The Point: Leave the Pregnancy Care Centers Alone

Is this a sign of good things to come? For the Colson Center, I’m John Stonestreet with The Point.

I told you back in November about an important case headed to the Supreme Court: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra.

At issue is the constitutionality of the California law forcing pro-life pregnancy care centers to advertise nearby abortion services. Federal judges in Maryland and elsewhere have struck down similar laws, and now that Maryland case—actually a Baltimore City ordinance—is back in the news.

A federal appeals court has rejected the city’s appeal to uphold that ordinance that would force pregnancy centers to refer for abortions and post government messages about abortion.

When will pro-abortion legislators learn? Mark Rienzi, senior counsel at Becket Legal, said the decision “confirms that government has no place mandating speech—especially speech associated with deeply-held religious beliefs.”

But don’t think yet another loss will deter pro-abortion forces from tying up pregnancy centers in court. Let’s pray the Supreme Court puts an end to this unconstitutional nonsense.

Resources

Court to government: Stop targeting pregnancy center
  • Melinda Skea | Becket Fund | January 5, 2018

Comment Policy: Commenters are welcome to argue all points of view, but they are asked to do it civilly and respectfully. Comments that call names, insult other people or groups, use profanity or obscenity, repeat the same points over and over, or make personal remarks about other commenters will be deleted. After multiple infractions, commenters may be banned.

  • Scott

    “Let’s pray the Supreme Court puts an end to this unconstitutional nonsense.”

    Amen!

  • Phoenix1977

    “When will pro-abortion legislators learn?”
    Never, because all we need is one victory in Washington and the pro-life movement is set back decades. So we keep moving forward and in the end we will get that one victory. Time is on our side.

    • Scott

      “Time is on our side.” – Rolling Stones, 1964.

      …Although I think their song “Sympathy for the Devil” (1968?) might be more appropriate here. ; – )

      • Phoenix1977

        My knowledge of the Rolling Stones is limited to “Paint it Black” (1966) and “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” (1968) and both because they were important soundtracks of series and movies I liked.

    • Steve

      At what point in pregnancy do you think abortion is wrong?
      Why are you so ardently for abortion?
      Who is the “we” you refer to?
      Embryology has shown that the distinct human life is formed at conception. You had referred me to physiology books about men carrying babies; why would you ignore this science?

      • gladys1071

        So you think it acceptable to force women to stay pregnant against her will? what about the woman and the rights to her body?

        Do women own their uteruses or are they subject to be regulated by the state?

        Somebody please answer, should women be forced to be an incubator against her will? for those of you that want to ban abortion, you do realize that you want to use the power of the state to control women’s bodies and violate her rights by stopping her from terminating a pregnancy?

        Would you force a sister, wife or other loved one to remain pregnant against her will?

        • Scott

          “So you think it acceptable to force women to stay pregnant against her will? what about the woman and the rights to her body?”

          So do you think it is acceptable to kill a two year old because their parent doesn’t want to buy them food? Was it the woman’s will to enjoy sex in the first place and does she get to kill the innocent person just because she didn’t intend for their life? Is a woman’s will to have sex more important than the life of an innocent child?

          “Somebody please answer, should women be forced to be an incubator against her will?”

          Who “forced” her to get pregnant in the first place? If a woman must have sex for the sake of pleasure only, why should we allow her to murder an innocent child just because they were an “oops?” Is that “oops” not God’s creation?.. the child might end up doing great things for His kingdom some day. Terminating a life because it is not convenient is NEVER okay.

          • gladys1071

            Having sex does NOT nullify bodily rights. Also we live in a secular society, yours and my religious beliefs are not shared by all.

            Bodily rights YES are more important than life, otherwise you and i could be forced to give blood or donate our organs. You should be glad that our bodily rights trump somebody else’s “right to life” that requires a use of another person’s body.

            Using somebody else’s body against their will is NOT OK.

            You really don’t understand bodily rights and that they supersede anyone’s right to life including an embryo or fetus.

            Stop making religious arguments that not everybody believes.

            We live in a secular society and the law says that a person’s right to their body supersede “the right to life”

            Do you lose the right to your body because you have sex?

            Do you want to be used as an incubator for 9 months against your will just because of an “oops”

            I am so disgusted by the lack of regard for women and the rights to her body. As a woman i am so glad i live in a state that respects a woman’s right to her body and to refuse to gestate against her will.

          • Scott

            “I am so disgusted by the lack of regard for women and the rights to her body. As a woman i am so glad i live in a state that respects a woman’s right to her body and to refuse to gestate against her will.”

            The life inside a womb is not part of that woman’s body. That life is an innocent human being that has the right to live just like you do. This argument is not religious.

          • gladys1071

            Stop arguing that this is about sex, it is NOT, it is about bodily rights.

            A woman does not lose the rights to her body and uterus because she becomes pregnant, her body is STILL HER OWN and she still OWNS her uterus.

            Forcing a woman to remain pregnant against her will is a form of abuse and oppression.

          • Scott

            “her body is STILL HER OWN and she still OWNS her uterus.”

            But she doesn’t own the life inside it. Killing an innocent life is murder.

  • Just One Voice

    It’s like forcing companies to promote their competitors’ products! Apple promoting Microsoft products, now that’s a picture there.

    Nonsense indeed.

    • gladys1071

      A pregnancy center is not a company selling a product. All they are required to do is inform the person about the option of an abortion services elsewhere.

      Why is it such a controversy to give a woman ALL of her options, not just the options that we approve of?

      I honestly don’t see what the big hoopla is about, give the woman all of her options, and let her decide.

      • Andy6M

        Perhaps the big hoopla has to do with the fact that the faith and conscience of some direct them to viewing abortion as the taking of innocent life, and as such is not an option they feel they can share.

        • gladys1071

          faith and conscience is personal and does not extend to imposing it on others.

          • Scott

            Like abortion imposes brutal death on an innocent life?

      • Just One Voice

        Okay, but they are providing/selling a service. So, the comparison till stands.

  • Timothy D Padgett

    We would like to thank everyone for their contributions to this important discussion. However, as the conversation seems to have come to an impasse, we will be closing the comments for this article

    Thanks you again,

    Timothy D Padgett
    Managing Editor