Christian news - breaking headlines from around the United States and the world. Trending hot topics in Christianity.

Pro-Life Group Loses Battle to Keep Pro-Life Ads on Buses

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pro-Life Group Loses Battle to Keep Pro-Life Ads on Buses

    A federal court has ruled that a Fort Wayne, Indiana bus system may deny advertisement services to a pro-life women’s health organization.



    More...

  • #2
    [FONT=Roboto][SIZE=18px]The federal judge ruled that Citilink has a history of refusing advertisements that address political, moral, or religious issues, and that it is legal for the company to refuse such advertisements.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    If Citilink follows this policy fairly and also refuses ads in favor of abortion then I agree with the court's decision. A bus company's job is to provide transportation, not to provide a forum for people to express their opinions.
    Clyde Herrin's Blog
    Comment>

    • #3
      Aren't all advertisements opinions? "We have a great product" is just the opinion of a company (and, probably a dishonest opinion).

      The publicly-owned bus company has made it their job to provide a forum for people to express opinions to raise money, in addition to selling tickets and leeching on taxpayers for money. And, I'll bet money they won't run a pro-life ad that has no opinions or value statements in it, like "Abortion after six weeks stops a beating heart." The banned "pro-life" ad advertised a referral service, so it's purpose was to promote a product.

      It sounds fair, no pro-abortion and no pro-life ads. Right? Wrong. Freedom produces positive results. And, I think "equal oppression" is never equal, in either implementation or effect. It's a publicly owned bus company, they shouldn't be in judging what's a political, moral, or religious issue. The government shouldn't have religion tests.



      Comment>

      • #4
        Originally posted by Cornelius View Post
        Aren't all advertisements opinions? "We have a great product" is just the opinion of a company (and, probably a dishonest opinion).

        The publicly-owned bus company has made it their job to provide a forum for people to express opinions to raise money, in addition to selling tickets and leeching on taxpayers for money. And, I'll bet money they won't run a pro-life ad that has no opinions or value statements in it, like "Abortion after six weeks stops a beating heart." The banned "pro-life" ad advertised a referral service, so it's purpose was to promote a product.

        It sounds fair, no pro-abortion and no pro-life ads. Right? Wrong. Freedom produces positive results. And, I think "equal oppression" is never equal, in either implementation or effect. It's a publicly owned bus company, they shouldn't be in judging what's a political, moral, or religious issue. The government shouldn't have religion tests.
        And your argument ignores the current controversy surrounding Christian bakers, photographers, florist, etc. Doesn't it? If not, how so?

        Interesting article I came across: Supreme Court Justice Scalia: Constitution says government can favor religion

        God bless,
        William
        Comment>

        • #5
          Originally posted by William View Post

          And your argument ignores the current controversy surrounding Christian bakers, photographers, florist, etc. Doesn't it? If not, how so?

          Interesting article I came across: Supreme Court Justice Scalia: Constitution says government can favor religion

          God bless,
          William

          The decisive difference between a christian baker and the public bus service is one is private and the other is public. "Freedom" means the people have rights, not the government. And, here we have the government's bus company dictating to private people what kind of speech they're allowed to express through the public forum of bus advertising.

          A pro-life service isn't allowed to advertise, but I'm 99.9% sure that Planned Parenthood would be allowed to advertise, just as long as they don't use the word "abortion." The banned ad for the pro-life service says absolutely nothing about abortion, not even the slightest hint (in fact, that's the reason the ungodly complained). They're being discriminated against because they are pro-life, not because of anything in their advertisement itself. They're being punished by the government for being pro-life, just not to the degree of being forced to change or go out of business as is the case with Christian businesses regarding SSM.

          “Unlike the other countries of the world that do not even invoke his name, we do him honor. In presidential addresses, in Thanksgiving proclamations and in many other ways,” he said in a brief talk at Archbishop Rummel High School in Metarie
          Scalia is referring to the minutia of ceremonial deism that the courts have allowed the government to practice. I wouldn't call that favoring religion, only that the courts aren't trying to 100% ban religious expression in government. The courts only 99% favor the religion of Atheism. And, the Supreme Court justices know it went better for Japan after Pearl Harbor than it would for to the Supreme Court justices if they tried to prohibit the President from using the word "God" in a presidential address.


          Comment>

          • #6
            Here's the ad the government banned. It's for a refusal service. A woman, presumably a pregnant woman, calls and they provide referrals to healthcare providers. This has nothing to do with abortion -- and that's why the ad was banned. It's not a political ad. The ad expresses no opinion. Yet, even Christians are willing to side with government oppressors because they've been conned into thinking there's something fair about this. If Women's HealthLink also provided abortion referrals, I am certain the add would be accepted. A Judge would just explain that by providing abortion referrals, in addition to healthcare referrals, that abortion-providing HealthLink is neutral on the issue of abortion.



            Let's suppose that all ads aimed at pregnant women are banned, either because they offer abortion or because they don't offer abortion (instead of now, where the only banned ad is for the organization that doesn't offer abortion). In your concept of fairness, you're devaluing the pro-life position by equating it with abortion. And, while I don't believe for a second that the bus company is even-handed on abortion, do you think the bus company would be even-handed on other issues, where there's more Politically Correct pressure? Once you approve of he government censoring views, you're asking to be persecuted. That's what's happening to Christian businesses on SSM. That's what's happening in public schools where "religious neutrality" is indoctrinating our children with a species of Atheism.


            Comment>
            Working...
            X
            Articles - News - SiteMap