Front Page  »  

Abortion rights group vandalizes pregnancy support center in Paso Robles

June 26, 2022

By KAREN VELIE

Supporters of a pro-abortion group called Jane’s Revenge allegedly vandalized a pregnancy support center in Paso Robles on Saturday morning, apparently following up on a threat.

In response to a leaked Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v Wade, the pro-abortion group emerged onto the online landscape in May. Jane’s Revenge urged its supporters to riot if the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade, which occurred on Friday.

“If abortions aren’t safe, you’re not either,” the group threatened in May. “We need to express this madness fully and with ferocity. We need to quit containing ourselves.”

Jane’s Revenge allegedly sent a threat to Tree of Life Pregnancy Support Center, which runs clinics in Paso Robles, Atascadero and San Luis Obispo. The pro-life centers provide no-cost pregnancy testing, ultrasounds and information on abortions and adoptions.

If a pregnant woman decides to keep her child, the group provides maternity clothes, baby clothes and medical referrals at no cost.

On Saturday morning, vandals broke windows and spray painted anarchist symbols and “JR” for Jane’s Revenge at the Paso Robles center.

Paso Robles police are reviewing surveillance tapes from businesses in the Highlands Shopping Center in the felony vandalism case, which could also be prosecuted as a hate crime.


Loading...
Related:


26 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The insane left terrorist apparently aren’t pro choice, like the choice not to terminate your pregnancy. Maybe they are upset their mothers were pro life while carrying them.


26

You can always tell who is losing an argument by who first becomes violent….

The polls taken of Hispanic immigrants from central and south America surprisingly show they heavily favor the pro life agenda… Thanks for boosting our numbers Joe….


21

As far as “first” goes, I’m pretty sure abortion clinics have been vandalized and bombed for far longer by pro lifers.


-10

I think that people on both sides of this issue should step back and take a breath!!!

Roe vs Wade was a terrible decision, not because I’m against legal abortion, but because it was a activist decision that should of been legislated from the beginning. Ever since that decision was made, every Supreme Court nominee has been judged by where he stood on that one issue:(

Hopefully abortion will be discussed and legislated on a national level and Supreme Court nominee’s will judged on their legal acumen again:)


32

Bold Guy, I agree completely!


Unfortunately, as in with the last appointment, we had a Supreme Court justice candidate who could not respond intelligently about something so basic as the Dred Scott decision. Imagine, a legal scholar, a jurist, an attorney or law professor, who can’t speak about the Dred Scott decision? Or consider her answer regarding the questions about the definition of a woman? She could’ve just said, “well the traditional definition is….” But instead we got the silly answer about I’m not a biologist or something.


The purpose of the Supreme Court is to interpret the constitution, not make policy, not make law. It is to determine whether or not laws passed by Congress meet constitutional muster and if they don’t meet that threshold they need to be over turned. (Even R.B. Ginsburg had issues with the Roe in terms of how it was decided, and its constitutional premise.)


Unfortunately, we have a lot of people in this country who don’t understand basic civics and view the US Constitution with antipathy or worse yet, want to throw it out and start over. I think we need to bring back basic civics into the public school curriculum.


5

Someone in the Paso Robles area with political view this strong is the kind of person who cannot help but be very vocal in their personal life and on social media on this issue. If anyone you know is fuming mad and constantly horrified by the SC decision, they might be this person.


33

The ruling was quite clear, the power to regulate abortion lies with the states, not the feds per the 10th amendment. Republicans and Democrats will both get smacked down if they try anything at the federal level. And vandalizing a pro pregnancy center is just pathetic on so many levels. Last time I checked they don’t waylay women and duct tape them to ultrasound machines. Get a grip, please.


24

This is crazy. Abortion law in California has not changed. This a protest without reason, cause or purpose. Nothing changed in California so why the rage?


86

Yep, it hasn’t changed.


UNTIL a majority Republican House and Senate, which seems quite possible next Jan., mandates a 15-week ban (many women do not realize they are pregnant at 15 weeks—most women don’t notice until 20) by eliminating the filibuster in the Senate. Contraception will be next. Then gay marriage.


Notice that Justice Thomas mentions those rights being overturned in his opinion, but not interracial marriage—go figure. A hypocrite of the first degree.


-68

Hey Jane’s Revenge, get a clue. The Roe decision has no effect in Calif. You can still abort your baby up to birth (and maybe even beyond, depending on changes that might be voted in by the super majority in Sacramento)


43

As President Biden said on Friday, there should be ZERO violence from the pro-choice factions in this nation. Unfortunate that these people decided to go to this extreme, rather than join the Democratic Party and make sure we elect officials who care about the right to privacy.


It looks like the Tree of Life was a legitimate option for some women. It should not have been targeted.


Nevertheless, it has always struck me as ironic that the right has, since Reagan, made abortion their banner, while at the same time voting down any attempt by the federal government to provide comprehensive health care to ALL of the nation’s citizens as well as consistently voting down increases in federal spending for education.


In most of the states where abortion has now been instantaneously banned, the state government would not even allow for the increase in Medicaid which was guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. These states also tend to lag behind other states in spending on education.


In fact, the states with the most uninsured citizens will be first to ban abortion, including Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, etc.


-60

1. Abortion is not a Constitutional right. Roe was a stretch as a right to privacy. So why don’t liberals support the right for a person to decide with their doctor in privacy not to get the COVID vaccine? Hypocritical.


2. Abortion is not a healthcare decision like getting heart surgery. It is the ending of another life, an innocent life.


3. Get over it.


23

Wow Mr. Trask, you have acquired an impressive amount of “down” votes, rivaling some of my own posts! And all for simply stating the truth. By the same people who enjoy calling “liberals” “snowflakes” when they spew insults at them and are told to show respect.


Were the court not currently loaded with partisan hacks (15 “conservative” appointments to 5 liberal appointments) which was orchestrated by a corrupt right-wing congress that refused to do its duty during liberal administrations, this “decision” would never have happened. It is drenched in fake religious doctrine, a “respect for life” which you so aptly point out, they do not have. Those who delivered this edict lied under oath during their confirmation. They were appointed by a President who is under heavy scrutiny and will surely be found guilty of attempting to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. This situation completely undermines the validity of and confidence in our Supreme Court.


I disagree with the people responsible for defacing the “pro-birth” clinic, especially given that California carefully protects the rights of women in regard to reproductive rights and related health care, but I must also point out that the article calling those who committed this act to be “pro-abortion” does not make them so. Anymore that the so-called “pro-life” people are actually pro – life, given that they show (as per your comment) that they care little to nothing about what happens to a child once it is born.


This is a religious issue, being interfered with by a government body. Catholics will not baptize or bury a premature child because they say it was not actually alive. And yet, “life begins at conception” is also a conflicting doctrine. Not the people who should be making our reproductive decisions. Period. This new “decision” is indirect religious conflict with the Jewish faith. Jews believe life begins at the first breath and the rights of the mother come first. Before that, it is a part of the woman’s body.


To attempt to control processes within a person’s body is the height of “government overreach” by the very people who are constantly whining about and lately radically demonstrating over perceived government overreach. They are about 30% of the population. Way to go to cause trouble with an issue that is none of their business. Which may be the whole point.


-21

Is this made up? Has everyone officially lost their mind?


59
1 2