Cal points out how ridiculous this is. The judge says the first amendment of free speech includes when you choose not to speak.
Cal Thomas makes a great analogy to listening to the airplane safety instructions each and every time you fly even though those very same instructions are printed in a card in the back pocket of each seat. Listening to those instructions might upset you, especially the part about what to do in a crash landing. I also note that they talk about a potential crash landing over water even when I am flying from Nashville to Green Bay and will not be over any water.
"A federal mandate requires agriculture employers to provide an oral warning to employees of certain pesticide applications in greenhouses, farms, nurseries and forests. Another requires a home health agency to orally disclose to a patient prior to giving them care the extent to which payment may be expected from the federal government and how much the individual must pay. The comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve and the FDIC require banks that sell insurance to orally disclose to the consumer that the insurance is not FDIC insured."Thomas concludes and rightly so that this decision is "unabashedly political. How can speech containing factual information violate the First Amendment, which is all about protecting, not restricting, speech?"
We know that as high as 90% of the women who view an ultrasound and are given factual information about fetal development will not choose abortion. Viewing the ultrasound makes it harder for the abortion industry to call the offspring just a clump of cells. This is their real objection. They say that the pro life people want to keep women barefoot and pregnant. Well the abortion industry wants to keep women uninformed so that their pregnancy can be $$wiped out again and again. Repeat customers are the backbone of every business. Remember that their core business is abortion....parenting or adoption does not ring the til.
No comments:
Post a Comment