Disabled Vietnam Vet Hot Dog Vendor Arrested Outside Met
Tenants' Rights Flash Cards!
Stuy Pyro Leaves Notes In Hieroglyphics
The Obamas' First State Dinner: Dazzling Fashion, Celebrities
Meatpacking District Tower Gets Approved
A City Council hearing had to be recessed after Council members James Oddo and Charles Barron got into a shouting match about a bill. The bill was the Clinic Access Bill--which covers harassment outside abortion clinics and is sponsored by City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.
In an opinion piece yesterday in Metro (PDF), Quinn and NARAL Pro-Choice NY President Kelli Conlin explained that the Clinic Access Bill will allow health clinics staffs to have "protestors arrested who deliberately interfere with a clinic's operations" as well as "allow police to arrest protestors they see blocking clinic entrances and exits as well as parking lots and driveways."
Oddo, who is against abortion, thinks the bill prevents anti-abortion protestors from gathering outside clinics, "I am somewhat amused by my good friend Charles Barron accepting a curtailment on free speech." Barron later said to Oddo, "For you to be confused on that is interesting, probably some hidden views on this issue, period." Oddo fired back, screaming, "Don't imply something, that I have a hidden agenda here," while Barron retorted, "Don't imply I'm impinging on First Amendment rights." When calls for order were ignored, a 5-minute recess was called. Politicker NY writes, "This is not entirely unexpected behavior from either Oddo or Barron."
You can read the bill here, and here are some more explanations: Staten Island Advance says it "would give abortion providers the right to press harassment charges if the incident occurs within 15 feet of a clinic, without having to prove the intent of that harassment. The current law allows police to arrest someone only if they can prove they intended to prevent a patient from gaining access to the clinic." And NY1 adds "it's nearly impossible in New York City to arrest a protester without the cooperation of the woman entering the facility. The new bill would give more weight to complaints of clinic employees or other witnesses."
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Not trying to be rude, but the Gothamist staff needs to edit itself. This article is rife with grammatical errors, as are many others.
you know who the anti-abortion supporters trotted out? wheelchair cop Steven McDonald, why is he against this bill? the harassers are saying they're just providing "counseling".
We would be better off if these two settled it like men in Weehawken.
How about a caption or something? Who's Oddo and who's Barron?
Interfering with the operations of a clinic or any place of business as described here is already illegal, and this bill will likely be used to squash free speech. Remember those federal "clinic access" laws that were mean to let prosecutors file federal charges against anti-abortion extremists? Those same laws have been used to harass anti-war demonstrators, environmental activists and others. Freedom of speech is endangered enough.
Men should not have any part in abortion discussions. There, I said it.
Men shouldn't have a role in abortion discussions? Yay, sexism! I don't want any straight people defending gay rights, grr!
Guess what democracy means! It doesn't mean 'I will limit certain issues to certain people', because that's insanely bigoted and elitist! You can't exclude men from a jury on a rape case, and you can't exclude women from a jury on a custody case. That a case could be construed to be closer to certain groups really makes broad, sweeping strokes about the plurality of experience and sentiment that will inevitably occur with a topic like abortion, and is honestly sexist. I'm pro-choice, for the record.
Whoops.
Plus, restrictions on protests outside of abortion clinics/hospitals is plenty Constitutional, as construed in Hill v. Colorado. You have a right to express your views but you don't have a right to disrupt the peace of a hospital zone without any restrictions. Sorry.
to add: Reasonable restrictions upon speech are plenty fine, but anti-choice protesters are certainly free to engage in civil disobedience.
#4 Oddo is ivory and Barron is ebony.
Quinn is a pig, no restriction on the first amendment. Of course Quinn has no issues with the Gay and their supporters protesting against Prop 8 but this pig has a problem with pro-lifers. wth???
You want someone telling you what to do with your body? Great. I don't.
If I accidentally get pregnant by my boyfriend and he wants me to keep it but I don't - guess what, I'm not keeping it. If I'm raped and get pregnant, I'm not keeping it.
Besides cases of obvious misuse (i.e. multiple abortions used as birth control), the issue is between a woman and her doctor. Anyone standing in the way is in the middle of someone else's business.
Agreed Jen S. This is BULL. It's just like these PETA people, I'm not saying woo hoo to clubbings, skinnings, etc and i'm not saying they don't have a right to protest, i am saying I too have the right to buy, wear, do as i want(the last time i checked at least) NO ONE should have the right to cause harm, injury, malice or prevent me from doing what i have the right to do.
Thank you, Charles Barron.
I'm sure Oddo would be singing a different tune if a crowd was permanently suddenly stationed outside his residence, shouting obscenities at his family.
I've escorted clinic patients, and have seen firsthand how ugly these self-appointed "counselors" claim to be.
And yeah, I'm amazed that some strange man thinks that bringing a pregnancy to term is best for a random woman.
Why the FUCK aren't these protestors putting their energy into ensuring that pregnant women/new mothers have adequate medical care or post-birth resources for child care, food, etc.? It's all about pageantry and attention for themselves - they don't give two shits about the mother OR child if she suddenly decides to keep it.
Is this really an issue in New York City right now?
It's all about pageantry and attention for themselves - they don't give two shits about the mother OR child if she suddenly decides to keep it.
Bingo.
This is a liberal attempt at encroaching on the First Amendment. No doubt about it.
Then the same liberals will cry and blame the pigs when they're arrested at the RNC in a "free speech zone" for specious reasons.
can't we just get rid of religious nutsos?
almond joys so full of nuts that they'll kill a clinic doctor.
"Besides cases of obvious misuse (i.e. multiple abortions used as birth control)"
Does this even happen in reality? Doesn't the cost of an abortion make this a very uneconomical form of birth control?
>Does this even happen in reality? Doesn't the cost of an abortion make this a very uneconomical form of birth control?
There are more women out there with multiple abortions than you may think...
And since many states subsidize abortion, which is anathema to me, it's affordable.