Should Man Go to Jail for Attack Billboard?

A New Mexico man said today he will fight to keep up a controversial billboard that suggested his ex-girlfriend had an abortion.
The billboard has a photo ofGreg Fultz holding the outline of a baby with a playground in the background. The large text beside the photo reads, "This Would Have Been a Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To NOT KILL Our Child!"
The sign is on White Sands Boulevard, the main thoroughfare in Alamogordo, N.M., and has been up since mid-May. Fultz's ex-girlfriend Nani Lawrence took him to court with a petition for domestic violence and charges of harassment and invasion of privacy.

ABC News for Full Story

First off, I am Pro-Choice.
Second, this guy is clearly just trying to get attention from his ex.
Third, I am more disturbed by the guy in the billboard then what it is saying.

That's my problem with this type of advertisement, it seems to just reinforce the values of the group putting it up in the first place, not anyone else. I mean really, if I was pregnant and was considering an abortion then walked past this sign, they would expect me to say, "You know they are right, maybe I should keep the baby after all!"
Like people who make decisions about abortion are really going to base it off what a billboard says.
But then again some of the Pro-Life groups may have trouble understanding that!

I think some shouldn't breed to begin with!

But no he shouldn't go to jail, just take it down.

reply to post by AnteBellum


What does "pro-choice" mean?

That is the key question. My last son was born at 26 weeks. He was less than 2lbs, and he is now a healthy 3 year old little monster, and I couldn't live without him.

Does pro-choice mean anyone should be able to abort any baby at any time? Because if that is the case, then some people will be murdering highly developed babies at 30-something weeks that could easily survive on their own!

It is ludicrous for women to assume that men have no emotional attachment to an unborn child. We grow up dreaming of becoming a father the same way women do. When we learn that a woman is pregnant, we run through the fairytale the same as women do. We imagine playing baseball, and learning to drive, and letting them crawl in bed with us during a thunderstorm. If a woman thinks it is entirely her choice to destroy a living being without any input from the father, it is entirely selfish and borderline criminal.

There are plenty of cases where people have been convicted for murdering an unborn child via DUI or assault or even accidents.

NOW, I will also argue the flipside for you,

There is no such thing as "Pro-Life" either. We can't legislate to the majority. Every case is unique. Maybe there is a health issue with the mother or the baby. Maybe the decision is made so early that the baby is not developed and could never survive on its own. Maybe there is an issue of rape or abuse or incest. We can't allow legislation to tie the hands of the doctors and consenting adults.

*********************************

So, I would never support an entirely "pro-life" agenda, but neither will I support a woman's selfish right to abort a full-term healthy baby without any input from the father.

If there is some solution in the gray middle, then my ears are open.

Seems like free speech to me.
I don't think the 2nd amendment should be violated just because you don't like what is being said.
That is a form of tyranny.

reply to post by Kaiju


The sign should come down. Putting the abortion issue aside I simply don't want to drive by a sign everyday that makes me feel like I'm getting sucked into the middle of a domestic fight. This is their problem and they should not be advertising to everyone else to see.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I wish I had an answer for you, but what you say is absolutely valid for both sides.

I feel the same way about both my kids and would never consider abortion unless raped, pregnancy was a danger to me, birth defect or should I even dare say, it was very early on and had personal reasons.

What sets me off also is the religious context people put on this subject. Religious people are considered pro-life by default, everyone else (atheists for example) are pro-choice. It shouldn't be so black and white when we are clearly talking about a 'grey' issue.

But as for late term abortions, I can't in my heart advocate such a thing.
But in the end I see myself as pro-choice because even if it is .01% in favor, it is still a choice. Pro-Lifer's have no choice they must keep it, but this is just semantics now.

reply to post by kro32


Some of those anti-abortion ads are disgusting. My wife is about 90% pro-life, and even she hates those billboards and ads. Putting graphic material up on display should be illegal. It amazes me that we can't show boobs, but we can show a bin full of aborted fetuses?

I can also see where this billboard borders on stalking. I don't really think it should stay up, and he probably won't be too disappointed as long as she got a chance to see it first.

Sometimes I put posts up on ATS, and I know they are going to have to come down, but I just hope they get to stay up long enough for the intended party to see them first, LOL! Same scenario!

reply to post by AnteBellum


This guy is obviously angry with his girlfriend.....and is expressing it in a big way! It seems to me she had the abortion without discussing it with him and then told him after the fact.

He should have a choice too. ...like maybe she could have carried it to full term and he could have raised it...or they could have had the baby adopted out to a good family.

I personally don't like abortion...but I also know that in some cases it may be necessary.

No, he should not go to jail... I think this should fall under free speech, freedom of the press.

I see anti abortion signs all the time. I see religious signs all the time... Should they all go to jail? No.

Originally posted by Kaiju
Seems like free speech to me.
I don't think the 2nd amendment should be violated just because you don't like what is being said.
That is a form of tyranny.

That is clearly the only correct answer. If he is willing to pay to post the sign, it is either his right to do so, or free speech is a myth. You simply cannot have it both ways. A person is either for free speech or against it and there is no gray area in between.

OP,
Do you support free speech, yes or no?

unbelievable what these people will do to force their morals and beliefs on other people. I for one think that a mother should be able to decide wether or not she wants to keep the baby.

Why would a man go to jail for expressing love of his dead child? Once the seed and the egg join a man is responsible for the welfare and protection of his child. I wonder how many woman would disagree with that, none that want welfare checks you can be sure of that. Either the child is his responsibility or it is not, you can't have it both ways. There are few things that should be enforced by people and one of those as stated in the constitution is the right to life. Each and every child has that right, born or unborn. If there is a question about the child being a human being, you can ask these simple questions. What is the DNA of? Is is the DNA of a frog, a rabbit, a horse, or a human? DNA of a human, check. What is life? A blade of grass is life, a tree is life, a one celled organism is life, is an unborn child life, you bet it is. By any definition I can think of, it is human life, and has the rights that come with. If a man is to be held responsible for the welfare of HIS child then he should have a say in protecting it's life, even if he is protecting that life from a mother without natural affection for that life.

reply to post by Blaine91555


Do you really have to ask that?
Of course I support free speech.

But I guess that is a moot point also given yelling 'fire' or 'bomb' in a public place is illegal.
Depends on the situation, another grey area!

And BTW to all, I don't think he should go to jail for this!
I don't think a crime has been committed on any level.

reply to post by Blaine91555

OP,
Do you support free speech, yes or no?

It isn't really that simple is it?

What if this billboard had been from an abusive ex, and it said, "Jane Doe, I know where you are, you can't hide from me." Or what if it said, "Jane Doe gave me Herpes." What if it said, "My ex-wife keeps $50,000 cash under the bed, and the alarm code is 6789, the dog's name is Fido, and he doesn't bite."

Like I posted before, why are nasty bins full of aborted fetuses ok, and regular boobs are not? I can explain boobs to my 4 year old, but I can't explain carnage in a dumpster!

I mean, I think the billboard in the OP is ok, it doesn't call her by name, and it is just an educational message, but what if it was more abusive and more personal?

I am all for free speech, but I am also all for protecting my family, and if someone used a billboard to threaten or slander my wife or mother or daughter, then jail would be the safest place for them.

It just isn't as simple as you would like it to be.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by AnteBellum

 

What does "pro-choice" mean?

That is the key question. My last son was born at 26 weeks. He was less than 2lbs, and he is now a healthy 3 year old little monster, and I couldn't live without him.

Does pro-choice mean anyone should be able to abort any baby at any time? Because if that is the case, then some people will be murdering highly developed babies at 30-something weeks that could easily survive on their own!

It is ludicrous for women to assume that men have no emotional attachment to an unborn child. We grow up dreaming of becoming a father the same way women do. When we learn that a woman is pregnant, we run through the fairytale the same as women do. We imagine playing baseball, and learning to drive, and letting them crawl in bed with us during a thunderstorm. If a woman thinks it is entirely her choice to destroy a living being without any input from the father, it is entirely selfish and borderline criminal.

There are plenty of cases where people have been convicted for murdering an unborn child via DUI or assault or even accidents.

NOW, I will also argue the flipside for you,

There is no such thing as "Pro-Life" either. We can't legislate to the majority. Every case is unique. Maybe there is a health issue with the mother or the baby. Maybe the decision is made so early that the baby is not developed and could never survive on its own. Maybe there is an issue of rape or abuse or incest. We can't allow legislation to tie the hands of the doctors and consenting adults.

*********************************

So, I would never support an entirely "pro-life" agenda, but neither will I support a woman's selfish right to abort a full-term healthy baby without any input from the father.

If there is some solution in the gray middle, then my ears are open.

I really don't need to comment because this guy just said it all. The problem is men think they know women and women think they know men. Besides certain traits and characteristics (that only a few out of the MANY have) we really don't KNOW $*!%