking in and not coming out to smiles and high fives.  Issue little punch cards where you get a free abortion after your first 5.
2013-06-24 02:50:02 PM  
3 votes:
I'm not normally a fan of Stand Your Ground laws, but what a delightful irony it would be if a person with a concealed weapon came out of a clinic, started feeling threatened, and blew all the protesters away.  Watch the right-wing pundit heads assplode with confusion.
2013-06-24 03:15:27 PM  
2 votes:

what_now: This old lady is there ALL THE DAMN TIME, annoying everyone.

I hope the young woman is telling the lady that she's on her way to get the kid in the stroller aborted.
2013-06-24 03:15:18 PM  
1 vote:

what_now: This old lady is there ALL THE DAMN TIME, annoying everyone.

She's not old, she's clearly in her late 20s or early 30s. And while some babies are annoying, those two seem to be fast asleep.
2013-06-24 02:56:38 PM  
1 vote:
There's a PP in Davis Square that does consultations and prescriptions. No abortions, no exams, just a place for women to get information, a hand full of condoms, and fill a script.

When it opened, I was walking down the street to the burrito joint and some lady got in my face about the "abortion mill" that had just opened. I calmly explained to her that this location didn't do any exams or procedures and she hissed "JESUS CAN SEE YOU!!!1".

I still don't know what she meant by that. Was Jesus angry that I was searching for a delicious burrito? In my defense, the falafel place wasn't opened yet.
2013-06-24 02:51:37 PM  
1 vote:

nmrsnr: El_Perro: Yup.  Basically the same issue as Madsen v. Women's Health Center (2004), which upheld a 36-foot buffer while striking down a 300-foot buffer.  The vote on the 36-foot buffer was 6-3, with Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy in dissent.  Not hard to imagine that Alito and Roberts may join those three, and the fact that the Court even took the case (where the lower court was aligned with the SCOTUS decision from less than 20 years ago) may suggest that at least one of them already has.

I'm too lazy to read the decision in that case right now, but what was their rationale? I understand the concept of "free speech zones" is anathema to some, but zoning laws don't let you sell your constitutionally protected porn within 500 yards of schools, or put up election signs within 100 yards of a polling place, so what's the problem with saying "yeah, you can say what you want, just not within 100 yards of their door?"

P.S. - in case it wasn't clear, I made up those numbers, so don't yell at me for being wrong.

Because Jesus hath decreed abortions to be illegal.
2013-06-24 02:27:58 PM  
1 vote:

DamnYankees: I'm not really sure how this is unconstitutional.

Because Christianity is oppressed, didn't you know that?
2013-06-24 02:19:04 PM  
1 vote:
If the town can set up a 500 foot no stripper zone around churches and schools, it surely can set up a 35 foot no idiot zone around abortion clinics.

The strippers are even hidden from view inside a building in all, while the idiots are right out in the open.  I don't want my kids exposed to that kind of hate.  Think of the children.
Displayed 10 of 10 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.