Supreme Court's NIFLA decision abortion or free speech

Wed Jun 27, 2018

for the most part i don't follow politics too closely cause well there are other things going on

but my news feed is dominated by Supreme Court's NIFLA decision

one way to look at the NIFLA decision is

imagine in a highly prolife state, laws were passed requiring abortion planned parenthood doctors to inform patients that a fetus is a person, it is conscious sentient being, and there are alternatives to abortion such as adoption, and force them to provide info from crisis pregnancy centers

how would NARAL and other abortion groups react?

obviously they'd be screaming bloody murder and say this is a violation of first amendment rights.

of course in the real world, the FACTS law in california written by NARAL is doing essentially the opposite with prolife crisis pregnancy centers.

imagine a law was passed in California or New York requiring alcoholics anonymous to supply information about alcohol and special coupons for alcoholics at the local brewery. would you let that fly?

Supreme Court ruled in favor of free speech.

I actually agree that free speech first amendment does mean that a baker in Colorado who doesn't want to create a gay wedding cake should not have to

here California is forcing prolifers to create a message they are personally opposed to.

prolifers have first amendment rights as do prochoicers

one way to look at this is that the first amendment of the constitution, which is also a human right, is both free speech and free association.

if prolifers through free assoication want to come together they have this fist amendment right

if they want to spread a message of prolife on abortion they have again this free speech right

when prochoicers claim prolifers only care about the baby in the womb but as soon as its born they don't care

prolifers can through free assocation and own personal time and money create this crisis pregnancy centers as a statement of values
to assist pregnant women esp pregnant woman who are prolife,

i don't see any good faith opposition of the left.

the left's history does include communism, stalin, mao, pol pot etc. the desire to persecute "reactionaries"

if a prolifer wants to assist prolife women with a crisis pregnancy and they do this with their own time and money, by forming these crisis pregnancy centers, i fail to see what is wrong with this.

there's nothing to stop prochoicers from doing the opposite, from forming abortion centers, telling pregnant women about the abortion option and helping them to an abortion

again, if a state say texas or iowa created a law forcing prochoicers about prolife pregnancy centers, would you let that stand?