There is an interesting free speech case out of Otero County, New Mexico. Hearing commissioner Darrell Brantley of the Otero County Domestic Violence Court has recommended an order of protection for Nani Lawrence against Greg A. Fultz after Fultz paid for a pro-life billboard criticizing the abortion of their alleged child. Brantley also wants the billboard taken down as a violation of Lawrence’s right of privacy.
It now goes to Twelfth Judicial District Judge James W. Counts, who is expected who is expected to sign the order of protection and an order the removal of the billboard.
The billboard shows Fultz, 35, holding what appears to the outline of a baby in his arms with the statement, “This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!” Notably, the billboard does not name Nani Lawrence. However, in a rather transparent reference, Fultz displays the endorsement of an organization he created called National Association of Needed Information. That’s right N.A.N.I.
Fultz later removed the endorsement of N.A.N.I. from the billboard.
Lawrence’s attorney Ellen Jessen said the order of protection was recommended under the Family Violence Protection Act.
The issue was closer when N.A.N.I. appeared on the sign, but it becomes a serious question of free speech if it is a statement from a father opposed to the abortion of the child. This is personal information for both the father and mother. Presumably, either part has a right to discuss his or her own experience with abortion. If true, it is not defamation. The right to privacy includes the tort of intrusion against seclusion and the public disclosure of embarrassing private facts.
The intrusion tort doesn’t fit because this is the disclosure of a fact disclosed to the father. The public disclosure tort runs into the same problem as a disclosed fact without any agreement to keep the information confidential. More importantly, this is a claimed injury or harm to the father coupled with a strong philosophical or religious view that he wishes to discuss publicly. Just as the original Jane Doe has discussed her abortion (and later opposition to abortion), a father should have the same right to publicly discuss his own experience. His use of the name was unnecessary and problematic. However, I am not sure that he could not reveal the name as long as he is speaking truthfully under the common law. The question is the obligation of a former boyfriend to keep the fact of the abortion secret.
There is also the question of balancing the remedy against the right now that the woman’s name is public. Does this mean that Fultz cannot discuss his views and alleged harm in public for the rest of time?
What do you think?
Source: Alamogordo News as first seen on Reddit.
Jonathan Turley
“However, we still should not act as if the man’s feelings do not matter at all. It’s easy to scream “pro-choice” but more difficult to live through it, especially when one party (the man) wanted the child more than anything.”
That’s because the Man’s feelings only matter as much as any other person’s feelings should be considered before someone under goes a medical procedure.
Look, it’s not hard. Replace “abortion” with any medical procedure of your choice. Would you still say “we have to consider how her husband\lover\one night stand\etc. feels”? It doesn’t legally matter if what my wife wants most in the world is for me to live because I had a malignant tumor removed, if I decide against the surgery, they don’t operate, if I decide for it, they do. I might be selfish, I might be an idiot, but it’s still my right to decide to completely ignore her wishes. Why? Because it’s still my body.
@Someonewithsense, my recommendation in this and in all other cases is to follow the law, and respect the right of women to make their own medical decisions.
@Anon, men can cry about it all they want, but all that is necessary is sperm. It is a choice to even implant the damned stuff, much less stick around for even 4.7 seconds afterward. Such flippancy is no receptacle for rights. If a father stays, this is a choice he makes freely.
Just as it remains a legal choice tor women to obtain an abortion if she so chooses. You are free to pass judgement on her and call her out if she does it for “the wrong reasons” or “it’s agin gaad’s plan” or whatever line of flawed reasoning you wish to employ. And the choice remains legally hers, as well as a violation of her privacy to disclose it against her will.
These are not strictly feminist notions. They are the facts of life. It’s why child support laws are likely doomed. The logic of them will be less sustainable in the future where marriage is likely to be minority status. In a world hurtling toward more people than it can handle, the whole notion of automatic childbirth must be reexamined. We have to be able to have the conversation.
Just checking to see how new format works.
…..
how about a billboard next to this one with the names and addresses of everyone owing back child support.
Actually, this case should be about libel. She didn’t have an abortion; she miscarried. She got pregnant, broke up with him, he harassed and stalked her, she miscarried, then he went into full on crazy mode including tweeting death threats. This is just his latest stunt. Also of note is the fact that the order to take down the billboard comes from a domestic violence court judge.
Hate speech is allowed at funerals.
Dancing is not allowed at the Jefferson Memorial.
Whistleblowers are encouraged to speak out.
Partners in a pregnancy decried for speaking of their experiences IFF they are not pro-abortion.
Accused rapists are named.
Alleged rape victims are not named.
Men and any rights they may have are rotely, robotically demeaned instead being acknowledged and discussed and compromises sought. We do this to protect, patronize, condescend to feminism and their unproven conspiracy theories of a patriarchal society wide hatred of all things female.
I liked it better when, as a kid, we defended even the rights of nazis, but this is one more demonstration that feminists consider men to be worse than nazis and deserving of less protection than nazis.
Lawyers. Gotta love them, because they don’t have the decency or common sense to kill themselves.
I’ll contribute also, but she really doesn’t deserve to be honored in that way. Planned Parenthood, unlike her and her cohorts, is an honorable organization that does some good in the world.
“The main reason leftist women have abortions is because they don’t believe science when it clearly teaches that: SEX LEADS TO BABIES and if you don’t want babies then get fixed or don’t have sex because protection can fail. (That instead of killing it, of course.)”
The highest rates of out of wedlock white births exist in tootie’s
beloved South, where they talk Christian and don’t use birth control. Yet hypocrites like her continue to berate the left, while screwing their brains out, without protection.
James – I get where you’re coming from. As a follow up, I don’t have an answer for this. True, just because the man wants the baby the women should not be compelled to give birth and raise the child. If a women isn’t interested in raising a child, forcing her to do so will probably prove detrimental to the kids upbringing ; she’ll likely neglect and resent him/her. However, we still should not act as if the man’s feelings do not matter at all. It’s easy to scream “pro-choice” but more difficult to live through it, especially when one party (the man) wanted the child more than anything.
People are too funny! Less than 1% of abortions are due to rape or incest. Look it up. And we’ll see how the courts rule. I disagree with many of these postings. He didn’t mention her name, nor did he post her picture. He posted a picture of himself. He probably had several ex-girlfriends, so the majority had no clue who he was talking about until she came forward – which was stupid on her part if what she wanted was privacy.
So what if blood tests prove it was his child? No….he has no rights at all if you have your way. His testicles have nothing to do with this, other than the fact that they helped create this child (supposedly). Women have the right to an abortion. Bravo, they won that debate. What else do you want? I guess the father’s job is just to pay child support. That is IF SHE decides to let the child live. Otherwise, he can just drink his whiskey and cry every night about the child he’ll never know. You belittle the men by your statements. Their just sperm donors, I guess.
This is about privacy, but where does it end? Can he make a website about it, post a blog? Or would that be wrong too? So, really, what can he do? He has no legal recourse, as we all know. The woman decides when and if the child is terminated. All the man can do is wait and pray.
Tootie
1, June 7, 2011 at 1:10 pm
[snip]
The main reason leftist women have abortions is because they don’t believe science when it clearly teaches that: SEX LEADS TO BABIES and if you don’t want babies then get fixed or don’t have sex because protection can fail. (That instead of killing it, of course.)
———————–
Riiiight. Remember everyone: “The “left” in the US doesn’t know/understand science.” (Just like the “left” in the US doesn’t know US history, like how Paul Revere rang bells to warn the British not to take our guns.)
Us “leftists” sure are screwed up and silly with our un-scientific “anthropogenic global warming” and “evolutionism.”
Real Americans know, “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!”
They should get a room.
Will also contribute in honor of
tootie
well——-does she have a fund started for her own billboard? I would like to contribute if she says that termination was necessary as she discovered, after the fact, that the father was irreversibly stupid and a positive intellectual health risk to her child.
free speech is one thing but to slander another person via public humiliation is next to a public execution and is without a doubt and no contest character assassination in the first degree, duh… stupid redneck
“terminates THEIR child (yes, it was both of theirs)”
Really.
And you know this how?
Unless your true identity is the woman is this case or you are actually Someonewithpsychicpowers, you don’t.
W\hat Frank said. Gave $25 in honor of Tootie today.
@Somoneonewithsense, you say, “She wanted an abortion but wanted it kept quiet.” That is the definition of privacy. It not free for even the father to violate. That is the whole point of this issue: the right of mothers to keep their medical decisions private. If I thought my husband would act as this creep did, you can bet I would avail myself of every scrap of privacy under the law.
Men cannot compel women to bear children.
You go on to say, “I guess his only recourse is to drown his sorrows in a bottle of liquor.” He has many other legal avenues. He also has the choice recognize the legal rights of the mother. Yours is the straw-man, cop-out argument because it always – ALWAYS – ends with the rights of women being trampled because men feel their testicles entitle them to ownership of flesh.
Not so, and never will be. Deal.
Every time Nuutie up there posts from here on I am sending $5 to Planned Parenthood. So we can no longer call it an ignorant, useless waste of carbon atoms; it has become a fund raising tool for Planned Parenthood.
Thousands of poor women will receive medical care they cannot afford on their own because of Nuutie. I urge you all to step up and do the same. I am no longer angry at the ignorant sack of crap that posts here as ‘tootie’ because now it is doing good in spite of itself.
Nuutie – post your address so I can have PP send you tank you cards so you know I am keeping my word.