left biblioblography: WHAT THE F#$K HAS THE SUPREME COURT BEEN SMOKING LATELY?

Sunday, March 05, 2006

WHAT THE F#$K HAS THE SUPREME COURT BEEN SMOKING LATELY?

This is just outrageous.

I was made aware of this nonsense recently.

From this article, at http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06060/662679.stm:
“Court: abortion protests don't violate anti-racketeering laws
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
By David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court yesterday ended a 20-year old lawsuit against militant anti-abortion groups, ruling unanimously that their use of "physical violence" outside clinics did not violate the anti-racketeering laws.
The decision marked the third time this case had been decided by the Supreme Court, and this time, they made sure it would be the last.
The effect of the ruling will be limited, however, because a federal law enacted in 1994 makes it illegal to block the entrances to an abortion clinic.”

A little further down in the article:
“The lawsuit that ended yesterday began during an era of abortion-clinic bombings in the 1980s. At the same time, anti-abortion groups such as Operation Rescue employed "human blockades" to try to stop pregnant patients from entering clinics.
“Searching for a legal weapon to combat such tactics, the National Organization for Women sued Operation Rescue and its leaders for violating the federal anti-racketeering law. This law incorporates other federal measures, including the laws against robbery and extortion.
“The Supreme Court allowed this suit to go forward in 1994, and a jury in Chicago ruled that the protesters had used force and, on occasion, violence to prevent patients and staff from entering clinics. A judge assessed damages against Operation Rescue and issued a nationwide order forbidding its members from blocking clinics.
“Three years ago, the Supreme Court appeared to reverse course. It ruled that the protesters did not engage in "extortion" when they blocked clinics because they were not seeking to take over these businesses.”

I ain’t no judge, not a lawyer, but if you look at the ACTUAL definition of Extortion:
http://www.answers.com/extortion

Elements of Offense

“Virtually all extortion statutes require that a threat must be made to the person or property of the victim. Threats to harm the victim's friends or relatives may also be included. It is not necessary for a threat to involve physical injury. It may be sufficient to threaten to accuse another person of a crime or to expose a secret that would result in public embarrassment or ridicule. The threat does not have to relate to an unlawful act. Extortion may be carried out by a threat to tell the victim's spouse that the victim is having an illicit sexual affair with another.
Other types of threats sufficient to constitute extortion include those to harm the victim's business and those to either testify against the victim or withhold testimony necessary to his or her defense or claim in an administrative proceeding or a lawsuit. Many statutes also provide that any threat to harm another person in his or her career or reputation is extortion.
Under the common law and many statutes, intent to take money or property to which one is not lawfully entitled must exist at the time of the threat in order to establish extortion. Statutes may contain words such as "willful" or "purposeful" in order to indicate the intent element. When this is so, someone who mistakenly believes he or she is entitled to the money or property cannot be guilty of extortion. Some statutes, however, provide that any unauthorized taking of money by an officer constitutes extortion. Under these statutes, a person may be held strictly liable for the act, and intent need not be proven to establish the crime.”

So someone please explain to me why the law was passed in the first place. Why? Because these frenzied, foam-flecked political prophets are violent assholes.

Oh, gotta love this one: “Helen Cindrich, who belongs to the same anti-abortion group, said the ruling means that people won't be afraid of protesting. She once was arrested for protesting outside an abortion physician's home and was sued, as was her husband because she drove his car to the protest.”
Somehow, details are, well, rather sparse in regards to this incident. I rather doubt she was innocent and wide-eyed, a movement martyr. Protesting outside the physician’s home?
Poor fucking baby. Harassing the doctor at his home?
Here’s what we should do:
Volunteer to escort women in and out of the clinics. I figure a good-sized fellow with a Louisville slugger angled onto the shoulder should disabuse most of these mad dogs.

Because obviously, talking doesn’t work. And the Powers That Be are clearly out of their minds.

Or perhaps we should gather en masse outside their homes, and see if they appreciate that.

I’d have a lot more respect for these loons if they actually created a sub-movement titled “Stop abortion! Adopt a Baby!”

I mean, really. They’re so dead set on stopping abortion, making choices for other people that affect their lives in no small manner, judging them on the present act without so much as a by-your-leave or an examination of the circumstances forcing them to undergo this procedure, that they block clinics (see second bolded paragraph, in the definition of ‘extortion’, above), and chuck bombs into the damn place, killing innocent people (which is so contrary to their philosophy, it’s hypocritical), well, it gets right up my nose, it does.

Sure, the extortion clause was a bit of a stretch, kind of a weak premise. So’s spitting on the sidewalk, fer crying out loud.

So we will wait and see. I could very well be wrong. Perhaps those methods are in disfavor two decades later.

So here’s to fingers crossed, and no bombs in the political crossfire.

And that, dear readers, is my nickel’s worth. Spend it wisely, and well.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

30 comments:

Beowulf said...

RA, I’m pro-life, but I think the use of violence and physical force is wrong and hypocritical (as you pointed out). People should be persuaded by reasons, not intimidation and violence.

Oh, BTW, I see you have been busy here. Where do you find the time?

Good day

~BF

Mesoforte said...

I have to ask, what's with the flurry of postings?

I guess I'm pro-let-let-all-the-women-in-america-decide-whether-or-not-they-want-to-be-pro-life-or-choice-because-I'm-a-guy-and-I-don't-have-to-deal-with-the-emotions-that-might-come-with-either-decision.

Okay, that's where I stand. BUT, if those guys were standing in the way of my non-existent girlfriend who had made the choice, then there wouldn't be one left standing after I was done with them. ^_~

Krystalline Apostate said...

BF:
RA, I’m pro-life, but I think the use of violence and physical force is wrong and hypocritical (as you pointed out). People should be persuaded by reasons, not intimidation and violence.
Agreed. But it speaks of frustration at not being heard.
& until we live in something resembling a Utopia, it's an ugly necessity.

On a different note, how's your wife holding up? Did she deliver already?
Sorry to ask on this thread. Didn't ask on my other 2 replies.

MF:
I have to ask, what's with the flurry of postings?
I dunno, just felt like it?
I mean, like 2 of them took me what? 15 minutes to slap together? The 3rd was an old article I'd written.
I saw a coupla things that irked me, so I wrote 'em up.
BUT, if those guys were standing in the way of my non-existent girlfriend who had made the choice, then there wouldn't be one left standing after I was done with them.
Yeah, I feel the same way you do.
Problem is, those Segal movies don't ever show the aftermath. The 12 guys getting the lone MA arrested. Because it's 12 words against his word.

Beowulf said...

RA, I’m still waiting for the squirt (pun intended). The wife is holding up fine (with a little cajoling to get her to relax a bit.) Thanks for asking.

Mesoforte said...

RA-

They couldn't testify against me. They would be vegetables by the time I was done. Gah, I sound mean. T_T

bf-

Awesome, let's hope for her sake it comes soon.

say no to christ said...

Every time I read or hear about stuff like this it reminds me of a crazy woman I knew in NC who claimed to be psychic. First off she said bush would never be re-elected. I told her he was elected the first time so what made her think he wouldnt or couldnt cheat again. Then she said "they will never over turn Roe vs Wade" and that abortion laws were safe". She was looking me dead in the eyes with a staight face when she said this. Hell, I have never claimed to be psychic, but even I saw this shit coming and know Roe vs Wade is on shaky grounds. Maybe I have a future in psychic stuff and she needs to get a real job! LOL

say no to christ said...

OOps I said:"he was elected the first time"

I ment to say 'he wasnt elected the first time'.

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

I'm continually amazed,
that U.S. lawmakers seem to have been much more progressive way -earlier- in your history.
Your Republican government currently seems hell-bent on curtailing all liberties for the common voter... and as their
Orwellian excuse they use "defence of Liberty".
Once again, I have to ask,
how does removing people's liberties propogate liberty?
And you've still got outrageous freaks of nature, like Bork,
spewing their poison.
Not that he, Bork, can't say what he wants, of course he can...
but how he was ever made a judge,
when he his so -personally judgmental-, is a mystery to a lot more people than me.
And America wonders why it's outpourings are no longer taken...
on faith...

heathenz said...

To my way of thinking (could be wrong here) racketeering and extortion are activities undertaken in the pursuit of the filthy lucre. While the activities described are highly objectionable irrespective of their motives, I fail to see a monetary motivation on the part of the protagonists that results in their fiscal gain.

From this unresearched an naieve position I view the supremes' decision sympathetically. Whether it is part of a larger agenda remains to be seen.

For the record, I do not condone intimidation and blockades, I just do not consider such tactics to fall within the definition of racketeering and extertion.

Krystalline Apostate said...

HZ:
True enough, a bit of a stretch.
Still, the blockades preventing egress are inhibiting business, & thus could be construed as 'extortion'.
A thin premise at best, I'll grant you.
I see it more as a stopgap measure.
I can only hope that time has mellowed the fury somewhat.

Krystalline Apostate said...

HMDK:
Once again, I have to ask,
how does removing people's liberties propogate liberty?

It can't, & it doesn't.
What was it that prevented Bork from joining the SC? Wasn't it that he 'inhaled'? Hehehehe.

Krystalline Apostate said...

SNTC:
Hell, I have never claimed to be psychic, but even I saw this shit coming and know Roe vs Wade is on shaky grounds.
LMAO! Very nicely said, dear.
I'm a-hopin' you didn't pay for this bit of skullduggery? ;)

Anonymous said...

RA You have been made a star over on BFs blog
RA - also you might want to know that you are the star of a BF blogpost here http://protheism.blogspot.com/2006/03/refuting-straw-god.html#comments

Beowulf said...

Anonymous,
RA knows; he put a link on his post to my response. I wouldn’t say I made RA a star though; he does that all on his own ;-)

Krystalline Apostate said...

bf:
RA knows; he put a link on his post to my response. I wouldn’t say I made RA a star though; he does that all on his own ;-)
I'm...thoroughly...flattered. Thanks. Yeesh.
Mind you, it don't get you preferential treatment, but I appreciate it immensely.

Krystalline Apostate said...

anonymous:
RA - also you might want to know that you are the star of a BF blogpost here
Hey, that's fine. Thought I felt my ears a-burnin'.

say no to christ said...

RA, HELL NO, I didnt pay! LOL I never pay for that kind of stuff, but there is always some nut job out there wanting to prove to me that they are really psychic. I attract crazy people for some reason. I think it has to do with an area in my work with dogs so called "psychic" abilities. Others in my field and myself as well know that dogs have to ability to hone in on their owners energies and know what you are thinking. I think some of it has to do with smell. Dogs can smell fear and agression. Our emotions are a form of energy that furry animals pick right up on and I believe some people have this ability as well. Psychic?? NOT! It is a natural survival instinct, that humans have lost touch with cuz we no longer see ourselves a part of the natural world. But, I believe it can be revived. A good example of this instinct is the primative peoples who survived the sunomie(sp? brain fart)in India. They are still intouch with the natural world and not only saw, but felt that sometime horrific was coming and were able to get to safe grounds.

Krystalline Apostate said...

SNTC:
RA, HELL NO, I didnt pay!
Yeesh, sorry! ;)
Yes, emotions are broadcast thru the release of hormones/pheremones, etc. Also, my TCC helps me to detect smaller movement in an opponent.
It's all a matter of reading the physical clues.

Future Geek said...

As a fan of nonviolent civil disobedience in general, I wonder how this case will set a precedent for organizations like Greenpeace, Earth First, etc when they engage in blockades?

Krystalline Apostate said...

future geek:
That's a very interesting query.
I don't think the extortion clause applied to them: it was directly aimed at the pro-lifers.

say no to christ said...

I dont know if there is anything any of us can do to stop the pro-lifers. I donate a lot of money to Naral, the feminist majority and planned parenting. I even attended the march for womens lives in DC a couple of years ago(over a million paople were there). The problem is that the minority of anti-woman and anti-child are controling the government.

I think we can still save womens rights, but not through government and politics, but through natural alternatives. It will take a small group of scientists to research herbal abortions and birthcontrol, to find out which ones work the best and safest. I have been talking with other feminists to form an organization to revive herbal birth control. Being able to use natural non governed herbs will give women absolute freedom.

Ra
That is so cool that you work on picking up the slightest movement of energy. Its amazing how similar our jobs are. When working with dogs you have to detect the least amount of anxiety in the dog, so you really have to hone in and focus on any movement without looking at the dog and determind what the dog is feeling. It is a lot easier then it sounds, that is why I believe that our natural instinct to feel atmospheric energy and so fourth can be revived in everyone. It has worked with many of my clients humans.

Mesoforte said...

HMDK

"Orwellian excuse they use "defence of Liberty"."

That reminds me of Animal Farm. Is that what you're making reference to? I could swear that the author had Orwell in his name.

Krystalline Apostate said...

BF:
RA knows; he put a link on his post to my response.
All due respect, I didn't know any such thing, until anon.'s post.
Unless you're talking about my link to my own post?
I'm not being disingenuous: I honestly don't recall doing anything like that.
Please explain, when you have time?

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

mesoforte... yeah, Animal Farm.
You got it. Same guy.

P.S.
YOU are my new nemesis, ya bastard.
And you KNOW why, you slovenly beast. I'll torture you slow...
I'll go Gitmo on your ass, you freak.
People like you shouldn't be allowed to breathe my air.
DIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!! MUWAHHHAHAHA!

....ARrrrRghh... Ahemm...

Eh, sorry, Reluctant, for this outburst... but mesoforte deserves all ill will... Right, meso?
Heeehehehhehe...

Beowulf said...

I saw the link and assumed it was you. I don’t know anyone who would have linked it, unless they want to make you a “star.” Your readership is much higher than mine (doh!).

Krystalline Apostate said...

HMDK:
Eh, sorry, Reluctant, for this outburst.
DON'T LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN!
I'm just playin', balding lemur.
Glad to see you're back in the pink o' things (pun intended).
Glad to have ye back, sahr.

Krystalline Apostate said...

BF:
I saw the link and assumed it was you.
I thought it was just some anonymous person. Not a big thing, just curious.
I don’t know anyone who would have linked it, unless they want to make you a “star.” Your readership is much higher than mine (doh!).
I'd thought it was an invitation into the lion's den (hehehehe).
I ain't been in a very sharing mood as of late, so I may drop by.
Oh, & I'll try to behave meself, as it IS your sandbox.
Sorry that your readership isn't doing so well.

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

Balding lemur?
Actually, that's a compliment... though it wasn't intented as one.
Lemurs are cuter than koalas.
Do feel free to pet me!

HA!

say no to christ said...

Hairless, I would pet you but I'm afraid you might start humping my leg. Tehehe.

Krystalline Apostate said...

SNTC:
Hairless, I would pet you but I'm afraid you might start humping my leg.
Oh, he don't need anything resembling an invitation, trust you me. Hehehehe.