WE Blog

Posting these patients pictures on the internet is wrong, but I’m sure I will see many posts supporting or condoning it, the crowd that believes “the ends justify the means”.

To say freedom of the press, only if proven as an establishment of the press.
To say freedom of expression, only if proven as artistry.

JR. http://www.maggotpunks.com/antis/fff.htm

Well I read a surprising story the other day.

Maybe somebody can get a link.

It seems that the majority of women choosing not to carry a pregnancy to term do so for economic reasons. Indeed, they have already had children and choose not to have more in the interest of the children they already have.

Now these folks with time on their hands to harass women seeking a perfectly legal medical procedure? Maybe they should devote their energies and time to actually doing things to HELP such women.

But on balance they won’t. They are not really pro life at all. They just have a need to inflict their own views on others.

JR – I think it was in Sunday’s paper – will look a bit.

TDT,
Actually, it’s legal to take pictures of anyone in public. Model releases are required for use of a person’t image for commercial purposes. It might be interesting to explore in court whether OR is using those pictures as part of their fund raising efforts and therefore commercially. OR has always seemed to me to be a fundraising enterprise that does as little as it can get away with and still solicit donations. I rarely saw more than half a dozen OR screamers at the clinics, and Troy showed up for about 10min. a day and stayed in his SUV most of that.

Okay Jed, now here is a fine point question. Even if they are on private property, a picture can be taken of them and used non-commercially?

On second thought I think it was Saturday’s Eagle. Not sure.

TDT,
For journalistic purposes, anyone or anything that’s visible from a public place is fair game. When the picture is sold for commercial purposes, including fund raising, it must be accompanied by releases. Whether propaganda is commercial or not is stickier ground, and when it constitutes a terroristic threat, as the pictures OR publishes may, it can lead to serious jail time!

There are some states as I recall that recognize a tort in the form of “invasion of privacy” which might apply to the referenced taking of pictures and posting of the same. Kansas is among the majority of jurisdictions that does not recognize such tort. Generally, however, if a person is “in public”, another person may take a picture, which becomes the property of the one taking it, which, in the absence of statutory or decisional law, may be used for any lawful purpose the owner desires, which would include fund raising.

Vaugn,
A person still has some rights to his own image which would include allowing it to be used for commercial purposes. As a general rule in the industry, a recognizable image (a face larger than 1/8th” in final reproduction) must be accompanied by a signed release form. Even when used for fund raising by a non-profit organization (which I believe OR is not) it may still be considered a commercial use.

One of the local hate groups MTTU.com used to put patient’s photos online. They got taken to court and lost. The main reason being that the patient’s weren’t public figures and weren’t drawing attention to themselves and the pictures were meant to harass the people and violated their Constitutional right to privacy as guaranteed under Roe v. Wade. Since the antis don’t want privacy rights it’s okay if they have their pictures put up. Then again, they are protesting so they want the attention.

http://www.maggotpunks.com Yeah, that is a good website.

Right Angle, the answer is no.

OR has been taking pictures of patients, their vehicles and their license plates since the summer of mercy in 1991. I have pics to prove it.
91 was a very intense year to be a clinic escort.

“Yes, the number of abortions has dropped dramatically, but the number of births has also dropped.”

I heard a story on television last week (I think it was on the channel 10 news) that our country was having a baby boom at this time. Don’t know if it was accurate or not.

Damn. I can’t find the link, but I read earlier today about the impact of RU-492, which is gaining as a medical abortificant and replacing the surgical procedure.

Something like 20% of of abortions in Europe are due to medically-induced miscarriages (which take place before the 9th week of pregnancy), thanks to the drug protocol. And the percentages are growing.

There was an extended piece on NPR this morning on how, because they’ve run out of issues, the Georgia “Right to Life” people are breaking from the national organization in an attempt to intrude more into the lives and rights of pregnant women. Their latest cause is the “Life Begins at Conception” amendment. The logical conclusion of such a law would immediately criminalize any woman who uses birth control or suffers from a tubal pregnancy; it would charge her or her physician with murder of a “life.”

Georgia Right to Life, who’ve been dealing with (ya know) “Georgians” are like the poor folks at the March of Dimes who first learned about Jonas Salk. Their cause and money-making institution is threatened because they’ve achieved everything possible and the people of America have found reproductive rights that will supercede the so-called “right to lifers’” political agenda.

But, hell. It’s Georgia. They might pull it off.

Nobody ever accused Georgians of being all that bright.

I’ve known women who’ve considered abortion, some of whom got abortions. I’ve talked with them before, during, and after the procedure. For any so-called “right-to-lifer” to think it’s not a deeply considered personal decision is demeaning to all women.

It is a choice. Sometimes it is a life-or-death decision.

Every time time you religious fanatics portray my friends, my sisters, my mother, and my daughters as “Baby Killers!” you lose your argument.

Not all of them have chosen abortion. But all should have the choice.

Lets get a few facts straight here:

Operation Resuce is planning on taking photos of those women who they think are in their late stages of pregnancy.

“Newman, and Cheryl Sullinger, also of Operation Rescue, have been taking pictures of some of the women, who they think look like they’re in their late stages of pregnancy, entering Tiller’s clinic.”

http://www.kansas.com/news/story/288286.html

You might not agree with what they are doing, but there is nothing technically wrong with it.

I don’t have all the facts, but it appears as if they are taking the photos for proof of what may be illegal abortions.

On Operation Rescues website they talk about how they have been investigating the practices of Tiller to find out if he is breaking the law in providing late term abortions.

As far as I can tell, they are not doing this to simply put the pictures of the women on the internet to embarrass them or intimidate them.

They are doing this as part of an ongoing investigation to show that Tiller is breaking the law.

If you go to their website, they have only 13 womens photos posted. They are posted under a link outlining the evidence they have collected which they believe shows that Tiller is breaking the law.

The pictures are at the very bottom of the page.

They are being used as proof, not as a tactic of intimidation.

You couldn’t even tell who the women were.

WS Clark,

I have never said that all abortions should be illegal.

My points about Operation Rescue were pertaining to what they were doing with these photographs which obviously several people here including Rhonda didn’t take the time to understand or find out.

“I have never said that all abortions should be illegal.”

Yes you did. I would have to spend some time in the boneyard, but you said “that is why we want to stop all abortions.”

And how do you justify the invasion of privacy that OR is guilty of? How can you tell how many weeks pregnant a woman is by a photograph with a telephoto lens?

There is no other reason to take such photos unless it is for intimidation and harassment.

Hi parkay

My kid has no health care. Can ya’ help?

JR,

Why don’t you get your kid health care?

JR,

To show to the world what Operation Rescue has found in the way of proof that Tiller is breaking the law.

JR,

You could probably get your kid insurance for a couple of hundred dollars a month.

That would be working one weekend a month as a waiter at a restaurant or doing some labor work somewhere in your free time.

Do you not care enough for your son to get him health care or do you simply expect everyone else to for you?

JR,

Here, get a quote and tell me how much a month it would cost you to insure your son:

http://www.usinsuranceonline.com/usio/index.php?wsc=1&adv=1&pt=101&kw=%5BBlue+Cross+Blue+Shield+Kansas%5D&tk=Z29vZ2xlLHVzaW9faGVhbHRoXzEsS2Fuc2FzLEJsdWUgQ3Jvc3MgQmx1ZSBTaGllbGQgS2Fuc2FzLFtCbHVlIENyb3NzIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIEthbnNhc10%3D&prod=Free+Blue+Cross+Blue+Shield+Kansas+Quotes

“However, all you have to do is look at their context and it is rather easy to see that they are being used soley for proof in Operation Rescue ongoing investigation into Tillers clinic.”

EVEN a Doctor cannot tell how many weeks a woman is pregnant by looking at photos taken with a telephoto lens from across a parking lot.

Some women look six months pregnant in the first trimester, some do not even look pregnant at six months.

And taking a photo of a woman walking INTO a clinic is not proof that an illegal abortion took place.

That type of evidence wouldn’t make it past the first “OBJECTION” from the defense.

WS Clark,

I didn’t claim that it was solid proof of anything.

It, compiled with the other proof that operation Rescue has put together, is what they felt to be enough to call for an investigation into Tiller’s clinic.

I’ll check it out Nathan. For what it is worth.

But let’s nail you down.

Why put the photos online?

“I didn’t claim that it was solid proof of anything.”

So why take and publish photographs of innocent women? For all you know, they may have been at the clinic for other reasons, but that is academic – you can’t tell the extent of a woman’s pregnancy from a long range photo.

For that matter – when you’re hanging out at the Mall next time, notice that there are women that look pregnant – some are and some are not – it is not a good question to ask if you value your teeth.

Those photos have NO value as evidence in any regard.

So why take them and publish them?

Unless it is just to harass?

WS Clark,

There seems to be some disconect here.

Operation Resuce believes that those photos are evidence of Tiller performing ILLEGAL aobrtions compiled with other evidence they have.

You might not agree with them, but there motives are rather clear.

They are not posting the photos to harrass or intimidate anyone other than Tiller, who they believe to be performing ILLEGAL abortions.

Damn, Nathan, if you went to the Mall you would also see a bunch of MEN that looked about ten months pregnant!

WS Clark,

The women were photographed walking into an abortion clinic.

It is rather silly to try and say that women that big could just be your ordinary fat person walking around the mall.

Have you looked at the photos or the website?

“It is rather silly to try and say that women that big could just be your ordinary fat person walking around the mall.”

Nonsense. There have been women that have given birth that DIDN’T EVEN KNOW THAT THEY WERE PREGNANT!

There are women that look like they are near term in the first trimester.

All women are different, no pregnancy is the same, even with the same woman, and it is impossible to tell the extent of the pregnancy by just looking at a photo of a woman walking into a building.

The photos prove NOTHING. They have no value as evidence, therefore they are just attempts at harassment.

WAYYY upthread Nathan, I cited that the majority of women seeking abortions do so for economic reasons.

Do look into that.

Think of it. Women who have already been through the whole process from conception to parenthood and they see a society that they cannot afford to bring another life into. A society that does not support them and that new life.

I’m pro life Nathan. And you?

WS Clark,

Curious…

How can you judge photos which you have yet to look at?

Yes, it is possible for a woman to look large and not be past the 22 weeks.

Yes, not all women are going to look the same in their pregnancy.

HOWEVER, there are women who do on average look a certain size at certain points in their pregnancy.

Women who are mothers do it all the time. They look at another woman who is pregnant and say: : you must be X many weeks along”

It is REASONABLE to say that those women are indeed in the latter term of their pregnancy and that the photos can lead one to believe that ILLEGAL abortions are being performed.

At least they could be evidence enough to further investigate.

And with that, I am outta here………..

Actually Nathan the third circuit court ruled such photos were an invasion of the patient’s medical privacy so it is illegal.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2002/05/antiabortion.html

http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/187/context/archive

http://seclists.org/politech/2001/Aug/0085.html

Yeah, once I went to the ER with my ex husband, and the NURSE asked me how far along I was. I told her I wasn’t pregnant.

“”"There are some states as I recall that recognize a tort in the form of “invasion of privacy” which might apply to the referenced taking of pictures and posting of the same. Kansas is among the majority of jurisdictions that does not recognize such tort. Generally, however, if a person is “in public”, another person may take a picture, which becomes the property of the one taking it, which, in the absence of statutory or decisional law, may be used for any lawful purpose the owner desires, which would include fund raising.”"”

Even if they did you would have to find that the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy which would be hard to prove on a public street. It would make an intersting case to see if the Supreme Court of a state or the USA might carve out an exception for people going and coming from a medical clinic but I doubt it. There have been many cases about this and none I know of that the plaintiff won. The TV show Cheaters has been sued several times and has not lost a case on appeal yet and they are much more intrusive than the religious nutcases are.

Here are the qualification guidelines for Kansas Health Wave, which is a very good program.

http://www.kansashealthwave.org/hwqual.asp

outlander – what was violent about “Kev” noting that one of the OR staljers is a known terrorist?

I don’t see how taking pictures of women entering the clinic is anything BUT harrassment. Abortion is legal through the 9th month of pregnancy in certain circumstances, so the gestation of the women entering the clinic is a moot point. I’m pro-life, but those who would stoop to this sort of thing are the ones who drive those on the fence regarding the issue in the opposite direction.
The only effective way to decrease abortions is with education, pregnancy prevention, and workable alternatives to abortion. Trying to intimidate women into not terminating their pregnancies has never worked. As long as there are unwanted pregnancies, there will be abortion..legal or not. Pro-lifers should focus more on prevention and helping those with unplanned pregnancies find viable options. Abortion isn’t going to go away just because many pro-lifers would like it to.

Glad you can interpret Kev’s words as peaceful, Ben. That’s quite a trick.

I agree with Mary that photos of patients should not be taken. It’s stupid and leads to emotions flying which leads to ignorant comments like Kev’s regarding harm to patients, which is a complete falsehood. And that leads to otherwise reasonable people like Ben supporting talk of violence against protesters. And so it goes…

Once again, for those of you who can’t read, are unable to read, or are obviously just too lazy to do any research:

Operation Rescue was not posting the photos to intimidate the women.

The 13 pictures they posted are what they consider to be a small part of their evidence against Tiller in their ongoing investigation to show that Tiller is breaking the law.

You do care about the law don’t you?

I do indeed care about the law.

The law says that a woman has a right to choose. You and yours would like to change that law Nathan.

Now you don’t want any additional social spending to HELP these women. But you’ll eagerly FORCE them to deliver a baby.

Then you turn your back on the woman and the baby.

outlander – so you support bombings? And think it is violent to try to prevent them? I agree that such action might be violent; however when dealing with a terrorist bomber just what choices does a person have?

Nathan – “Operation Rescue was not posting the photos to intimidate the women”

Intimidation is in the eye of the beholder. I wonder if those woment agree with you.

As I recall you were one of those who supported the destruction of the tapes showing ‘aggressive interrogation’ by CIA to protect the identity of the interrigators. Why? Shouldn’t THEIR pictures be published? After all, that won’t intimidate them in any way! And, the pictures might show alleged violations of law. Post those pictures so we can see them and judge for ourselves.

How much social spending JR? What’s enough? Who judges? You? Is more automatically more fair?

See the link above to Health Wave. Good program. Takes care of low income folks with children. Taxpayers fund that you know. Welfare programs. Taxpayers fund that too. We fund a lot of social programs. Who are you to say it isn’t enough?

So, how much more do you want from those of us who pay taxes?

Ben: Sorry, but you are just being stupid.

I guess you would have to ask the women in question outlander. I’ve never been in the position of having to make such a deeply personal choice.

As I have said, I was truly surprised to learn that the majority of abortions are for women who already have kids. That is surprising and so very sad as it speaks to our country and how we care for our fellow man/woman/child.

I do not advocate violence against innocent protesters. However, I cannot see why you support convicted terrorists.

“One of the things that does bother us is the presence of Cheryl Sullinger, a comvicted clinic bomber and terrorist, and she’s the one taking the pictures. Some of your more radical friends want to go the next step and take the bombing and shooting to the patients as well as the clinic staff. Is she planning on using such pictures to plan such attacks?”

Perhaps if someone like that were not involved the idea of “innocent protesters” might make sense.

Given the fact that there are terrorist bombers out there associated with OR I would think that it would be rather intimidating to be stalked by one of them.

Again I ask – why was the publishing of the CIA interrogators’ picture opposed? After all, they have nothing to fear from terrorists do they?

Perhaps some of the Operation Rescue folks should try reading Mary Caruso’s post.

Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

If half of the effort of the virulent anti-choice folks were to be put into the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, then maybe the above statement could become a reality.

And thank you, Mary, for your well reasoned comments.

WSC – agreed. Mary made excellent points. I’m sure Catholic Charities’ Gerard House and other similar entities could use their support.

Considering OR and other groups record of violence, Army of God for example I would think that Kev would be well within his right to be considered about his family in his a example, and as far violence goes I could list numerous examples from the so called pro-life side finding examples of violence from the other side a bit harder.

By your logic Tom, all pro-life people would be supporting terrorists because of one person they don’t even know, who also happens to be pro-life.

That the best you can do?

IF operation rescue want to be taken serious as a pro life group then they shouldn’t employ terrorists, if OR are cool with their leadership and other members having terrorism ties then yes I would say their supporters of terrorism, as most prolife people aren’t in OR no I wouldn’t call all prolife people terrorists and many would and do denounce violence and are peaceful people.

“Those of you that have the stomach to look at the “maggot punks” website can see what kind of people they are.” -Outlander

I’ve asked before on this forum what lies were being presented but none have been given to me.

However it appears my response to Nathan with links to the stories about the photos being illegal was taken down. Thankfully the Maggot Punk website has the links.
http://www.maggotpunks.com/headlines/2003-01-05.htm

Nathan,
“Operation Rescue was not posting the photos to intimidate the women.”

And of course OR wasn’t trying to intimidate anyone when they sent anonymous and highly offensive postcards to friends and neighbors of anyone they perceived as pro-choice. And there was no intimidation intended when they approached (and sometimes chased) the children of clinic workers, screaming insults. And their support of Shelly Shannon was strictly humanitarian. Nathan, you’re digging yourself a mighty deep hole!

“”"outlander – all he is suggesting is that these women deserve protection from a convicted terrorist. Bombing places, trying to kill people, is a lot worse than smacking someone tp prevent such a bombing.”"”

I wish I still lived in Wichita where I could serve as a volunteer patient escort at Dr Tiller’s clinic. Take all the pictures you want but the second any of you steps into my personal space, expect a major smack down! And I do not even agree with late term abortions except to save the life of the mother. But I would be happy to escort any lady into and out of that clinic past the mad dog religious idiots outside.

Anything to stop the genocide of millions of innocent, defenseless babies.

Sorry Jed, I have to disagree…for every abortion, a human being misses out on the opportunity for life. For those who are pro-life, that IS the issue. It’s not about controlling women, it’s about protecting innocent life. NO ONE wants to see women pregnant against their will, it’s how to deal with an unwanted pregnancy that underlies the conflict.
Trying to intimidate women and outlawing abortion won’t work. The pro-life side needs to come up with workable solutions, because the tactics the pro-life extremists are resorting to are backfiring in their faces.

Mary, Ben,
I wish I was wrong about the anti movement (I dig babies too), but if you read the other writings by the anti-abortion leadership you’ll find a strong undercurrent of fear and hatred of women that aren’t squarely under men’s thumbs (their term is “Feminazi,” and they use it a lot).
I can’t say I like abortion any more than you do, but I also have no desire to return to the good old days of shotgun marriages and coathangers. I saw way too much of that to ever want to repeat them.

Jed – I agree with you too. I think mary’s point was that there are also those who want to help improve things.

Here’s some quotes from Operation Rescue leader Troy Newman.

“In McVeigh’s case the civil magistrate acted Biblically to cleanse the land of the bloodguilt. It is required that the person directly responsible for murder should pay with his life lest the land and its inhabitants be brought under the heavy hand of the Lord.”

So women should be executed for having abortions. I don’t think the Operation Rescue types should be considered pro-life and they are about as pro-woman as are the theocrats in Saudi Arabia are who whip women for being gang raped.