The Jefferson Street protester on life, freedoms

Home » Opinion » Commentary

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Comment

By Ron Maxson

As the guy responsible for the demonstrations infringing on others’ rights in front of Planned Parenthood, I find this dialogue is most encouraging. As a guy who invested two years in combat, fighting for the principles enunciated in our Declaration of Independence and enshrined in our Constitution, I find the freedom to express even very controversial opinions very precious.

As a guy with four adopted children in my family, I feel the responsibility to speak out for the unseen little ones with no voice. It is a grave obligation toward the most important of our rights, the right to life, even if other lesser rights are infringed.

When in the course of human affairs a government oppresses one category of humans in favor of another, it is the responsibility of everyone to work to rectify the injustice. After the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision imposed national sanction for unjust oppression of slaves, the people who knew black men are fully human used every way short of violence to express their controverted opinion: books, signs and demonstrations decried the outrage of enslaving fellow humans. But the injustice went unremedied, and history tells the story.

What is more precious than the right of every innocent human being to life, from the moment of conception to the natural end of life in death? If there is doubt about when life begins or ends, it seems reasonable, even obligatory, to err on the side of protecting that life. The Roe v. Wade decision admitted that the justices couldn’t be sure when life begins but then went on to create the option to kill life in the womb through all nine months. Even fully formed children, with only their heads held out of sight in the womb by the doctor, were unprotected: “Choice” to kill a human that we can see but still can’t hear. I believe they were dead wrong. Innocent life is too precious to remain indifferent about protecting, preserving and nurturing. So, how best to express our conviction to the indifferent, ignorant and misinformed? How to peacefully protest the killing?

Hopefully, the protection of children in the womb will not take the drastic course repeal of slavery took. Dialogue such as that generated by my signs and the good people willing to stand peacefully, praying for those mothers who ponder the awful “choice” will be a much more acceptable way to bring about the necessary change in our country — even if our demonstrations infringe on others’ rights.

(Maxson lives in Napa.)

49 comment(s)

pharper wrote on Jul 1, 2009 12:52 AM:

" Can I ask you a genuine question? Do you oppose the death penalty and the war in Iraq? I'm seriously curious.

And while this letter seems respectful, even if I don't agree with it, the actions of those with whom you stand do not fall into the same category as the message of this commentary. They frighten and intimidate women, most of whom are not going into the clinic for advice about abortions. Most go to the clinic for birth control, gynecological exams, medical advice, and testing for STDs. Abortion represents only a small number of the women who go into Planned Parenthood, and by doing what you often do, you are preventing many deserving women who have nowhere else to go from getting the proper treatment. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jul 1, 2009 5:29 AM:

" I respect your right to stage the demonstrations on Jefferson Street.

I'm sure Planned Parenthood appreciates the donations that I make whenever I pass by and see the demonstration.

We both have equal civil rights as do the women who go to the clinic for legal medical services up to and including abortion.

As long as you don't trample on the rights of women to obtain medical care from whomever they wish, and stay within the law, please continue raising money for Planned Parenthood.

~Ruff "

napagrammy wrote on Jul 1, 2009 5:59 AM:

" God bless you. "

noblindershere wrote on Jul 1, 2009 7:06 AM:

" "It is a grave obligation toward the most important of our rights, the right to life, even if other lesser rights are infringed." So, you are saying that one person's freedom is more important than another? Lesser rights? Wow, interesting "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 1, 2009 7:09 AM:

" you have to love a man that loves children. God Bless you and good luck. "

Skip M. wrote on Jul 1, 2009 8:08 AM:

" As a man with four adopted children, Mr. Maxson clearly has creditibility in this debate. If a woman does not want to have children, there is a simple means of preventing conception; don't have sex (with a man). If a male does not want to support children he sires, the solution is simple; don't have sex (with a woman).

The problem is this mentality of "ME", instant gratification, and the disavowment of personal responsibility. If we can overcome that social ill, perhaps abortion itself would die of natural causes. "

napadad wrote on Jul 1, 2009 8:45 AM:

" "When in the course of human affairs a government oppresses one category of humans in favor of another, it is the responsibility of everyone to work to rectify the injustice."
Thank you for speaking out against prop 8 ! Every one does deserve equal rights! "

Raven wrote on Jul 1, 2009 8:58 AM:

" 'even if our demonstrations infringe on others’ rights....."

so you feel that your demonstrations do infringe on others rights to obtain services which are legal at Planned Parenthood. "

cheezcakemaker wrote on Jul 1, 2009 9:51 AM:

" Mr. Maxson,

You must be the nice person who waves at me when I head north on to Jefferson from D Street every morning. However I must say, all of your signage makes it very difficult to see the north bound traffic and is somewhat of a nuisance.

I appreciate the fact that you expressing yourself in a peaceful manner therefore I will not acknowledge or refute your political/personl beliefs. However, I must ask, can you please cut down on the size and placement of the signs for the neighbors sake?

Thanks! "

Sickothis wrote on Jul 1, 2009 10:06 AM:

" Wen you grow a womb, Mr. Maxson, I will defend your right to privacy about your health care fervently.

Until that time, you have no right to infringe upon any person's right to privacy other than your own.

You don't want an abortion, don't have one. "

native74 wrote on Jul 1, 2009 10:25 AM:

" It's degrading in my perspective. It's people like this that make me feel glad to have healthcare and not have to go to a clinic where demonstrators might be waving a sign or saying disrespectful things to my face or a loved one while just seeking regular check-ups.

I mean really...in this small town it's bad enough as it is with locals knowing what you are doing, but down to the knowledge of your last intimate healthcare check? The last thing I need is someone assuming I'm pregnant and telling me 'save the life' - I think my knee jerk reaction would be to punch the guy in the face and land myself in jail. Seriously. How dare you tell me what to do or assume the worst case scenario!

I do applaud him and the group for their passion, but there are other venues for this. I know where I stand on this issue, but would NEVER try to push that on anyone else and least of all at a health care clinic. "

random name here wrote on Jul 1, 2009 10:29 AM:

" I've spent the majority of my life observing people to determine why we do the things we do. Ron Maxon didn't have to write a letter to the editor, so why did he do it?

His motivation to write the letter came from a desire to respond to criticism. He feels the need to justify his actions. We could dig deeper and deeper to analyze why he's doing what he does, but the bottom line is: Mr. Maxson has a belief and he's not comfortable with it.

I have beliefs too, and if I express my opinion about certain ones I don't care what anyone else says or thinks. If I find myself responding to criticism then I have to take a seat and think about that belief and my conviction behind it. "

Rick wrote on Jul 1, 2009 11:44 AM:

" Ron - Informational picketing doesn't violate anyone's rights - it's just part of life in a free society. No one, especially the self-proclaimed 'tolerant' ones - should be complaining. But taking an innocent human life is indeed a direct contradiction to our fundamental American principles. Good work! "

pharper wrote on Jul 1, 2009 12:17 PM:

" Voltaire said, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." I'm with him on this one in most instances, but not this one.

I cannot in good conscience defend people who inhibit innocent women from obtaining much-needed healthcare. Many of us are lucky enough to have health insurance and the ability to go to professional healthcare providers rather than clinics like Planned Parenthood. If that's the case, good for you. But many people do not have that privilege, and by intimidating them with gory pictures and loud mantras, you are preventing them from using a clinic that is in place to help them.

By the way, did you know that Planned Parenthood also assists men? "

Sickothis wrote on Jul 1, 2009 12:31 PM:

" Well now, random name here, THAT'S an interesting interpretation... "

alucawanza wrote on Jul 1, 2009 1:39 PM:

" Mr. Maxson:
Why not work hard to stop unplanned pregnancies. Work to educate young people to use reliable methods of birth control. Work to educate women and men about monthly cycles. Work to pass out free condoms (perhaps as you demonstrate). There's more than one way to stop abortion.
And in the meantime demonstrate if you must. Everyone has a passion. Yours is to control women's rights.
I hope its true about the four kids. Why aren't you home taking care of them? "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jul 1, 2009 1:46 PM:

" Why is the parking space in front of the Planned Parenthood clinic not marked as a 'loading zone' with 24 minute parking?

I should think that parking a car in those spaces all day can be handled better without infringing on anybody's rights to walk on the sidewalk.

As far as I can tell parking is not constitutionally protected free speech.

~Ruff "

Tom Riley wrote on Jul 1, 2009 2:38 PM:

" One interesting fact about Planned Parenthood's abortion involvement is that it officially opposes "conscience clauses" that excuse health care professional from participating in abortion.

This has been true at least since Gloria Feldt's address to the National Press Club on June 18th, 1999. But if Planned Parenthood has changed its stance on this issue, please let me know.

In former days, Planned Parenthood complained that it was wrong to put doctors in jail for performing abortions. But isn't it at least as wrong to put doctors in jail for not doing abortions?

Sort of hard to reconcile with the phrase "pro-choice" -- but I'm sure someone will try. "

misfit wrote on Jul 1, 2009 9:32 PM:

" I'm just wondering how many of you "Love the Fetus and Hate the Child"?
When you start standing behind making sure that every child eats, gets a good education and has access to quality healthcare...I might be able to swallow your rhetoric. And when you stop supporting war at any cost...maybe then too. "

misfit wrote on Jul 1, 2009 9:37 PM:

" When are men going to be held accountable as well for unwanted pregnancies? "

fmmt47 wrote on Jul 1, 2009 9:41 PM:

" Right on! This is still the United States of America and everyone has the right to voice their protest over issues which they feel are unjust or morally reprehensible. Planned Parenthood was initially a vision of the malthusian Margaret Sanger who believed in racial superiority of the white race. She made the rounds as a guest speaker to hate groups such as the KKK in order to foster her theory that races other than the white race were inferior. Note that most abortions performed in these abortion mills target minorities throughout the United States. Through twisted propaganda and logic, abortion as a method of birth control for selfish people has been widely accepted. Why not place the child up for adoption instead in ending his/her life? Oh, I forgot, if you carry the child full term you may gain some weight and end up with a few stretch marks. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 1, 2009 11:21 PM:

" pharper wrote: "... most of whom are not going into the clinic for advice about abortions."

Since there is no way of telling who is going in for what, how do you propose that the demonstrators differentiate?
It is reasonable to assume that at least some of the women are seeking advice about abortion. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 1, 2009 11:26 PM:

" noblindershere wrote:" you are saying that one person's freedom is more important than another?"

No, he is saying that some rights are more important than others, with the right to life being the greatest of them all. Our Declaration of Independence would seem to agree. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 1, 2009 11:34 PM:

" pharper wrote: "you are preventing them from using a clinic that is in place to help them."

PP could easily defuse this situation by declaring that they will no longer give out abortion advice or make referrals to abortion clinics. Seems like these functions could be separated out. If that was done, the protesters would go away. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 1, 2009 11:41 PM:

" alu wrote: "I hope its true about the four kids. Why aren't you home taking care of them."

Isn't that equivalent to the old idea that women should be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen? How dare you suggest limiting someone's right to protest? "

Raven wrote on Jul 2, 2009 7:05 AM:

" "PP could easily defuse this situation by declaring that they will no longer give out abortion advice or make referrals to abortion clinics."

Why should PP be forced to do that, JR? The clinic is offering and the people trying to make use of the clinic are obtaining services that are completely legal. Why should they be forced to stop providing them?.... and I doubt if that would make the protesters go away, because from the posts here recently, a good many of them feel that many forms of birth control are abortion practices as well.

Should the gun shops be forced to declare they would no longer sell firearms because some people object to deaths of children from firearms? The sale of firearms is legal and one presumes the gun shop is not violating the law in whom it sells them to, so should they also be forced to stop?

And yes, he is saying some one's freedom is more important than others. Those who oppose abortion have decided that the 'rights' of the unborn, trump the rights of the already born.

Btw, the declaration bestows no rights upon anyone; it has no standing as a legal document, just as a statement of principle - a magnificent one - but none the less, just a statement of principal. "

theangrybear wrote on Jul 3, 2009 1:01 AM:

" No it does not bestow rights raven, it enumerates our God-given rights. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 3, 2009 1:28 AM:

" Raven wrote: "Why should PP be forced to do that, JR?"

You're putting words in my mouth again. I never said or implied "force".
PP has a choice. They can either continue as they have, which means the protesters will continue; or else PP can decide that their non-abortion functions are paramount and provide only those services, in which case the protesters will probably go elsewhere. So, it's PP's choice. "

Raven wrote on Jul 3, 2009 10:09 AM:

" If they are doing it to get rid of or stop something, they are in effect, being forced. Why should they even have to consider doing it at all, under any circumstances, JR.? And you would have no problem with demonstrators doing the same to a gun shop then?

Angry, whether it bestows or enumerates, it has no legal standing in protecting those rights. "

winewoman wrote on Jul 3, 2009 11:27 AM:

" JR said, "PP could easily defuse this situation by declaring that they will no longer give out abortion advice or make referrals to abortion clinics."

Are you serious? Woman are entitled to full disclosure, complete information, unedited and uncensored education. Women have a right to know all of their options, particularly and most especially when it deals with their health and their bodies. Women have the intellectual ability to make decisions based on facts, evidence and reasoning. The idea of witholding information and or medical referrals from women is archaic - and frightening. BTW, PP provides information - they do not advise women to do anything. Important distinction. "

winewoman wrote on Jul 3, 2009 3:07 PM:

" Mr. Maxson, You and your protesters dispense medical information without qualifications or a license. You and your protesters tell the women who go into the PP clinic that birth control kills babies, that birth control causes breast cancer and that many women on birth control die from blood clots. I think the people of Napa would be very interested to hear about the false medical information that you are dispensing to our young women. God forbid some young woman should believe the medical advise from such a sidewalk charlatan. "

valleygirl wrote on Jul 5, 2009 1:50 PM:

" When I was a highschool freshman I had sex with an adult. Should I have, of course not. Did I fully understand the concept of sex, of course not. I unfortunately got pregnant and was scared to death. My parents found out and took me to planned parenthood where I was able to have an abortion. It was the best thing for everyone, not just ME as implied in the article and comments. I am glad I had PP to help me through a difficult time. I have been on birth control ever since and learned a lot. I am now 34, married and READY for children. Thank you PP and it's supporters.
Maybe the focus should be on education?? "

daveposner wrote on Jul 6, 2009 12:28 PM:

" "Hopefully, the protection of children in the womb will not take the drastic course repeal of slavery took. "

But, hey, whatever it takes -- right?

Seriously, don't be confused, this letter contains a threat. "

alucawanza wrote on Jul 6, 2009 7:19 PM:

" daveposner:
Please be more direct. What is the nature of your threat? "

daveposner wrote on Jul 6, 2009 9:45 PM:

" Sigh,

No alucawanza, I'm not making a threat. I'm concerned that there is a not so subtle threat in Mr. Maxson's letter. Perhaps I'm taking his words too literally, I hope so, but it sure sounds like he's arguing that the antiabortion cause is at least equivalent to the abolition of slavery and that the same means required to end slavery, i.e., civil war, would be justified to end abortion -- though he "hopes" it won't come to that. Recent events including the murder of Dr. George Tiller have caused me to be somewhat paranoid on this topic. "

Raven wrote on Jul 6, 2009 11:48 PM:

" spell it out dave, don't be shy...what are you threatening? "

diehard4ever wrote on Jul 7, 2009 7:46 AM:

" If you kill a pregnant woman, it's double murder, but if you s_ck a baby through a tube and down a sink, it's called "choice". Something seems seriously messed up here... "

napamama wrote on Jul 7, 2009 9:53 AM:

" As a teen I was able to obtain health care and information from PP. Thanks to PP I did NOT get pregnant as a teen. My parents blocked sex education from me due to religious beliefs and I had no other options. It's scary enough as a teen to obtain this care, would have been impossible if I had to walk past protesters. "

theangrybear wrote on Jul 7, 2009 1:31 PM:

" Tiller's death was unfortunate because it has provided more opportunity for the pro-aborts to label all who oppose abortion as murderous fanatics. But seriously though, the man was a disgrace. I am not shedding any tears for "Dr." Tiller. I honestly don't see how anyone of sound mind who actually gives it some serious thought could defend such a gruesome act as late-term abortion or someone who so ruthlessly and prolifically perpertrates it. "

winewoman wrote on Jul 7, 2009 2:18 PM:

" I get what dave is saying and he's right. Dave is not threatening, he's stating that the demonstrator (Maxson) and his words and actions are threatening. And he's right. This is not Mr. Maxson's first rodeo. Mr. Maxson has been doing this (demonstrating, etc.) for at least 20 years. This from his website, "I tried everything else and failed. Only God can lead me now, through prayer, fasting, and talking to people. We are up against spiritual warfare, and without God, the odds are bleak. God has put each of us in our place for the battle, and the battle has to be consistently fought.” Maxson is affiliated with Lambs of Christ and Operation Rescue. Both considered extremist Christian groups and The Lambs of Christ has been identified as a Christian terrorist organization. They claim to be nonviolent, however, members of the group have been linked to several incidents of violence. "

winewoman wrote on Jul 7, 2009 4:11 PM:

" theangrybear - I haven't noticed anyone defending late term abortions here. The Napa PP does not perform abortions. They provide health care, birth control, testing and education. The protesters are preventing women from getting the birth control and education that they need so that they don't get pregnant in the first place.

I'll say it again - I have problem with assaut rifles. I know that picketing a civil war gun show is not going to deliver my message effectively. And preventing an assault victim from obtaining a hand gun for protection is just cruel.

Mr Maxson and the protesters are preventing women from taking action to prevent what the picketers are protesting in the first place. How does that make sense?

We all (yes, including pro choicers) want to reduce the need for and the number of abortions. But, you've got to be smarter about this. Start at the beginning, not the end. Don't stop women from getting birth control, so that they don't have to consider an abortion in the future. In this case, correlation does imply causation. If women don't get access to birth control, they will get pregnant. "

Daveposner wrote on Jul 7, 2009 9:37 PM:

" Let me be clear that I don't know anything about Mr. Maxson other than what I can glean from his letter. The letter begins and ends by comparing abortion to slavery and explicitly makes the point that peaceful protests were not adequate to end slavery. I don't think it's much of a stretch to interpret that to mean that if peaceful protests are not adequate to end abortion then violent means may be called for. That's the source of my concern. I would be gratified to hear Mr. Maxson declare that that is not his belief. "

tangent wrote on Jul 7, 2009 10:50 PM:

" Dave: I had a similar interpretation of this letter. That the Register printed it at all is extremely disturbing. Maxon, absent further explanation of his text, is not-so-subtly advocating violence to achieve his ends. "

alucawanza wrote on Jul 8, 2009 4:10 PM:

" daveposner:
Thanks for the clarification. I wrote earlier but it didn't get posted.
I believe that obsessive behavior which Maxon is demonstrating can be dangerous. I do sense the threat in his letter. I just didn't put that together with your entry. Sorry.

theangrybear: Google placenta previa. It will help you understand why late term abortions are necessary. There are other medical factors that also determine this decision. These are emergencies. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 9, 2009 7:46 PM:

" alu wrote: "Google placenta previa. It will help you understand why late term abortions are necessary."

Hardly anyone is opposed to an abortion that is necessary to save the life of the mother. But you need to put into perspective that grave conditions like placenta previa affect only about 0.5% of late term pregnancies. The current loophole, that late term abortions may be performed for the "health" of the mother is wide enough to drive a Mack truck through. "

theangrybear wrote on Jul 10, 2009 1:40 AM:

" Oh please, alucawanza. Even the abortionists who perform late-term abortions will admit that the vast majority are not medical emergencies where the mother's life is threatened or anything of that sort. George Tiller himself boasted of having performed over 60,000 abortions. As John Richards said, there is a very big loophole that exists which allows practice to go on "

healtheducation wrote on Jul 11, 2009 3:40 PM:

" There are so many topics and issues being discussed here it is difficult to isolate them. First the idea that PP should stop providing abortions to rid themselves of protesters is unrealistic. So thank you to those who have the intelligence to understand that. In napa PP only provides abortions up to 8 weeks, and this is only a very small percenatge of their services. PP also provides a case management program to assist the teens who CHOOSE to continue their pregnancy. The goal being they graduate high school. But also assits with health care, relationship issues, nutrition, housing job placement ect. Did anybody know about that, or care to mention it? Also as my last point, while i do agree people should have the right to pro test peacefully, Ron and his "gang" (I call them that becuase they are often dressed in red, a Norteno gang color. Stange napa pd has yet to put these peole on gang file when they are very quick to put a 19 year old with red shoe laces on gang file. I am just saying...) often are not protesting peacefully. I have personally talked to two teens who have been physicaly restrained by one of the protesters. In both cases they tried to walk away and their arms were grabbed tightly. Of course neither would pursue filing a report, due to the fact that one of the girls and seen a police officer talking with Ron and hugging him when he walked away. The other had already at the age of 14 no faith in police being on her side. I dont think that is a very peaceful action!Lastly thank you to the person who brought up the bad info they hand out. "

daveposner wrote on Jul 12, 2009 12:05 AM:

" How about it Mr. Maxson and fellow protestors, are you in fact physically restraining clients of Planned Parenthood? "

LittleJoe wrote on Jul 15, 2009 1:33 PM:

" I have the same question as "pharper" "Can I ask you a genuine question? Do you oppose the death penalty and the war in Iraq?

ALL of the abortion opponents that I have talked to support the war in the mid-east. How does one oppose abortion on the grounds that it is murder, whilst supporting war?

If you are one of these people, please enlighten me! "

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: