Front Page  »  

Hundreds gather at abortion rights rally in SLO

May 22, 2019

Several hundred people gathered in front of the San Luis Obispo Superior Court on Tuesday for a rally in response to the recent wave of anti-abortion legislation that has been passed in several states. [Cal Coast Times]

The local rally was organized by the SLO Women’s March as part of a national movement to “Stop the Bans.” Rallies and marches were held across the nation as part of a defense of abortion rights, legalized in the United States by the 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade.

Last week, Missouri lawmakers voted to make most abortions illegal after eight weeks of pregnancy, joining a tide of anti-abortion legislation in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Kentucky, and Ohio. The new laws are seen as an attempt by anti-abortion advocates to get the issue before the Supreme Court and overturn Roe v. Wade.

A group of right to life activists also participated in the SLO rally. While most of the protestors were peaceful, a pro-life participant called those who support abortion rights murderers while a pro-abortion attendee called a pro-life supporter sexist.


Loading...
Related:


31 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Tuesday, eh? So that’s how women that don’t work spend their time.


3

These poor burned-out sexists have been fed the most horrific lie out there — that’s it’s OK to murder a baby under the guise of “choice” — “it’s her body, thus her choice.”


Bull. It’s her baby’s body (and soul) and she has no right to extinguish it. We are seeing a correction now to the horrid 1970’s that gave us horrors like Roe/Wade. Fight as they will, abortion will become illegal once more in the US, thanks be to God.


I can already imagine future generations looking back on today with disbelief at the brutal carnage and evil practiced by so many here and now. Absolutely disgusting.


4

Are not 3 people involved with this? The woman, the baby and the sperm donor?


1

At the same time I would have to assume that al of these people are then 100% in support of the death penalty?


17

Folks,


It is a child, not a choice.


Those misguided people who argue that a woman somehow has a ‘right’ to kill the life within her womb are badly mistaken, and we as a society have a moral obligation to speak for the voiceless, for the unborn baby cannot advocate for their own life. Liberal progressives who fervently argue that government ought to be a voice to lift up the downtrodden seem to have lost this conviction when it comes to lifting up those unable to lift themselves. Why the hypocrisy?


The 1972 Supreme Court Roe v Wade decision is not grounded on sound judicial reasoning, and a new court ought to overturn the case, just as the Brown v. Topeka Board of Education case overturned Plessy v Ferguson. Consider this scenario: if a woman gave birth to a drug-addicted baby, the medical community would have a legal obligation to inform law enforcement, as the child has rights (including the right not to become drug addicted due to a bad mom) that have to be respected. Following this reasoning, why would a mom not be permitted to get their child addicted to drugs, but be allowed to kill that same child?


We have an obligation to end abortion NOW, and I am proud of Alabama.


Not one single child chose to die.


RIP: the 50 million babies killed since Roe v Wade.


3

If you don’t have to have an abortion don’t have sex. Choices have consequences.


18

The “choice” to kill another human being is not a Constitutional right.


20

Why weren’t there thousands of protesters. As a long time libertarian, I believe that what goes on between a woman and her doctor or significant other is completely her business. I read a book many years ago named Freakonmics. One of its principle thesis was that Roe v. Wade was partially responsible for the precipitous drop in crime some 18 years later—1991—after the passage. Totally believable. Let’s eliminate a bunch of kids who grow up unwanted and badly cared for.


1

“Why weren’t there thousands of protesters?”


They would’ve been there but they were aborted.


10

So, where’s you’re argument refuting my statement. Unfortunately, in the age of Trump, your comment, absolutely without any thought, is the norm.


I pray for Americans like you everyday.


-3

Actually, I did refute part of your statement if you cared to think about what I wrote.


Per your ‘Freakonomics’ argument-and I have read the book-the authors make the argument that the numbers of abortions performed in a country is inversely related to the crime rate of the next generation of said country. They give pretty strong data to back it up as well.


You know what? I still don’t think that is the right thing to do. I think the ‘fix’ is worse than the problem. What is interesting about all this is that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, made this EXACT same argument in the 1920’s and 1930’s regarding blacks.


So you can agree to this? I’m not black but I cannot stomach this. I’m not fine with the elimination of non-white offspring just so we have an easier time on this earth. I think using abortion as a quick fix instead of dealing with the real societal issues is the lazy and inhuman way out.


I don’t expect to convince you-just want you to know that there are other sides to this issue.


1

And the times they are a changin…..


2

Yeah, more and more people are beginning to understand the horrors of abortion. There’s really no way to put a positive spin on murdering babies.


7

Wouldn’t it be nice if the “No Abortion no matter what ” people and the “we want the right to kill the baby as it’s being born” people could meet somewhere in the middle?


1

You are setting up a strawman. Most pro-lifers I’ve met know there are times when an abortion is necessary. The actual “No Abortion no matter what” people are few and far between.


The infanticide people get standing ovations in the NY state congress and elsewhere.


1
1 2