1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Over the line or Free speech?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Jun 7, 2011.

  1. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    Baron - I see, so the law determines right and wrong and if something is legal it is OK and vice versa?

    Well then given that I can't understand why brothas and sistas in this country spent so much time and energy whining about slavery because, hey it was legal so it must be OK!!!
     
  2. No, that's not how I meant it, certainly not directed at you directly. I just knew that was going to get the ball rolling on an abortion discussion, which is sure to get this puppy locked pretty quickly.
     
  3. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    It's a matter of rights. For slavery, you had one group saying that blacks had the right to be free. You had another group saying that they weren't human, that they were property, and they had the right to do what they wanted with their property.

    For abortion, you have one group saying women should have the right to choose what they want to do with their bodies, and they should have that right because if they didn't, they'd do it anyways and it'd be more dangerous for them. You have another group that insists that the fetus is a living baby, and should be protected.

    It comes down to who you feel deserves more rights. The slave or the property owner? The woman, or the fetus?

    There was a war and a 100-plus year fight to settle one issue. I don't think most sane people are willing to go to war for the other issue. So, they should work within the system to have the law changed, and to assist in gently persuading women not to have one.

    But this douchebag was seeking to humiliate his ex with the issue. It's stuff like that which makes people question pro-lifers' sanity.

    What the ex-GF should do is create her own billboard, with the words, "I had an abortion because Johnny Douchebag was a lousy boyfriend!"
     
  4. LOL.
    That's even funnier with the coda kitty waving buh-bye.
     
  5. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    How could she sue for libel if she's not named on the billboard?

    It's a totally rotten, extremely shitty thing for her douchebag ex to do.

    Is it free speech? I'm torn. On one hand, you could make the case it puts his ex in jeopardy from some loon who wants to off her because she had an abortion. In that case, it might be construed as fighting words, which are not protected.

    On the other hand, she's not named on the billboard. The ex, douche though he is, didn't identify anyone, although by including himself in the ad, maybe he identifies by association? Then again, its an association the general public isn't going to get.

    I lean towards fighting words, and it not being protected, but I don't think there's a libel case here.
     
  6. printdust

    printdust New Member

    We just love supporting killing babies and making excuses for it.

    "Oh. I'm pregnant by a guy I didn't really love. I must rid myself of this, um, burden."

    Funny it is how a guy willingly participates in the act of creation, yet has no rights.

    Have the child, put it up for adoption if you don't want it. Or be responsible with your sexual exploits.
     
  7. CarltonBanks

    CarltonBanks New Member

    I don't see an invasion of provacy if she was not named. I also think it is a shitty thing to do to kill the child if the father wants it. If he will pay for everything and take the child, letting the mother sign away all rights and claims, it is a shame the woman would kill the baby that is obviously wanted. It takes two to cause a pregnancy, it should take the consent of two (if the father can be identified) to terminate it.
     
  8. printdust

    printdust New Member

    Exactly. How the hell does she know it was her if he/she wasn't named? "Paid for by Joe Schmoe" for example.
     
  9. TheSportsPredictor

    TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

    If this guy is that big of an asshole, it's good he doesn't have a kid. Sounds like a sterilization candidate.
     
  10. printdust

    printdust New Member

    Oh. My. God.
    I guess he'd been the epitomy of class had he put one up saying: "My girlfriend was inconvenienced physically and exercised her perfectly legal right to extract fetal tissue (no, it's not a child). Isn't America great?" And use a flag as a background graphic covering the whole billboard.
     
  11. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    How about over the line and free speech?
     
  12. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    I don't know about New Mexico, but in some states, as long as one person knows who the alleged libeler is talking about, that's one of the elements of libel/slander/defamation.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page