Religions > Atheism > ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
04 May 2006 11:13:17 PM |
| Object: |
ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
It appears the word "integrity" has been banned from the ACLU vernacular.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat2234.html
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The ACLU has determined that a
Congressional measure targeting pregnancy centers is constitutional but its
board of directors has decided not to back the bill because it likely has no
chance of being approved.
The new report on the bill from the pro-abortion legal firm comes after a
controversy which saw ACLU staff join pro-abortion groups in supporting the
bill while key members of its board opposed it.
The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, pro-abortion New York
congresswoman, would prohibit crisis pregnancy centers from advertising
themselves as abortion facilities. When she announced her legislation,
Maloney provided no examples of any pregnancy centers engaging in so-called
false advertising.
The measure would subject advertising by pregnancy centers to regulation
from the Federal Trade Commission.
Vivian Berger, one of four lawyers who serve as the ACLU's general counsel,
told the New York Sun yesterday, "We said that the bill, on its face, was
not an unconstitutional abridgment of free speech since the offer of
abortion services by people who don't provide such services is not
protected."
Berger admitted to the Sun that the group's traditional stance in favor of
any free speech has the possibility of being trumped by its abortion
advocacy.
"It's certainly true that it isn't usually our bread and butter to take a
position that affirmatively supports legislation that even arguably could be
viewed as impinging on speech, but, on the other hand, we have a very strong
commitment to abortion rights," she said.
--
----------
J Young
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
04 May 2006 11:19:16 PM |
|
|
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
It appears the word "integrity" has been banned from the ACLU vernacular.
It appears that you don't even understand what the word means.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
08 May 2006 01:20:37 PM |
|
|
On 05 May 2006 04:19:16 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
alt.atheism
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
It appears the word "integrity" has been banned from the ACLU vernacular.
It appears that you don't even understand what the word means.
It hasn't the single requisite neuron to understand anything.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
05 May 2006 08:51:39 AM |
|
|
<youngopinions@aol.com> aka "J Young/IBen Getiner" wrote in message
news:8ZWdnXsKBepeTcfZRVn-uA@giganews.com...
It appears the word "integrity" <is just one more thing that J Young has
no clue about>
LC~ "Integrity" is just another meaningless concept to our village idiot
IBen.
"You and your little ***** friend can play that Jon Young/Iben crap all
you want...You don't want me in your NG's? Then back off."
From: "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com>, meltdown # 398.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.penpals
Subject: Re: Ice
Date: 17 May 2005 22:01:05 -0700
Message-ID: <1116392465.871738.252590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
05 May 2006 06:36:10 AM |
|
|
*It appears the word "integrity" has been banned from the ACLU
vernacular.
If you knew what this word means, you'd commit suicide...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional,Won't Support |
05 May 2006 02:44:46 AM |
|
|
wrote:
It appears the word "integrity" has been [centeral to] the ACLU vernacular.
Heading fixed.
Unless they perform abortions, create-a-crisis pregnancy centers should
not advertise as such.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat2234.html
<The usual snipped>
--
--sexkitten--
Do not be too moral. You may cheat yourself out of much life. Aim above
morality. Be not simply good; be good for something.
-Henry David Thoreau
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woland" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
05 May 2006 09:38:13 AM |
|
|
wrote:
It appears the word "integrity" has been banned from the ACLU vernacular.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat2234.html
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The ACLU has determined that a
Congressional measure targeting pregnancy centers is constitutional but its
board of directors has decided not to back the bill because it likely has no
chance of being approved.
The new report on the bill from the pro-abortion legal firm comes after a
controversy which saw ACLU staff join pro-abortion groups in supporting the
bill while key members of its board opposed it.
The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, pro-abortion New York
congresswoman, would prohibit crisis pregnancy centers from advertising
themselves as abortion facilities. When she announced her legislation,
Maloney provided no examples of any pregnancy centers engaging in so-called
false advertising.
The measure would subject advertising by pregnancy centers to regulation
from the Federal Trade Commission.
Vivian Berger, one of four lawyers who serve as the ACLU's general counsel,
told the New York Sun yesterday, "We said that the bill, on its face, was
not an unconstitutional abridgment of free speech since the offer of
abortion services by people who don't provide such services is not
protected."
Berger admitted to the Sun that the group's traditional stance in favor of
any free speech has the possibility of being trumped by its abortion
advocacy.
"It's certainly true that it isn't usually our bread and butter to take a
position that affirmatively supports legislation that even arguably could be
viewed as impinging on speech, but, on the other hand, we have a very strong
commitment to abortion rights," she said.
Is it that you hate America, civil liberties or unions?
All three?
Just curious.
Peace-out
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miriam Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional,Won't Support |
05 May 2006 05:29:20 PM |
|
|
Woland wrote:
youngopinions@aol.com wrote:
It appears the word "integrity" has been banned from the ACLU vernacular.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat2234.html
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The ACLU has determined that a
Congressional measure targeting pregnancy centers is constitutional but its
board of directors has decided not to back the bill because it likely has no
chance of being approved.
The new report on the bill from the pro-abortion legal firm comes after a
controversy which saw ACLU staff join pro-abortion groups in supporting the
bill while key members of its board opposed it.
The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, pro-abortion New York
congresswoman, would prohibit crisis pregnancy centers from advertising
themselves as abortion facilities. When she announced her legislation,
Maloney provided no examples of any pregnancy centers engaging in so-called
false advertising.
The measure would subject advertising by pregnancy centers to regulation
from the Federal Trade Commission.
Vivian Berger, one of four lawyers who serve as the ACLU's general counsel,
told the New York Sun yesterday, "We said that the bill, on its face, was
not an unconstitutional abridgment of free speech since the offer of
abortion services by people who don't provide such services is not
protected."
Berger admitted to the Sun that the group's traditional stance in favor of
any free speech has the possibility of being trumped by its abortion
advocacy.
"It's certainly true that it isn't usually our bread and butter to take a
position that affirmatively supports legislation that even arguably could be
viewed as impinging on speech, but, on the other hand, we have a very strong
commitment to abortion rights," she said.
Is it that you hate America, civil liberties or unions?
All three?
Just curious.
D) all of the above
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
05 May 2006 06:45:34 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 05 May 2006 00:13:17 -0400, youngopinions wrote:
It appears the word "integrity" has been banned from the ACLU vernacular.
So, if a "crisis pregnancy center", that has the intention of *preventing*
women from seeking abortions, advertises itself as an abortion provider,
in order to lure in clients who don't know any better, that's OK, but it
is the ACLU that is "lacking integrity" for having to chose between
protecting the free speech of these slime-balls, versus protecting their
potential patients from this unscrupulous business practice?
I guess it's time to break out a new irony meter. There seems to be some
smoke coming out of the old one...
Such a law already exists in NY State, I believe. When you open the
Yellow Pages, pregnancy counseling centers are divided into two headings:
those who provide abortion services, and those who don't. It sounds as
though the Congresswoman is trying to get a similar law at the Federal
level.
If you do not offer abortions, why would you advertise yourself as someone
who does, if not to lure people to your facility by deception? Isn't
lying supposed to be a sin? Are these people the agents of Satan, the
great deceiver?
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU: Abortion Bill Targeting Pregnancy Centers Constitutional, Won't Support |
05 May 2006 12:23:02 AM |
|
|
Previously, on alt.atheism, youngopinions in episode
<8ZWdnXsKBepeTcfZRVn-uA@giganews.com>...
It appears the word "integrity" has been eliminated from my vocabulary.
Finally, something we agree on!
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
