my girlfriend and i went to subway, we seen the worst thing ever along the way.

That sounds an aweful lot like "Don't be protestin'."

Theokhoth

its not anti protesting, or saying that it should be illigal. why not take the van to abortion clinics? there are none in the town i live in. so why drive around town with that on there? it would be like a soldier waving a gun around every where he/she went. then when someone questioned why he/she was doing so, that person would say "to scare terrorists". or a cop doing the same thing, but saying they're scaring criminals.

i guess the main point being theres a time/place to do these sort of things. save it for then.

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"] The lie of it's only a clump of cells has been spread for far to long, and if this is what is takes to get it through people's thick skulls than sure let her do it..AirGuitarist87

and yes we still went to subway. we didnt stay there. we brought it home. my girlfriend almost threw up when i said "abortion van" about 10 mins after we ate.Invisible_Kid2

LMAO fetus mobile :lol:

While I am against abortion, that is just ridiculous.  Not only is it disgusting but obviously distracting.  

My two cents on this issue:

What a freaking weirdo. We kill cows for food, do we see fanatical vegetarians putting a picture diagram of how a cow got on my plate?

On the whole issue of abortion, if a would be parent wanted an abortion, they probably would have made crappy parents in the first place. If anything, think of it as a mercy thing. I mean, would you want another poor child getting little food and getting beaten?

This woman was driving a car in the subway? How did she do that? It must've been awful.UssjTrunks

 did you read the entire post, or...any posts....at all?

Should've rammed her off a bridge. Society has no need for people like her.Vfanek

Either this or plant a car bomb that detonates upon vehicle ignition.

We kill cows for food, do we see fanatical vegetarians putting a picture diagram of how a cow got on my plate?

PEELEDbanana

[QUOTE="UssjTrunks"]This woman was driving a car in the subway? How did she do that? It must've been awful.Invisible_Kid2

 did you read the entire post, or...any posts....at all?

[QUOTE="Invisible_Kid2"]

[QUOTE="UssjTrunks"]This woman was driving a car in the subway? How did she do that? It must've been awful.UssjTrunks

 did you read the entire post, or...any posts....at all?

then why post? im just wondering. post count, raise your percentage, ect.?

On the whole issue of abortion, if a would be parent wanted an abortion, they probably would have made crappy parents in the first place. If anything, think of it as a mercy thing. I mean, would you want another poor child getting little food and getting beaten?

PEELEDbanana

Then they should have done one of two things.

1) Used preventative measures such as the use of condoms or birth control.

2) Put the baby up for adoption.   

Is that legal? It seems exposing an unwilling minor to such a thing would be illegal.Guybrush_3

i don't think what she did is worse than what many mothers to be do in having an abortion.superheromonkey

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

...its legal

[QUOTE="superheromonkey"]i don't think what she did is worse than what many mothers to be do in having an abortion.Invisible_Kid2

Edit: Your logic is also terrible. Just because they don't advertise what they have done(which is terrible), does not mean that somehow the showing of a pic of an aborted fetus should be illegal while the actual having an abortion is not. 

why should it be illegal?There is no reason for it to be illegal other than it may gross people out or offend people, unfortunately those aren't good reasons to make the message she is sending illegal.

Edit: Your logic is also terrible. Just because they don't advertise what they have done(which is terrible), does not mean that somehow the showing of a pic of an aborted fetus should be illegal while the actual having an abortion is not. 

superheromonkey

It's not the message that's the problem, it's the medium. If something like that was shown on TV, there'd be a "viewer discretion is advised" bit preceding it. Unfortunately when you see something like that in real life it isn't as simple as changing the channel.

The sad part is that she doesn't know she is a tool. I'm sure she is a republican, yet hasnt realized that her party of choice had complete control for 6 years but didnt pass any legislation on her issue of choice. and they never will. she is being used. this has nothing to do with obama. the supreme court is even conservative. she should start there.TBoogy

well technically it is where Obama stands on the issue but your point is still valid

[QUOTE="superheromonkey"]

why should it be illegal?There is no reason for it to be illegal other than it may gross people out or offend people, unfortunately those aren't good reasons to make the message she is sending illegal.

Edit: Your logic is also terrible. Just because they don't advertise what they have done(which is terrible), does not mean that somehow the showing of a pic of an aborted fetus should be illegal while the actual having an abortion is not. 

UnrighteousFury

It's not the message that's the problem, it's the medium. If something like that was shown on TV, there'd be a "viewer discretion is advised" bit preceding it. Unfortunately when you see something like that in real life it isn't as simple as changing the channel.

I think the protests are absolutely ridiculous. I've seen a few of them (Venice Beach boardwalk, outside my local mall).. it's pretty awful that they're forcing these images upon the public. And don't say "Oh, just don't look." When you're walking down the street and people are yelling in your face you're pretty much going to look. :P There should be some type of regulation in what they can display.

You should have destroyed it with fireCloud_Insurance

[QUOTE="UnrighteousFury"][QUOTE="superheromonkey"]

why should it be illegal?There is no reason for it to be illegal other than it may gross people out or offend people, unfortunately those aren't good reasons to make the message she is sending illegal.

Edit: Your logic is also terrible. Just because they don't advertise what they have done(which is terrible), does not mean that somehow the showing of a pic of an aborted fetus should be illegal while the actual having an abortion is not. 

sparkypants

It's not the message that's the problem, it's the medium. If something like that was shown on TV, there'd be a "viewer discretion is advised" bit preceding it. Unfortunately when you see something like that in real life it isn't as simple as changing the channel.

Obscenity laws have been in place for a long time. They aren't a new thing. And when the vast majority agrees (as most in this thread have) that something crosses the line, maybe a second look should be taken.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]Is that legal? It seems exposing an unwilling minor to such a thing would be illegal.sparkypants

There are laws against displaying obsene material in many places. I believe that that would qualify.

I think the protests are absolutely ridiculous. I've seen a few of them (Venice Beach boardwalk, outside my local mall).. it's pretty awful that they're forcing these images upon the public. And don't say "Oh, just don't look." When you're walking down the street and people are yelling in your face you're pretty much going to look. :P There should be some type of regulation in what they can display.

 

Calypto

Obscenity laws have been in place for a long time. They aren't a new thing. And when the vast majority agrees (as most in this thread have) that something crosses the line, maybe a second look should be taken.

UnrighteousFury

[QUOTE="UnrighteousFury"]

Obscenity laws have been in place for a long time. They aren't a new thing. And when the vast majority agrees (as most in this thread have) that something crosses the line, maybe a second look should be taken.

sparkypants

1. she could be doing psycological damage to children

2. she has every right to voice her opinion on it. No one is trying to argue that. 

[QUOTE="Calypto"]

I think the protests are absolutely ridiculous. I've seen a few of them (Venice Beach boardwalk, outside my local mall).. it's pretty awful that they're forcing these images upon the public. And don't say "Oh, just don't look." When you're walking down the street and people are yelling in your face you're pretty much going to look. :P There should be some type of regulation in what they can display.

 

sparkypants

[QUOTE="Invisible_Kid2"][QUOTE="superheromonkey"] why should it be illegal?There is no reason for it to be illegal other than it may gross people out or offend people, unfortunately those aren't good reasons to make the message she is sending illegal.sparkypants

You're missing the fundamental difference, though. Assuming I were a parent, I could stop my child from playing M rated games or watching R rated movies if I so chose. However, this lady had her van parked in front of a Subway for all to see. I wouldn't exactly be able to sheild my child from that.

[QUOTE="Invisible_Kid2"][QUOTE="superheromonkey"] why should it be illegal?There is no reason for it to be illegal other than it may gross people out or offend people, unfortunately those aren't good reasons to make the message she is sending illegal.sparkypants

No, they would not be preventing her from speaking in public. She can protest all she wants. They would be preventing her from exposing obscene material to the public.  

[QUOTE="UnrighteousFury"]

Obscenity laws have been in place for a long time. They aren't a new thing. And when the vast majority agrees (as most in this thread have) that something crosses the line, maybe a second look should be taken.

sparkypants

If I were to walk into a school, see those, and complain about it, I bet they would be taken down.

[QUOTE="sparkypants"][QUOTE="Calypto"]

I think the protests are absolutely ridiculous. I've seen a few of them (Venice Beach boardwalk, outside my local mall).. it's pretty awful that they're forcing these images upon the public. And don't say "Oh, just don't look." When you're walking down the street and people are yelling in your face you're pretty much going to look. :P There should be some type of regulation in what they can display.

 

Calypto

[QUOTE="sparkypants"][QUOTE="UnrighteousFury"]

Obscenity laws have been in place for a long time. They aren't a new thing. And when the vast majority agrees (as most in this thread have) that something crosses the line, maybe a second look should be taken.

UnrighteousFury

If I were to walk into a school, see those, and complain about it, I bet they would be taken down.

[QUOTE="UnrighteousFury"][QUOTE="sparkypants"] Its a conundrum, states are allowed to have there own laws on censorship however they go against national law. I cant stand hypocrisy, however...the fact of the matter is, shes not hurting anyone and its not likes shes lying, This is true and she has the right to voice her opinion on it. whether you agree with her actions or not. And just as people have the right to go to schools and post those images of destroyed lungs from cigarette smoke or disfigured images from intoxicated car crashes she has a right to display those images.sparkypants

If I were to walk into a school, see those, and complain about it, I bet they would be taken down.

i dont think you could do that. if the lung/car crash pics were in plain public view (IE: street signs, posters/ect.) , then maybe, but if its inside of a building owned by someone other than yourself, then wouldnt it be considered destruction of property? kind of the same way that we can't post shock pics/ nudie pics on GS.

[QUOTE="Vfanek"][QUOTE="ferrari2001"]I don't see a problem with it personally. So many people think only a clump of cells are being aborted, that "fact" is spread everywhere, but the fact that what's being killed, looks like a baby and has every living aspect of a child cannot be spread than the other side is taking away freedom of speech to keep people in favor of abortion. ferrari2001

sigh....

[QUOTE="sparkypants"][QUOTE="UnrighteousFury"]

 

If I were to walk into a school, see those, and complain about it, I bet they would be taken down.

Invisible_Kid2

i dont think you could do that. if the lung/car crash pics were in plain public view (IE: street signs, posters/ect.) , then maybe, but if its inside of a building owned by someone other than yourself, then wouldnt it be considered destruction of property? kind of the same way that we can't post shock pics/ nudie pics on GS.

That's really creepy. so was it like painted on her van? or like a large magnet or window sticker? anyway that pretty eww...Ultima_5

[QUOTE="Invisible_Kid2"][QUOTE="sparkypants"] well that is more of an extreme, but if you wanted you could post pics objecting to those pictures, and in this case you could infact protest the subway lady. If you sigle handedly objected to the pictures in the hallway, they wouldnt take them down, like they would tell the subway lady to leave but if a group of people rallied against it, signed petitions and took to the halls in a non violent manner you have a chance of taking them down. The same concept applies to the subway lady. The government cant stop her from saying what she wants to say nor can they stop you. sparkypants

i dont wanna be mean, but why does everyone think she stopped at subway? we were going to subway (our destination point) we were turning onto a street. we had to yield to traffic, so while we were waiting on traffic to pass, we noticed the van.

[QUOTE="Santesyu"]

Hmmm, I wonder what made you stay and look at that? I would of just looked at it for a second and walked off, but you on the other hand stayed and sorta like investigated the picture, who is really the werid one here.8)

Invisible_Kid2

i was saying that i dont think you can tear down signs being that they're in a building where the owner put them up. i see your point about protesting to take them down though.

...its legal

sparkypants