Demonstrators infringe on other’s rights

Home » Opinion » Letters To The Editor

Friday, June 19, 2009

Comment

By Iris Barrie
Napa

Dear editor, the recent chilling account of a physician’s slaying at his church was a stark reminder of the lengths a fanatical fringe of anti-abortionists will go to prevent women from receiving a medical procedure with which they disagree. The irony, of course, is that often these fanatics claim their actions are religiously sanctioned.

Over the past few years, a fringe group of religious activists has taken it upon themselves to park a van and/or truck covered with messages intended to intimidate women and men as they enter the Planned Parenthood clinic in Napa. Their demonstrations also are a visual and verbal assault on drivers, neighboring businesses and people attempting to walk in front of the clinic.

Planned Parenthood’s clients use the clinic for a myriad of services including pregnancy and STD testing, prenatal care, family planning and education related to women’s health issues. At times, they also use it, as is their constitutional right, to receive an abortion should the woman (and often her partner) believe it is the best option for her health and circumstances.

In the 1990s, there was a rash of clinic bombings and killing of physicians who, as a part of their practice, performed abortions. I thought those days were over. Now, I’m not sure.

How ironic that in the recent crime in Kansas, the perpetrator apparently believed It is OK to take the life of a physician, father or mother — contributing members of the community — but not a fetus that has yet to come into personhood.

I implore Napa city officials to put a stop to this visual assault on its citizens and safeguard a woman’s right to seek medical care without fear of intimidation. The tactics of these few infringe on the rights of all Planned Parenthood clients and those of us who patronize the adjacent businesses or drive past.

86 comment(s)

kevin wrote on Jun 19, 2009 4:41 AM:

" Sorry Iris, free speech isn't free if its only protected for issues that DON'T offend anyone.

It always amazes me that the very people that are "intimidated" by PICTURES of abortions are the same ones that have no problem actually inflicting them on innocent life... "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 19, 2009 6:17 AM:

" I have often wondered how the protesters at Planned Parenthood feel about the death penalty, the Iraq War (war of choice), foster children (do they have one?) and orphans looking to be adopted.

The real issue is how they feel about comprehensive sex education, easy access to birth control etc. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jun 19, 2009 7:41 AM:

" Whenever I drive down Jefferson and see those demonstrators and the parking blocked out in front of Planned Parenthood, I walk in and donate more money to the clinic.

They should make that parking spot a loading zone, but Planned Parenthood would take a small funding hit since my donations would drop if the demonstrators weren't there.

~Ruff "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jun 19, 2009 7:53 AM:

" Bauhausfan- Stop and ask them... I've talked to them after donating to Planned Parenthood.

The saddest story to me is that one woman who had an abortion for reasons that don't seem right to her now and regrets it... is trying to take the choice away from other women who may have entirely different motivations for getting an abortion.

While I grieve with the woman for her loss, I don't see that as giving her dictatorial power over how other women handle their reproductive choices.

~Ruff "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jun 19, 2009 7:56 AM:

" I wonder if the Republicans have the same sympathies for folks demonstrating for equal rights for gay and lesbian citizens as they do for anti-abortion demonstrators.

My reading of the posts here on the NVR is rather disappointing in that regard.

~Ruff "

rpcv wrote on Jun 19, 2009 7:56 AM:

" Amen, Iris and Bauhausfan. Abortion would be a moot issue if we invested in sex education, birth control and pre-natal care. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 19, 2009 8:55 AM:

" I agree that it is intimidation and an assault on women, particularly those young women who go to Planned Parenthood for birth control and/or health care. Really, why scare them away? We need our young women to be responsible, educated, protected and healthy. Yet another example of the religious fanatics attempting to force their values on everyone else. Young, frightened women are easy targets. "

livinggood wrote on Jun 19, 2009 10:05 AM:

" people need to mind there own business.. everyone equates everything they do or say with religion.......i am so sick of hearing that.. if my sister wants to get an abortion that is her business, if I want to marry another guy, that is my business.. NOT YOURS!!! all these religious radicals are the ones causing problems, not the doctors.... again people MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS! "

Alter ego wrote on Jun 19, 2009 10:17 AM:

" I have often wondered how the abortionists and their supporters feel about God, original sin and eternal d*mnation.

The real issue is how they feel about States rights, parental rights and (ultimately) about the Right to Life. "

pharper wrote on Jun 19, 2009 10:43 AM:

" As someone who has gone into Planned Parenthood to ask advice about the birth control pill, I have to say that I have two very different experiences with the demonstrators. The first was when one of them informed me that by purchasing birth control or having an abortion, I was committing murder (this woman did not know what I was going into the clinic for; I did not tell her). When I told her (as politely as I could) that it was none of her business why I was going in there, she began to preach to me about the "dangers" of any contraceptive and the "reliability" of natural family planning (which according to my health teach and the Internet is, at best, only about 80% effective). I was unimpressed by her rudeness and her efforts to intimidate me. I can see a less strong-willed girl becoming too scared to go in and get the help she may need, regardless of her reasons for being there.

The second time, I was not accosted by anyone, and when I left the building, a young man handed me a rose with a picture of Mary attached to it. My two friends and I stayed and talked for a while, and though he didn't manage to convince me of anything, he was very polite and courteous.

Ruff - at least the young man that I talked to did believe in the death penalty and thought that all gay people should remain abstinent for life and not be allowed to adopt, if that gives you any idea. "

Sickothis wrote on Jun 19, 2009 11:23 AM:

" There is a 15' buffer around the facility and an 8' personal buffer that the protesters are not allowed to breach by federal law, I believe.

I have often wondered why they are allowed such close access to the facility.

They are also probably violating a bunch of ordinances, although I am not personally familiar with the specific City codes. "

napat wrote on Jun 19, 2009 11:37 AM:

" Ruff, I'm with you. They are so disruptive to the neighborhood that my husband and I (both senior citizens) walked into the clinic and gave them $100. "

napan1961 wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:14 PM:

" Blocking access to birth control is just wrong. Especially if you are trying to prevent abortions! "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:35 PM:

" The fact that a few violent anti-abortionists have claimed affiliation with Christian churches does not prove that Christianity somehow encourages violence against abortionists. There are a few crazies in any organization. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:40 PM:

" Bauhausfan wrote:
" I have often wondered how the protesters at Planned Parenthood feel about the death penalty, the Iraq War..."

Why wonder? The answers to your question are readily available. Neither the death penalty nor war casualties are considered murder, while taken an unborn child's life could well be considered murder in the strictest sense of that word. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:46 PM:

" Ruff wrote: "I wonder if the Republicans have the same sympathies for folks demonstrating for equal rights for gay and lesbian citizens as they do for anti-abortion demonstrators."

? I don't see how you can equate the taking of innocent lives with the selfish attempts of some folks to gain more rights than what they are legally entitled to. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:50 PM:

" livinggood wrote: " people MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS!"

If your neighbors were abusing their young children, would you look the other way, or would you report it to CPS? Not very consistent, are you? "

Napagrrl wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:58 PM:

" Bauhausfan, you ask "...how they feel about .... access to birth control..." Sadly, I have seen a poster at the PP offices which states, "The Pill Kills." The other BC methods they recommend have ridiculously high failure rates. How many people in their 40s - 60s are the result of the rhythym method?!

Anecdotally, over the years when I have asked anti-choice people about the kids they have fostered or adopted, they have the same excuse as those who opt for adoption: I can't afford it; I'm in school (or too busy at my job); I already have X-number of kids and so on.

" I have often wondered how the protesters at Planned Parenthood feel about the death penalty, the Iraq War (war of choice), foster children (do they have one?) and orphans looking to be adopted. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:58 PM:

" napat wrote: "They are so disruptive to the neighborhood that my husband and I (both senior citizens) walked into the clinic and gave them $100."

Non sequitur if I ever heard one!
Did the contribution make your neighborhood quieter? "

Napagrrl wrote on Jun 19, 2009 1:01 PM:

" JR writes, "... selfish attempts of some folks to gain more rights than what they are legally entitled to... "

Um, if they are "rights" they are rights. If one group of people has certain rights, should not others have the same rights? How is it selfish to try to obtain the rights other people are afforded? "

Sickothis wrote on Jun 19, 2009 1:28 PM:

" John Richards - when you develop the ability to gestate a child, I will defend your right to not have an abortion; the same way I will defend the right of any woman a choice for their own health and welfare. "

reader wrote on Jun 19, 2009 1:38 PM:

" Right wing anti aboration/anti choice folks ironically don't support birth control either. To further their contradictory thinking, it is due to anti abortion/anti choice folks that birth control cannot be purcased with medi-cal/medi-care payment but viagra can! Poor women are not allowed protection but poor men are allowed a free extra boost to do it even more to unprotected women. It reeks of centuries old pariarchical dominance over women. Men fearful of women so they exercise control over them and their women who like living a subservient life, to men. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 2:48 PM:

" Napagrrl wrote: " if they are "rights" they are rights."

Sorry to bust your bubble, but gay marriage is not defined as a right in the Constitution, nor in US laws, nor in the laws of 44 states. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 2:53 PM:

" Sickothis wrote: " I will defend the right of any woman a choice for their own health and welfare."

Too bad that many young women think that mere personal inconvenience qualifies as a 'health and welfare' issue. It reminds me of the doctors who issue medical marijuana permits for people with hangnails and bunions. "

freeport56 wrote on Jun 19, 2009 2:53 PM:

" Reader-

ever ask yourself why women's bodies are heavily legislated by the democrats and men's bodies are not?

It seems to me if the far left control women's bodies, they can control birth rates, replace parents as guardians, and reduce the population. My question really comes down to, "Is this really freedom of Choice, or are\have women been lead down a road to buy into the hype that you are pushing? "

John Richards wrote on Jun 19, 2009 2:59 PM:

" Napagrrl wrote: "The other BC methods they recommend have ridiculously high failure rates."

Medical science disagrees with you. For example, the IUD has a failure rate much lower than oral contraceptive pills or condoms. "

sickothis wrote on Jun 19, 2009 4:14 PM:

" John Richards - who are you to decide what constitutes "health and welfare" of anyone other than yourself? "

winewoman wrote on Jun 19, 2009 5:10 PM:

" JR said, "Too bad that many young women think that mere personal inconvenience qualifies as a 'health and welfare' issue."

Huh? Mere personal inconvenience? We're not talking about having a tooth pulled or a mole removed here. Women, both young and old, who choose the option of abortion do not make the choice lightly. I can assure you that there is suffering and pain involved, at a physical and emotional and psychological level. Many times, the decision is a desperate one. Do not minimize the circumstances that lead women to this decision, JR. Want to reduce the number of abortions in America? Educate the boys and the men. Teach responsibility. "

Raven wrote on Jun 19, 2009 5:52 PM:

" While I disagree with many of the Catholic Church's positions I will give it the consistency award - they disapprove of abortion, artificial birth control and the death penalty. "

pharper wrote on Jun 19, 2009 6:24 PM:

" And, JR, it's not just about abortions - I'm seventeen; I don't need an abortion. I never have and hopefully I never will. That doesn't mean I shouldn't have free, clear, uninhibited access to Planned Parenthood, though. Hormonal contraceptives are used as a variety of things other than birth control - in fact, most people I know who take birth control pills, or the patch, or any other hormonal method aren't taking them to prevent a pregnancy. They're used as mood stabilizers, to regulate menstrual cycles, and to help with symptoms of menstruation, just to name a few things.

And Napagrrl wasn't saying that the Pill is the best method or that others aren;'t more reliable; she was saying that the methods recommended by these protesters are considerably less reliable than it is. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jun 19, 2009 7:33 PM:

" My ex-wife had a condition called endometriosis (sorry if I misspelled it) but her periods were extremely painful and menstrual flows were VERY HEAVY... she needed to have hormonal control of her periods which were two week long struggles with sanity and blood loss.

She was Canadian and there were no demonstrators outside her healthcare provider.

The demonstrators only know that Planned Parenthood MIGHT offer an abortion to some woman, but they harrass every woman going there.

That's one reason why I donate money.

~Ruff "

Enlightened Coelacanth wrote on Jun 19, 2009 9:21 PM:

" Here, here! I too wish Napa officials would put an end to the "visual assault"
I must endure during illegal immigration rallies, pro Obama marches and any other cause that might offend me.
And I agree: pictures of the sorts of atrocities that George Tiller
performed, and at which he made a very good living indeed, are offensive and a visual assault.
Why is the US virtually the only civilized nation in the world that still performs acts of infanticide during partial birth abortions?
It seems to me a very good way to avoid reminders of this sort is to end the barbaric practice. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 19, 2009 9:23 PM:

" Wow! I love this letter and all these posts – particularly the ones I disagree with. They prove a vital point. It’s astounding how all these good civil libertarians are eager to shut down any speech they disagree with.

But I shouldn’t have said “all.” Pharper is a nice reasonable person who tries to see the good in others. She’s what a liberal should be. I can’t help it: I like that girl.

And Raven is a decent person, also. She’s even willing to see consistency in the moral teachings of the Catholic Church. She’s a good egg – and was once a good fertilized egg.

But the rest of you… gosh… Heil Margaret Sanger! Get the camps ready for those who think they have a First Amendment!

Demonstrators in Napa are doing absolutely nothing illegal. Sickothis is just plain wrong about “ordinances” that apply here. A judge who thought there was a problem could impose the sort of bubble zone Sickothis describes, according to current federal law. But no such order has been imposed – and, if it is, it will most likely be overturned in the near future. The composition of the Supreme Court, you see, has changed since the relevant vague decisions were rendered.

So just adjust, meine Herren und Damen! Constitution says you have to allow free speech even for people like me. "

Ranae33 wrote on Jun 19, 2009 9:25 PM:

" If a woman were stabbing to death her new baby in front of all the world - would you, Iris, stand by and say it is her right? Do you realize that many premature babies in the NICU are the same age as those being aborted in another section of the same hospital? Because abortion is a largely UNSEEN holocaust, its inconsistencies are dismissed by many. Ending abortion is the last and greatest civil rights movement we have before us. "

napa1957 wrote on Jun 19, 2009 11:20 PM:

" Late term abortion. NOT a good idea. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 20, 2009 8:19 AM:

" Since when does Planned Parenthood perofrm late term abortions, Tom Riley, Ranae33 and napa1957? This conversation is about intimidating and assaulting women that are going to Planned Parenthood for health care, birth control, prenatal care, pregnancy testing, etc. Fascinating how you feel the need to bring up the issue of late term abortions - the ultimate scare tactic. Hey, how about whenever we talk about religion, we make comparisons to the religious fanatics that kill innocent people. Well, why not? We'd both be using the same hasty generalization logical fallacy. "

funnyme wrote on Jun 20, 2009 2:36 PM:

" Imagine those who call the soon to be aborted BABY "only a clump of cells", regard that BABY the same way they regard murderers on death row? Imagine if they gave that baby the same 15-20 year chance in the name of 'human rights" before the death penalty comes down on them?

BTW, I love the new billboard on Hwy 29 between Napa and Yountville (where Cyndi Gates' usually is)...Is that infringing in your rights too Ms. Barrie? "

Raven wrote on Jun 20, 2009 11:30 PM:

" ahem....making assumptions there Tom, aren't ya? I am a he....and while I have no problem with the picketing, in my book, when they approach someone and continue after that person has shown they are not interested in hearing them, they have crossed a line.

As for consistency, too many of the people I have met who oppose abortion, seem to favor the death penalty...so it would seem they are not opposed to killing, just the age at which it may happen.

I also think more organizations like PP, educating and providing birth control services, would go a long way to reducing the numbers of abortions. "

glenroy wrote on Jun 21, 2009 12:33 AM:

" There is no such thing a free....we pay for it.... "

alucawanza wrote on Jun 21, 2009 12:21 PM:

" And if the mother's life is in danger, Ranae333? Research placenta previa. Having been faced with that the agony of decision was incredible. Late term abortion is not always just a choice for convenience. It is a medical decision after months of waiting for a change in a condition beyond the mother's control. Start bleeding out because the decision is made too late. Both die.
This can happen before the baby can survive a caesarian.

I don't believe in third trimester abortion for any other reason but medical ones. But that is a choice I made for myself. Everyone else must make their own decision. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 21, 2009 5:11 PM:

" Oops! Sorry, Mr. Raven, sir! I won't make that mistake again.

I think that, if you saw the rules governing the demonstrators in question ("40 Days for Life"), you'd see they were benign by your standards. Those people aren't even supposed to talk to passersby, period. Of course, there are always jerks who refuse to play by the rules. I know some of them.

Also, associated with the demonstrations are sidewalk counselors authorized to offer help with problem pregnancies. Their purpose is best served by extreme politeness and a non-threatening posture.

I have taken part in these demonstrations in a tangential way. I only show up when women demonstrators are alone at night -- as a bodyguard. I have spoken to passersby -- but only when passersby, who were also pro-lifers, started the conversations. They were eccentric street people and at least part of my purpose was to keep them from disturbing the ladies praying the rosary.

I've never been there during operating hours.

You're still a good egg. "

farmer wrote on Jun 21, 2009 5:41 PM:

" Bravo Iris. I drive by this site regularly and feel that this demonstration is a distraction. These people need to be taken to task for their continued harassment of the facility and patrons. Free speech? Well maybe, but there are limits and these people have reached it. Given the 8 foot personal barrier limitation stated above is correct, when it is going to be enforced? "

winewoman wrote on Jun 21, 2009 6:12 PM:

" Sorry, Tom Riley, your demonstrators are not following the rules. My daughter tells a story that when she went to Planned Parenthood on more than one occassion - for herself and with a friend - that the demonstrators were rude and in her face, telling her that birth control is murder and it kills babies. Are you people serious? Birth control kills babies? Thankfully, my daughter and her friends are strong, confident young women and they told the demonstrators - who were blocking their way - to back off, and they went in. Besides, who in their right mind would allow themselves to be counseled by a "sidewalk counselor"? Put a quarter in the sidewalk game and see what you get? Oh, that's right, you're counting on these young women to be frightened, gullible, ignorant, and impressionable, right? "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 21, 2009 7:54 PM:

" Say, winewoman, when did my post say anything about late-term abortion? Except for one slender witticism about Herr Raven, I didn’t address the abortion issue at all. My post was about First Amendment rights – and I note that you don’t really want to address those in the context of anti-abortion demonstrations at Napa’s Planned Parenthood.

But, since you raise the issue, I shall now address it.

You regard late-term abortion as a “scare tactic” because images or even accurate verbal descriptions of late-term abortion are so horrific as to be irresistible. Show the picture and no one but an amoral monster would try to defend the procedure.

But what about an abortion the day before it’d be a late-term abortion? What about a day before that? And a day before that?

The point is that human life is a continuum, not a series of discrete and distinguished stages. If late-term abortion is horrific, then early abortion is horrific, too – since it is essentially the same thing.

Now it’s up to you, winewoman. Where is the flaw in my logic? "

winewoman wrote on Jun 21, 2009 8:58 PM:

" Tom Riley - Oh, please - is that the best you can do? Well, to start, you've got a Weak Analogy - you know, when two things that are being compared aren't really alike in the relevant respects - therefore your analogy is a weak one. (you anti abortion folks frequently use this one to fool people to believe your position). You've got a False Continuum because you claim that because there is no definitive demarcation line between two extremes, that the distinction between the extremes is not real. Makes one wonder why science names the stages of gestation if, according to you, stages don't exist. Finally you have Argument from Authority becuase you claim to know the when life begins (that whole continuim analogy). Truth of a claim should ultimately rest on logic and evidence, not the authority of someone promoting it - that would be you.

And what say you, Tom Rileyi, to your untrue claims that your demonstrators behave appropriately, when in fact they harrass and lie to young, frightened women. "

diehard4ever wrote on Jun 21, 2009 9:21 PM:

" The ONLY time I think an abortion would be necessary is if there is no chance, or a very slim chance that the mother will survive.

Kids will always need a Mom!

For those who were raped, (which I feel very, very, very sorry for. My deepest condolences to rape victims) I believe there is something called the "Morning After Pill". The last thing a woman needs after that kind of thing is a child to take care of or an even bigger scar with an abortion.

Why not just wait until one is MARRIED (committed relationship with a mom and a dad) to have sex?
Duh.
No unwanted kid.
No worries.
How hard was that? "

John Richards wrote on Jun 21, 2009 9:33 PM:

" winewoman wrote: "Makes one wonder why science names the stages of gestation if, according to you, stages don't exist."

So what are these self-evident stages of gestation? Aren't they nothing but an artificial division of the nine months of pregnancy into a first trimester, second trimester, and third trimester? How lame can you get? There is nothing scientific about it. From conception to birth, fetus development is a smooth, unbroken continuum. "

pharper wrote on Jun 21, 2009 9:43 PM:

" The Morning After Pill is something I highly doubt is an immediate concern in a rape victim's mind. Not only that, it is only available over the counter to those over eighteen, and anyone under that age (and I believe you still have to be seventeen anyway) must have a prescription. Neither you nor anyone else has any right whatsoever to tell a rape victim she must carry her rapist's child. You don't get to say that. You don't get to tell a woman, "oh, well. You didn't get the morning after pill. Too late now!" I'm sorry. But you don't.

And not everyone subscribes to the belief in abstinence before marriage, Angelina. For one thing, it's a primarily religious practice (or lack of practice, as it were) and not everyone's religious. For another, people like sex, and if you're safe and careful, there's no reason not to have it. It's human nature to want to have sex - both for procreation and recreation. Sex isn't evil - people wouldn't do it if it wasn't fun! (That isn't to say I don't fully and absolutely respect those who believe in no sex before marriage - it's absolutely a matter of personal beliefs. My point, though, is that these people are not "right" any more than they are "wrong." There's no correct way of looking at it, and there are arguments for both sides).

Bottom line is, these people harass women outside the clinic, most of whom are NOT there for an abortion. They don't have that right. They have the right to protest, not to harass and intimidate. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 21, 2009 9:51 PM:

" Sorry, again, winewoman, but your answer was insufficient. Not only are you mistaken to say that I presented a false analogy; you’re mistaken to say that I presented any kind of analogy. An analogy is the comparison of one thing to another thing for purposes of illustration. But I didn’t compare one thing to another thing. I compared one thing to the same thing the day before – not to illustrate anything, but to demonstrate the obvious truth that, one day earlier, that thing is the same thing.

Your answer has only revealed that you don’t know what an analogy is. I didn’t mean to nudge you into such an embarrassment. Please pardon me for being rational.

So I’ll ask again: at what point, working backward, does abortion change its nature so that it ceases to be horrific? If you can’t answer, you lose.

With regard to your anecdotal account of your daughter’s experience, I’ll note that it shows that her rights were not violated. When she said to back off, the people she had a problem with backed off.

If your daughter’s rights had been violated, she should have called the police and had the violators arrested. Why didn’t she?

Put up, people, or stop trying to deprive other people of their First Amendment rights, clearly enumerated in the Constitution. There are a lot of allegations here, but no one wants to put her story on the line. Most of you don’t even have the courage to put your names on the line. "

Ranae33 wrote on Jun 21, 2009 10:15 PM:

" Well said, John Richards. It's ironic, isn't it, that something so simple and basic as the medically accepted fact that human life begins at conception can be twisted all over the map to suit one's personal belief system. None are so clueless as those who refuse to see. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 21, 2009 11:10 PM:

" Truth Hurts

These fetal photos really need to go.
We find them a distraction from the void
In which the fetus and the embryo
Are absences by which we’re not annoyed.
With unseen death we are not overjoyed.
We do not cheer. We do not celebrate.
Rather, on seas of ignorance we’re buoyed.
We need not see. Not seeing, we feel great.
Then come you anti-choicers, preaching hate,
And show us what we do not choose to see.
Our cheerful little visages deflate,
Punctured by truth with which we can’t agree.
There’s just one thing that we at last can do.
No First Amendment rights for such as you!

T.R. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 22, 2009 12:28 AM:

" Who said anything about trimesters, JR. That would just be lame. No, I was referring to Zygote, Blastocyst, Embryo, Fetus. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 22, 2009 12:38 AM:

" Uh, ok, Tom Riley. Geez, I guess all of that huffing and puffing makes your argument right, then. Doesn't it. Wrong.

You said, "So I’ll ask again: at what point, working backward, does abortion change its nature so that it ceases to be horrific? If you can’t answer, you lose.:

Hey, pal, this isn't a game where someone loses if they don't answer a question the way you set it up and the way you like it. And I don't lose because your question can only be answered by the women who have had to make the choice of abortion. It's a personal decision and it's not yours to take away.

What does "put her story on the line" mean? And who is depriving whom of their first amendment rights? Now you and your demonstrators are victims. Oh, please. "

OU now wrote on Jun 22, 2009 6:44 AM:

" All this talk about about rights and freedom on both sides. As long as the anti's are not breaking the law, and follow the law for peacefull protest, they should be left alone. As long as abortion is legal, women will have them. The christian right needs to read the bible before they call it murder.(exodus 22-24). The tora gives a better and clearer translation. It is wrong to kill the unborn, but its not murder. My opinion on late term is that it is murder when you have to Kill the fetus to keep it from living outside the womb. You can not force morality on people, just look at Iran today. Say what you feel is in your heart and share your feelings about your passions. If you are right, you may change their heart. If you fail, they will be the ones that suffer for their hard heart. Don't worry about the unborn, they have an innocent heart. the kingdom is theirs, and we all die sometime. Worry about the lost and care for them. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 22, 2009 8:12 AM:

" Winewoman, I’ll tell you exactly what putting your story on the line means. It means that when someone known only as winewoman writes into the paper to say that her daughter told her about ill treatment at the hands of abortion opponents, it constitutes evidence of absolutely nothing.

Let me repeat: if winewoman’s daughter (assuming winewoman actually has a daughter) was treated illegally, the proper thing to do was to report it to the cops at the time. The fact that winewoman’s putative daughter didn’t report it tends to indicate that she wasn’t treated illegally.

Put up – or stop trying to get everyone else to shut up. "

Sandra wrote on Jun 22, 2009 9:42 AM:

" Abortion is a personal choice that the one who chooses to have one, or not have one, lives with for the rest of their life. I would not presume to make that choice for anyone but myself.

That being said, Die Hard, I think you need clarification on how the Morning After pill works.

“The emergency contraceptive/morning-after pill has three modes of action (as does the regular birth control pill); that is, it can work in one of three ways:
The normal menstrual cycle is altered, delaying ovulation; or
Ovulation is inhibited, meaning the egg will not be released from the ovary;
It can irritate the lining of the uterus (endometrium) so as to inhibit implantation.
Keep in mind that fertilization (the union of female ovum, or egg, and male sperm) occurs in the fallopian tube and that fertilization marks the beginning of a new human life - and the beginning of the pregnancy. The newly created child then travels down the fallopian tube to the uterus (womb) where he or she implants. Implantation is necessary for the new child to receive nourishment from the mother and continue developing. The journey from the fallopian tube to the womb takes between five and seven days during which pregnancy cannot be readily detected.
Therefore, if a woman ingests emergency contraception after fertilization has taken place, the third mode of action can occur. The lining of the uterus can be altered causing the woman's body to reject the living human embryo, making implantation impossible and the child will die. This result is called a chemical abortion; therefore emergency contraception is an abortifacient.” "

O/U now wrote on Jun 22, 2009 11:39 AM:

" Tom riley 6/19/09 ****Libertarians are split on abortion, don"t confuse us with social liberals who can not tolerate any opinion that differ from their own. Libertarian stands for liberty, not liberal. and yes, we do have kooks just like dem's and repub's. "

fedupinnapa wrote on Jun 22, 2009 3:51 PM:

" Intense topic, as always. I would be interested to find out more as to why the "right to life" group still supports the death penalty. If someone was to tell me that nobody has the right to end the life of another, no if's and's or but's i would be interested to listen but the statement that aborting a child is murder but putting a incarcerated person to death is not murder is a bit beyond me. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 22, 2009 4:21 PM:

" Tom Riley, calm down, man. Show me where I said that your demonstrators were acting illegally. Oh, you can't? That's right, because I never said they acted illegally. I did say that they lie, are rude, and are behave inappropriately. Lying to young, frightened women - telling them that birth control kills babies. That, sir, is deplorable and pathetic. So, what do I need to put up?

So tell me, Tom Riley, you say that I am trying to deprive people of their First Amendment rights? What about the young women's legal right to obtain birth control, education and an abortion is they choose? Seems you are attempting to insert yourself and obstruct a process that is completely legal. Really, it is in the best interest of society that our young women are healthy, protected and educated. Just curious as to whether you equally support the first amendement rights of gay and lesbians as they work to realize their civil rights. One more thing, I don't lie. Anything and everything I have said here is true. It's interesting that you would assume someone else's deception - you know, considering that your demonstrators lie to women. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 22, 2009 6:58 PM:

" I'm calm now, winewoman. I'm calm. I just had a nice glass of Madorom cab. I forget the year.

I'm all the calmer because you and I are in agreement that anti-abortion demonstrators should have the same First Amendment rights as other demonstrators -- and no more.

Sorry if I misjudged you, but you seemed to writing in support of Iris Barrie, who definitely was urging the City of Napa to restrict the First Amendment rights of those pesky people in front of Planned Parenthood. Her actual supporters were even more vociferous in this direction -- and they were responding not to any of the bad behavior you reported but to what they saw just driving by.

One writer even said: "Free speech? Maybe." I'm glad that you're saying: "Free speech? Definitely."

I think you should reconsider your accusation that sidewalk counselors "lie" to young women. To lie is to tell a deliberate falsehood -- one the liar knows to be false. You seem to be suggesting that these people are just crazy.

As one of these people, I don't even think the remark is crazy. It is a little tendentious. I can see why you wouldn't want to say, "The pill kills a baby." But the pill does sometimes act to prevent implantation, and in my view what it prevents from implanting is a human life. The pill does (sometimes) kill -- though you may want to dispute the moral status of what it kills.

I'll be happy to have that discussion with you (if you please) after I pour myself another glass. "

PastNapan wrote on Jun 23, 2009 8:10 AM:

" To FedupinNapa: It's kind of like the Pro Choice crowd who support abortion and think there's nothing wrong with it but on the other hand will sit outside a prison crying with candles in hand over the serial killer that is about to be executed. That doesn't make much sense to me "

Napagrrl wrote on Jun 23, 2009 8:45 AM:

" Diehard is softening up! It was in the not-to-distant past that she stated her belief that abortion was NEVER okay - even in the case of rape. That she now okays the use of the morning after pill indcates she may be considering that the idea of carrying a rapist's child might not be an optimum situation for rape victims. "

fedupinnapa wrote on Jun 23, 2009 8:28 PM:

" PastNapan- I fully agree that such a opinion makes no sense as well. I am just always frustrated at the line in general. Anti Abortion-Pro death Penalty Vice verse neither make sense to me.... And i would be interested to hear how people justify the concept either way. "

aknra wrote on Jun 24, 2009 7:37 AM:

" First of all, the man who killed the abortion doctor should be tried for that crime. Having said that, I do believe that he couldn’t have targeted a better murderer himself. As for those protesters, I have absolutely the utmost respect for what they are doing, vs. what the Joseph Megele style doctors within are doing to unborn life. My own conscious is very clear. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 24, 2009 10:09 AM:

" winewoman wrote: " Who said anything about trimesters, JR. That would just be lame. "

Lame indeed. Yet Roe v. Wade hangs all its pseudo-medical reasoning on the trimester concept. Ironic, isn't it. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 24, 2009 10:35 AM:

" Tom Riley, we have two things in common - I agree that demonstrators have a first amendment right to protest, and I enjoy a nice glass (or two) of Cab as you do. That's were are commonalities end. Protesters do not have a right to intimidate and lie. And I'm not sure why they need to show photos of fetuses when the Napa Planned Parenthood does not perform abortions. The women going to this clinic are going for medical treatment, birth control and education. The demonstrator's tactics are a nuisance and inappropriate, even though they may be legal. My first amendment rights allows me to confront and challenge you and them on these tactics and lies. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 24, 2009 10:43 AM:

" aknra - so you believe in people's first amendment rights to protest, picket, march and assemble, then. That's good. So, you shouldn't have an issue with people asserting their first amendment rights to speak in favor of same sex marriage then. "

formerprunepicker wrote on Jun 24, 2009 1:14 PM:

" Personally I am not for abortion, but I think it should be a women's right to choose. I went to Planned Parenthood when I was a teenager, and I am thankful that something like this was available. Not only do they supply birth control, but I felt like I could really talk to the people there when needed. And regarding the demonstrators...they park illegally (one of them thinks it is OK to park your car on the very corner of the street at a 45 degree angle), they block the sidewalk, and smoke. I see one lady out there carrying a sign with one hand and a cigarette in the other. So while protesting to save lives the smoker is killing her own and then jeopardizes the rest of the protesters with second hand smoke. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 24, 2009 3:53 PM:

" It's okay, winewoman. I don't need us to have much in common.

But I feel you haven't responded to my substantive points about the nature of lies and about ancillary effects of the birth control pill.

And after we were hitting it off so well!

The smoking comment was a scream. When it becomes illegal to smoke on the sidewalk, call that in to the smoking police.

Until then, recognize that some people (including our current presidential unit, a good buddy of the Planned Parentoids) smoke cigarettes.

If it's inconsistent to smoke and be against abortion, then it's equally inconsistent to be against smoking and to defend abortion.

Finally, this whole they-don't-do-abortions-at-the-Napa-PP shtick is getting ancient. They certainly do chemical abortions there -- and the chemical abortion is the quintessential abortion, the only kind generally available way back when the Hippocratic Oath condemned abortion.

Besides, if peaceniks have a beef with the military, they demonstrate at any military installation anywhere, not just at the specific sites where the protested activity is taking place.

Like all the other objections raised against the pro-life demonstrators on Jefferson, this one is a ruse, the only purpose of which is to evade the issues raised by the demonstrators. "

WINEWOMAN wrote on Jun 24, 2009 4:48 PM:

" Tom Riley. Your protestors claim "Birth Control kills babies". This broad statement includes all forms of birth control - because you claim broadly that "birth control kills babies". Not, "the birth control pill kills babies" or "the morning after pill kills babies", No, you say, "birth control kills babies". So let's look at that.

Barrier Methods — a barrier, to keep sperm from reaching the egg. Contraceptive sponge - Spermicide kills sperm. Diaphragm, Cervical Cap, and Cervical Shield - block the sperm from reaching the egg. Female Condom - keeps sperm from reaching the egg. Male Condom - keeps sperm from reachng the egg.

Hormonal Methods — Prevents pregnancy by interfering with ovulation, fertilization, and/or implantation of the fertilized egg. Oral Contraceptives - keeps the ovaries from releasing an egg, causes changes in the lining of the uterus and the cervical mucus to keep the sperm from joining the egg. Mini-pill - thickens cervical mucus, keeps the sperm from joining the egg. The Patch - stops the ovaries from releasing an egg. Also causes changes in the cervix that keep the sperm from joining with the egg. Vaginal Ring - stops the ovaries from releasing eggs. Also thickens the cervical mucus, which keeps the sperm from joining the egg. Implantable devices — Devices that are inserted into the body. Progestin causes changes in the lining of the uterus and the cervical mucus to keep the sperm from joining an egg. It stops the ovaries from releasing eggs. Permanent Birth Control Methods. Sterilization.

Hmm, don't see "kills babies" anywhere. "

winewoman wrote on Jun 24, 2009 5:26 PM:

" You and your protestors are interfering with women's right to legally obtain birth control, health care and education. Because you take issue with one birth control aspect - prevents implantation - you prevent women from obtaining other forms of birth control, including barrier methods. You also limit these women from becoming educated and getting health care because your people frighten and intimidate them. While this is not illegal, it is wrong. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 24, 2009 6:59 PM:

" This is from "Physician's Desk Reference."

"Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression of gonadotropins. Although the primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include changes in the cervical mucus, which increase the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus, and changes in the endometrium which reduce the likelihood of implantation."

Did you get that? Oral contraceptives "reduce the likelihood of implantation." As in, after fertilization.

Which means that, sometimes, these drugs act not as contraceptives but as abortifacients.

Hence, the pill kills.

Quod erat demonstrandum. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 24, 2009 7:11 PM:

" Also, you may be interested to learn that John Calvin, the Reformer whose teachings gave rise to the Presbyterian and Congregational Churches, characterized contraception in general as "a violent abortion."

And he wasn't even Catholic! (Well, he was baptized Catholic.)

The operative formulation, by the way, is: "The pill kills." "

Raven wrote on Jun 25, 2009 9:55 AM:

" yeah Calvin.....a real expert on modern contraception methods... "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 25, 2009 1:05 PM:

" Raven, if you were one of the ravens that sat on the shoulder of Odin, or even the raven that spoke to Thorin Oakenshield and his companions on the Lonely Mountain, you’d be more perspicacious.

I addressed modern methods of contraception in my post quoting the “Physician’s Desk Reference.” If that’s what you want to talk about, why not respond to that post?

In that post, I proved not necessarily that the pill kills, but that it’s reasonable to assert that it kills – that is, that the demonstrators using their First Amendment rights to convey that message are not “lying.”

Then someone (in essence) challenged me to defend the proposition that birth control kills babies.

Now I don’t really think demonstrators say that. The sign says: “The pill kills.” But I don’t think pro-abort witnesses are lying on that one, either. They’re hearing that because that’s what they expect to hear.

So, in the spirit of accommodation, I tried to meet the challenge – by referring to Calvin, one of the greatest minds in the history of Western Christianity. I showed that it is reasonable, if you’re a Calvinist, to accept that proposition, given the Calvinist premise: the absolute and unconditioned sovereignty of God.

And how do you respond? You complain, in effect, that Calvin is just some dead white guy.

What kind of evidence will you people accept on anything? "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 25, 2009 1:59 PM:

" Ravens

The raven perched on Odin’s sturdy shoulder.
“O One-Eyed God, I give you my report.
The world’s no wiser, even if it’s older.
The two-eyed see -- but forcefully distort.
What has begun they eagerly abort.
What has survived they hasten to destroy.
The image they are ravening to court.
Reality they spurn as just a toy.”
Answered the god: “This news I don’t enjoy.
But, as All-Father, I’m obliged to hear.
Go forth and look again -- and don’t be coy
In speaking. Look who happens to appear:
Your brother raven! What says he?” “O King,
I am here to report the same old thing.”

T.R. "

Raven wrote on Jun 25, 2009 3:05 PM:

" I responded to what I responded to, Tom, you cited John Calvin, who died in 1564. I said and say again that Calvin's views on modern contraception, are frankly irrelevant in today's society, because he had nothing even comparable to deal with

"The two-eyed see -- but forcefully distort.
What has begun they eagerly abort.
What has survived they hasten to destroy.
The image they are ravening to court.
Reality they spurn as just a toy.”

As for the rest, Tom, it is clear to me at least that nothing I say will influence your faith in the rightness of position. So be it. Life goes on.

BTW, if something prevents fertilization, then there is no implantation to prevent, is there?

PPS, first time I have had the Hobbit cited in reference to me. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 25, 2009 5:47 PM:

" Well, Raven, I don't expect to convince you, either. So we're even.

But I'm not a Calvinist, and I wasn't arguing for my own views when I cited Calvin. As I mentioned earlier, I find the formula, "Birth control kills babies," rather tendentious, and prefer to say, more precisely, "The pill sometimes takes a human life."

This is because the pill sometimes fails to prevent ovulation (and thus fertilization) so that it actually does prevent implantation.

I was merely trying to show that people who use the more severe formula are not "lying."

I hoped you liked the sonnet. Of course, I had to write it in a hurry. The ravens of Odin have always been a powerful image for me. In Tolkien, they become the eagles of Manwe. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 25, 2009 7:16 PM:

" Although I grew up in a Calvinistic church, I find very little official opposition to oral contraceptives within Protestant churches. It might be interesting to see some statistics as to which contraceptive mechanism of the pill prevails (suppression of ovulation, interference with motility to the womb and interference with implantation). I understand the latter can be quite common even for women who are not on the pill. Perhaps it is nature's way of disposing of a defective fertilized ovum. "

Raven wrote on Jun 25, 2009 10:05 PM:

" I must admit, Tom, you are the first to make that connection....you remember, what their names mean, Huginn and Muninn? "

winewoman wrote on Jun 25, 2009 10:19 PM:

" Raven, I've been wanting to tell you this for a while. I spent many years in Alaska - the Haida and Tlingit tribes in the Southeast have beautiful (and funny) folklore and stories about the raven. The raven is respected and revered because he (yes, he) brought light into the world. The Tlingit see the raven as a creature who upset things but through doing this he made the world better for man. Raven made land by gathering sand from the bottom of the ocean with the help of Seal and Frog so that he could marry Fish Woman (I can't wait for you to tell your wife that!). The Tligngit and Haida people also (still) believe that ravens are reincarnations of their dead relatives. Very often, people say of ravens, "there goes grandfather". Whenever I see your screen name, I think of these wonderful experiences that I had in Alaska. "

Tom Riley wrote on Jun 25, 2009 10:30 PM:

" I don't think that identification is original with me -- though I'm not sure where I got it. Randel Helms? "Tolkien and the Silmarils"? I'm not sure.

The names of Odin's ravens are typically translated as "Thought" and "Memory," but I don't have Old Norse, so I can't vouch for the accuracy of the translation. What I know about other Germanic languages makes me just a little suspicious. "

Raven wrote on Jun 26, 2009 8:00 AM:

" That is a great story, winewoman and yes, Tom, that is the translation I have heard. "

aknra wrote on Jul 2, 2009 5:16 AM:

" Winewoman, I never DID infer to infringe on people asserting their first amendment right to speak in favor of same sex marriage; I DID take the entire life style choice to task. How you can relate one to the other speaks volumes… "

winewoman wrote on Jul 2, 2009 2:31 PM:

" aknra - never said you did interfere. I was actually thanking you for supporting the First Amendment rights of all people - including supporting those who speak in favor of same sex marraige. :-) "

aknra wrote on Jul 11, 2009 10:13 AM:

" You’re welcome winewoman; I AM for protests of that type, even though I don't agree with the message; it's a part of what I served to protect. What gets me is how a perversion is being forced into acceptance as normality. "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: