The Boston Globe published an opinion piece over the weekend which really must be answered. If you don't read the Globe, here it is http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/10/11/supreme-court-should-uphold-mass-buffer-zone-law/Waf1cn6pdAt4ZDsp6yp4kN/story.html
The piece is so poorly reasoned that it is easy to answer. Letters to the Editor are limited to 200 words so you will not be able to address all the inaccuracies and misrepresentations. Please pick something in the piece and write your answer. I have included my Letter below. Remember that members of the Court read the Globe and sister papers.
Thank you for getting on this!
Anne
Renee Loth, A zone that should be left alone (Globe, Oct 12th), maintains that the Massachusetts 35-foot Buffer Zone law is even-handed and that the Supreme Court should uphold it.
Loth undermines her whole argument by claiming the Buffer Zone is like the law which keeps political material 150 feet away from a polling place. In Loth's world, her candidate would be allowed to distribute materials and talk to people right into the voting both. It would only be the other candidate who could not.
Thus Loth has effectively made the argument against the Buffer Zone – the Zone singles out certain kinds of medical facilities and applies only to people with certain opinions, which, of course is what makes it unconstitutional.
Loth further undermines her argument by claiming the Supreme Court upheld the Buffer Zone in Hill v Colorado. The Colorado law applies to "any person outside any health care facility." That makes it apply evenly to all, even the so-called "escorts" who hustle women in for abortions without letting them hear the information they need to make truly informed decisions.
I hope the amicus briefs filed by the people with Loth's opinions are as poorly reasoned as her piece.
Anne Fox,
President
Massachusetts Citizens for Life
The Schrafft Center 529 Main Street
Charlestown, MA 02129 617-242-4199
No comments:
Post a Comment