Can Mississippi Stop Advertisements of Abortion Medicines


Free speech is a cherished right in the U.S. There are some restrictions of course. You cannot stand up in movie theater and yell, "Fire! Fire!." There are limits on how untruthful an advertisement can be. In Fargo, ND, an abortion clinic took a forced birth to court and stopped the latter from advertising it provided abortions. It had advertised "Abortions" hoping to lure young women into lectures and finger pointing about the sin of abortion. Now Mississippi is trying to stop billboards and TV ads which merely provide a phone number and site where women can buy pills that cause a miscarriage. The advertisements provide true information. Will conservative judges put their religious views and its requirement to spread the gospel and protect free speech? 

Mississippi forced-birth politicians seem to believe the only way they can reduce abortions is to block information about their availability. It is apparent that before Roe, when abortions were illegal, there were lots of abortions. Countless women today testify about getting abortions back then. Records show huge numbers of women were admitted with complications from home administrated abortions. Women found ways to get abortions when there was no advertising. Today there are so many avenues to communication it will not be possible for Mississippi to make a dent in the number of women circumventing its state law making abortion illegal.

I suppose the Texas/Mississippi laws making it profitable for individual citizens to rat on their family and neighbors would have a huge impact. Apparently, there have been a few cases reported by vigilantly anti-abortion snitches, but Mississippi seems more worried about women finding abortion medicine. They should be because that is the most likely source of abortions.

I've said this so many times I'm hesitant to do so again. But it is necessary to point out the failure of alcohol prohibition and its similarity to abortion prohibition. The principle is this: If you have a law the majority does not like, you need to have larger budgets for law enforcement. Further, law enforcement must sign on with enthusiasm to enforce it. Without these both of these we have the failed experiment in the prohibition era.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe the "Original Sin" Should be Reassigned

The Religious Capitol Invaders May Yet Win

Father Frank Pavone, the Ultimate Crook