Few things are more important than the right to freely express ourselves. Imagine if killing children up to their second birthday was legal. Is this something you would be interested in protesting against? Would you be compelled to fight for that child’s life? Would it be fair if only those who believe in killing these children were allowed within the buffer zone? Today, these people are the mothers delivering their children into the hands of an abortionist, the employees assisting in their slaughter, and the pro-abortion escorts pushing the innocent child toward their brutal death. Is it fair to exclude those who speak on behalf of the child about to die? Shouldn’t that child have one last chance for someone to change his or her mother’s mind? Freedom of speech and freedom to assemble are two of our greatest rights. Is killing unborn children so important that we must erode these freedoms in addition to our most basic human right – the Right to Life?
See this post to learn more.
I am curious to know what your stance is on the buffer zone laws being heard in the Supreme Court. I do believe that at its most extreme, it is meant to protect patients from the rather radical part of the pro-lifers (the ones who scream murder and throw ketchup at the ground or on patients). I do know that a majority of the pro-lifers are not radical to that degree (some come off as \'pushy\' if they insist on having a conversation, but most respect the patients if they don\'t wish to speak).
