Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-07-2011, 10:43 AM
 
1,337 posts, read 1,522,596 times
Reputation: 656

Advertisements

Apologies if this is a duplicate. I didn't see it posted yet.

A potentially interesting free speech case:

Jilted Ex-Boyfriend's Abortion Billboard Ignites Free Speech Debate (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110606/ap_on_re_us/us_abortion_billboard - broken link)

Brief abstract of the story for those that don't want to click on the link (based on scant details that I glean from this article - other articles might have more details and a picture of the billboard). An ex-boyfriend paid for billboard space which supposedly shows a picture of himself holding the outline of a baby. The caption for the billboard reads: "This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!"

A domestic court is trying to intervene in the process by ordering the removal of the side, but that is being challenged on free speech grounds.

** EDIT: What happened to the rest of the subject line? Silly computer deleted part of it somehow. Pesky AI computers with a mind of their own.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2011, 10:45 AM
 
1,700 posts, read 3,424,212 times
Reputation: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedomThroughAnarchism View Post
Apologies if this is a duplicate. I didn't see it posted yet.

A potentially interesting free speech case:

Jilted Ex-Boyfriend's Abortion Billboard Ignites Free Speech Debatelatestnews

Brief abstract of the story for those that don't want to click on the link (based on scant details that I glean from this article - other articles might have more details and a picture of the billboard). An ex-boyfriend paid for billboard space which supposedly shows a picture of himself holding the outline of a baby. The caption for the billboard reads: "This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!"

A domestic court is trying to intervene in the process by ordering the removal of the side, but that is being challenged on free speech grounds.
It should be challenged on free speech grounds. Nothing horrifying or gruesome to the eye is going on in the billboard. Just stating facts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 10:51 AM
 
18,381 posts, read 19,018,265 times
Reputation: 15700
perhaps the ex girlfriend should put up a billboard about his small manhood or third nipple. the man is obviously a jerk to put up the billboard. a woman has the right to privacy. the public also assumes facts not in evidence, how does one really know if it is true or not?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 10:52 AM
 
Location: Neither here nor there
14,810 posts, read 16,206,409 times
Reputation: 33001
She probably dumped him for someone else and now he's getting even.

Low class and tasteless but, personally, I don't it as being much different that this.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 10:54 AM
 
Location: California
37,135 posts, read 42,209,520 times
Reputation: 35013
I've said it before...billboards are a pox on society.

And no, I don't believe he should be allowed to subject the public to this under "free speech", but that's another story..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 11:19 AM
 
1,700 posts, read 3,424,212 times
Reputation: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by hothulamaui View Post
perhaps the ex girlfriend should put up a billboard about his small manhood or third nipple. the man is obviously a jerk to put up the billboard. a woman has the right to privacy. the public also assumes facts not in evidence, how does one really know if it is true or not?
Well he left her name out of it. Still private. Also it's free speech, he's allowed. If people are allowed to protest funerals then this should fly also.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Tx
1,073 posts, read 2,094,749 times
Reputation: 857
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc99 View Post
Well he left her name out of it. Still private. Also it's free speech, he's allowed. If people are allowed to protest funerals then this should fly also.
Valid point. He didn't include any identifying information about the ex girlfriend. So hmmm....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 02:57 PM
 
2,170 posts, read 2,861,115 times
Reputation: 883
Good on him. She murdered their child. The world has a right to know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 03:08 PM
 
14,917 posts, read 13,099,924 times
Reputation: 4828
Well, the story also says:

Quote:
The woman's friends say she had a miscarriage, not an abortion, according to a report in the Albuquerque Journal.
If the message on the billboard is correct and true, then it's protected speech (no matter how disgusting his airing this laundry via a billboard is - and I find it very disgusting). If she in fact miscarried, then I'd say she has a very good case for libel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2011, 03:11 PM
 
1,759 posts, read 2,029,352 times
Reputation: 950
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post

If the message on the billboard is correct and true, then it's protected speech (no matter how disgusting his airing this laundry via a billboard is - and I find it very disgusting). If she in fact miscarried, then I'd say she has a very good case for libel.
But he's not using her name on the sign; how could it be libel?

I agree that it is protected free speech, and I don't find it any worse (since there are no identifying details)
than the anti-God signs I see. That's free speech also, even if I don't agree with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:00 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top