Jilted ex-boyfriend puts up abortion billboard that sparks free speech, privacy court

[Deezy]

..ALAMOGORDO, N.M. - A U.S. man's decision to lash out with a billboard ad saying his ex-girlfriend had an abortion against his wishes has touched off a legal debate over free speech and privacy rights.

The sign on Alamogordo's main thoroughfare shows 35-year-old Greg Fultz holding the outline of an infant. The text reads, "This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!"

Fultz's ex-girlfriend has taken him to court for harassment and violation of privacy. A domestic court official has recommended the billboard be removed.

But Fultz's attorney argues the order violates his client's free speech rights.

"As distasteful and offensive as the sign may be to some, for over 200 years in this country the First Amendment protects distasteful and offensive speech," Todd Holmes said.

The woman's friends say she had a miscarriage, not an abortion, according to a report in the Albuquerque Journal.

Holmes disputes that, saying his case is based on the accuracy of his client's statement.

"My argument is: What Fultz said is the truth," Holmes said.

The woman's lawyer said she had not discussed the pregnancy with her client. But for Ellen Jessen, whether her client had a miscarriage or an abortion is not the point. The central issue is her client's privacy and the fact that the billboard has caused severe emotional distress, Jessen said.

"Her private life is not a matter of public interest," she told the Alamogordo Daily News.

Jessen says her client's ex-boyfriend has crossed the line.

"Nobody is stopping him from talking about father's rights. ... but a person can't invade someone's private life."

For his part, Holmes said that during a domestic court hearing last week he pointed to the U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this year concerning the Westboro Baptist Church, which is known for demonstration signs and slogans that include anti-gay slurs.

"Very unpopular offensive speech," he told the Alamogordo Daily News. "The Supreme Court, in an 8 to 1 decision, said that is protected speech."

Holmes says he is going to fight the order to remove the billboard through a District Court appeal.
...

Although it would appear to be a dick move on the guys part. It would also be known that the guy didn't release personal information about his ex either. If that was the case, that would be a totally different topic.

But I think it's remarkable that anyone is even having this conversation in the 21st century. 'Free speech' is a precaution against government action, not a license to be irresponsible. And 'Free Speech' is not the same as 'unlimited speech' even in America. There are laws restricting speech that are threats for example to government officials. There are laws restricting speech which are slanderous. Or libelous. Abortion is a personal medical procedure and everyone is entitled to control that information and how its used. If anything, if the guy did expose her confidential medical history without her consent. That would be an eggregious violation of her privacy, which would make this topic totally different. One thing is for sure, this guy is an asshole and also an abuser of those rights. Him and people like him need mental help.

Wearing a condom that costs a few bucks can save alot of litigation.

Discuss...

 

[Troy]

"As distasteful and offensive as the sign may be to some, for over 200 years in this country the First Amendment protects distasteful and offensive speech," Todd Holmes said.

This is where this lawyer shows he doesn't fully understand the law. The First Amendment does not protect distasteful and offensive speech like you said deezy it means that you are allowed to comment about the government freely without fear of persecution. You can't say anything you want about anyone and something like this is private and therefore should never be put out publicly like he did especially when it is none of his business.

It is down to what the female wants to do and has nothing to do with what the male wants. That is the way it works so if she did have an abortion that is her decision and she can do that even if he wanted the baby.

Like you said, just wrap it up to prevent things like this happening.

 

[Lady Redfield]

Free speech is non-existent, no matter what the government says. You have to watch what you say or do because some random asshole is going to be offended by it and cry a river and you'll end up like this guy, battling the courts.

 

[John McHenry]

Hmm but buy allowing his face to be shown you could extrapolate from there her identity and that's where it gets messy I think.

 

[Deezy]

Free speech is non-existent, no matter what the government says. You have to watch what you say or do because some random asshole is going to be offended by it and cry a river and you'll end up like this guy, battling the courts.

Libel or slander is the only way people end up in courts. If someone gets offended that you used a word they didn't like. It's nothing to go to court over.

But by saying that, I wouldn't be surprised if it ever goes to that. Political Correctness seems to be winning over common sense and basic logic.