Archive for Censorship

Abortion scheme on college campus: purchase public sidewalk to censor pro-life speech

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on November 23, 2015 by saynsumthn

An exhibit at an Ohio campus, which shows images of abortion victims, has sparked such a controversy that so-called “liberal” students unsuccessfully collaborated to censor the pro-life message by suggesting they purchase the sidewalk to shut down the protest completely. The pro-life group Created Equal which brings the truth of abortion to college campuses across the nation, said their exhibit of abortion victim images at the Campus Center location at Otterbein college was on public property owned by the city of Westerville.

Created Equal abortion protests Otterbein

Seth Drayer, spokesperson for Created Equal said that the student government of the liberal college is set to purchase the public sidewalk to curb their First Amendment rights. This would have been unheard of years ago when the so-called Free Speech Movement on college campuses was born. In 1964, 60’s activists gathered on Sproul Plaza at the University of California Berkley to protest the school’s shutting down their political views.

Jo Freeman at the University of Illinois at Chicago describes that time in history this way: “By the time Berkeley Chancellor Clark Kerr became University President in 1958, student groups could not operate on campus if they engaged in any kind of off-campus politics, whether electoral, protest or even oratorical. At the Berkeley campus students spoke, leafleted and tabled on the city sidewalk at the campus edge. When the campus border was moved a block away, this activity moved with it…”

Enter 2015, when politics are clearly permitted on campus, the only question is, whose politics and views will be allowed? In Ohio, the message is clear – no pro-life viewpoint will be tolerated on the campus of Otterbein University in Westerville. This was reinforced by the student newspaper, Otterbein360 which reported that the campus climate subcommittee discussed the purchase of the sidewalk at its Oct. 26 meeting after the Campus Center sidewalk was used twice this year by Created Equal to, “stage protests including images of aborted tissue on public property, where speech is currently regulated by a public instead of a private entity.”

Why the censorship of the pro-life group?

According to a member of the student government, Elise Woods, it makes students unhappy, telling the paper that “for the abortion protests, I just noticed that when those specific people, that group, is on campus, it makes the campus climate…people get very unhappy,”she said according to the newspaper,” she said.

But, Conner Dunn, vice president of student government, was slightly more reasonable – slightly being the operative word, telling the student body that, “Buying up the sidewalks is an alright idea. Unless we buy all of Otterbein’s sidewalks, it wouldn’t stop much, they would just go to a different part of campus.”

Mark Harrington, founder of Created Equal responded to the censorship plan by stating, “The insane “Safe Space” coddling cultures of Mizzou and Yale are not anomalies. Created Equal has observed an entire generation of young people who are willing to take increasingly drastic measures to punish anyone with ideas they dislike! Recently, Otterbein University’s student government (through their “Student Experience and Campus Climate Committee,” whose purpose is to “address campus climate”) applied for a grant to buy the very ground we stand on to conduct peaceful outreach! This purchase would transfer sidewalk ownership from public to private, giving Otterbein the rights to kick us off of the sidewalk, because “[our display] makes the campus climate… very unhappy.”

Created Equal Otterbein abortion prolife 2

Seth Drayer said this is not the first time students tried to censor their pro-life message on this campus. In 2013, a student attempted to knock over signs showing pictures of the victims of abortion, the preborn child in the womb.

Created Equal COllege abortion

In 2015, another Otterbein student recruited a “bed sheet brigade” to try to censor the images. Another stood in the street in front of Created Equal’s Truth Truck and JumboTV trailer to temporarily stop it from circling the campus.

“Students themselves, who throughout time have railed against “The Man” to fight for free speech, are trading in this American treasure for thirty pieces of silver—or, in the case of Otterbein, thirty feet of concrete.” Drayer said. “They do this under the guise of creating “safe spaces” free from reminders of emotional pain (i.e., “triggers”).”

Harrington told 10TV that even if Created Equal didn’t have the option of sidewalks, the group would still get its message out, “The more they try to censor us–bed sheets, knocking over signs, trying to purchase a public sidewalk–it’s not going to deter us,” he said.

Created Equal Otterbein abortion prolife

But, despite the desire to purchase the sidewalk and shut down Created Equal’s display, the city of Westerville told abortion supporters that the sidewalks were not for sale.

“Public sidewalks are public infrastructure and generally they don’t go up for sale the same way private property would or a house might go up for sale,” said Christa Dickey, community affairs administrator for the city of Westerville.

Created Equal said they will continue speaking the truth of abortion on college campuses. Meanwhile, Otterbein students in favor of censoring the pro-life message should reflect on the 1960’s Free Speech protests at Berkley and understand that speech should be protected not silenced.

The words of Lynn Hollander Savio, a senior at Berkeley in October of 1964, contradicts censorship attempts from Otterbein abortion supporters. Years after the Free-Speech Movement on campus was birthed, Hollander Savio reinforced the need to protect political speech on campus when she told told NPR, “ We gave youth in America a sense that political and social action is something that you can and should be involved in…” she said.

(Image credits: Screen grabs from 10TV news story, Otterbein360 Twitter page, and Created Equal video and Twitter page.)

Pro-life group says High School violated student’s free speech rights in censorship case

Posted in free speech, Students for Life with tags , , , , , , , , on October 15, 2015 by saynsumthn

Black pro-lifer wins lawsuit against NAACP over abortion support

Posted in NAACP, Ryan Bomberger with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 22, 2015 by saynsumthn

REPUBLISHING from the Life Dynamics Blog –

An appeals court has ruled in favor of a Black pro-life organization which parodied the NAACP to expose their stance on abortion.

WE WIN!!!!” those are the words of Ryan Bomberger founder of the Radiance Foundation regarding his free speech lawsuit filed by the NAACP.

Ryan Bomberger wins NAACP lawsuit

4th Circuit Court of Appeals rules, unanimously, in our favor! This is a huge win for the First Amendment. The NAACP tried to crush our right to free speech but truth and justice prevailed,” Bomberger posted today.

The lawsuit, initially filed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, better known by its acronym “NAACP” against Bomberger began after The Radiance Foundation, an organization Bomberger co-founded, published an article online entitled “NAACP: National Association for the Abortion of Colored People” which criticized the NAACP’s stance on abortion.

Radiance Civil Wrong d40e76914970c-500wi

The Radiance Foundation is a nonprofit organization focused on educating and influencing the public about issues impacting society. Radiance addresses social issues from a Christian perspective. It uses as its platform two websites, TheRadianceFoundation.org and TooManyAborted.com, where it posts articles on topics such as race relations, diversity, fatherlessness, and the impact of abortion on the black community.

The article, “NAACP: National Association for the Abortion of Colored People,” was posted by Radiance, and then picked up by Life News, exposing the NAACP’s ties to Planned Parenthood.

Shortly after the NAACP began to receive criticism for its position on abortion.

life-news-ryan-naacp-story

Though the NAACP has often claimed to be neutral on abortion, Radiance maintains that the NAACP’s actions actually demonstrate support for the practice.

According to Life News, following the piece, the NAACP sent Bomberger, the Chief Creative Officer of the Radiance Foundation, and LifeNews a threatening letter claiming infringement on its name and logo for including it in the opinion column.

The letter, accused Bomberger and the Radiance Foundation, of “trademark infringement” and stated that while “you are certainly entitled to express your viewpoint, you cannot do so in connection with a name that infringes on the NAACP’s rights.

NAACPFACTPOSTER

A court then ruled that The Radiance Foundation engaged in trademark infringement after doing nothing more than posting an article online that parodied the NAACP’s name.

The Radiance Foundation, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) , then filed a declaratory judgment action in federal court, and in return, the NAACP filed counter-claims of “trademark infringement, dilution and confusion” for parodying the organization’s name in what the group describes as, “the NAACP’s documented pro-abortion position and actions.”

we-will-not-be-silenced

After a bench trial, the district court found for the NAACP on all counterclaims and denied declaratory relief to Radiance. The district court issued a permanent injunction “against any use [by Radiance] of ‘National Association for the Abortion of Colored People’ that creates a likelihood of confusion or dilution. However, it declined to award any damages or attorney’s fees, as it found the NAACP had failed to make the case that they were warranted.

In the latest decision, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals found that the NAACP does not have actionable claims for trademark infringement here, and Radiance’s use of the NAACP’s marks falls squarely within the exceptions to trademark dilution specifically included in the Lanham Act to avoid encroaching on free speech rights.

In the context of trademark infringement, the Lanham Act’s purpose, as noted, is to protect consumers from misleading uses of marks by competitors,” the decision states.

The decision also points out that a trademark “only gives the right to prohibit the use of it so far as to protect the owner’s good
will against the sale of another’s product as his.

NAACP had held that because Radiance had a donate button on their website they were using the image for goods and services.

But, the appeals court wrote, “When the “use of the trademark does not imply sponsorship or endorsement of the product because the mark is used only to describe the thing, rather than to identify its source,” restricting speech does not serve the purpose of the Lanham Act.

“Indeed, criticism or parody of a mark holder would be difficult indeed without using the mark. Trademark protections exist neither to allow companies to protect themselves from criticism nor to permit them to “control language.”

Get a free prolife pin

In finding that Radiance’s use of the NAACP’s marks was “in connection with” goods or services, the appeals court ruled that the district court erred in several respects, pointing out that Radiance used the NAACP’s marks only in the title and body of an article criticizing the NAACP.

The Appeals Court Wrote:

    Although present on the article page, the Donate button was off to the side and did not itself use the NAACP’s marks in any way. The billboard campaign was displayed on a different page altogether. A visitor likely would not perceive the use of the NAACP’s marks in the article as being in connection with those transactional components of the website. It is important not to lose perspective. The article was just one piece of each Radiance website’s content, which was comprised of articles, videos, and multimedia advocacy materials. That the protected marks appear somewhere in the content of a website that includes transactional components is not alone enough to satisfy the “in connection with” element. To say it was would come too close to an absolute rule that any social issues commentary with any transactional component in the neighborhood enhanced the commentator’s risk of Lanham Act liability.

The court addressed the issue of “confusion” that the Radiance parody of the NAACP caused as one over policy and not over goods, when it wrote, “trademark infringement is not designed to protect mark holders from consumer confusion about their positions on political or social issues. The evidence of “actual confusion” relied on by the district court consisted of phone calls to the NAACP by people who took issue with the NAACP supporting abortion. “[I]ndignation is not confusion,” at least not as pertains to trademark infringement, and at best the calls demonstrated confusion as to the NAACP’s policy positions rather than any good or service. Policy stances are neither goods nor services, though the means of conveying them may be.

The appeals court continued, “it is not immediately apparent how someone would confuse an article which is strongly critical of an organization with the organization itself. The mark in this case was used primarily to identify the NAACP as the object of Radiance’s criticism, resembling a descriptive or nominative fair use albeit by employing a modified version of the name.

As for the free speech aspects of Radiance’s parody of the NAACP the court writes:

    Whatever the label affixed to the article, Radiance’s twist on the famous moniker follows in the same vein as articles that refer to the NRA as the “National Republican Association” or the ACLU as the “Anti-Christian Lawyers Union.”

    Radiance’s ploy was nonetheless effective at conveying sharply what it was that Radiance wished to say. The implications for the likelihood of confusion factors are thus obvious: parody or satire or critical opinion generally may be more effective if the mark is strong and the satirical or critical version is similar to the original. The critical message conveyed by the satirical mark itself and in the commentary that follows ensures that no confusion about the source of the commentary will last, if in fact it is generated at all.

    In this case, the title related to and conveyed the subject of the article: the NAACP and Radiance’s views of its alleged stance on abortion. The use of the satirical modification of the true NAACP name was designed, as many titles are, to be eye-catching and provocative in a manner that induces the reader to continue on. We cannot find that use of the NAACP marks in the title of the Radiance article created a likelihood of confusion as to the piece’s authorship or affiliation.

The court then ruled in favor of Radiance writing, “In sum, and for the aforementioned reasons, the plaintiff’s expression in no way infringed upon or diluted defendant’s trademark rights. We hereby vacate the district court’s injunction and remand with directions that the defendant’s Lanham Act counterclaims be dismissed.”

Ryan Bomberger 47912860773315_n

Ryan Bomberger says that now that the legal wranglings are over, he plans to continue to call the NAACP out on their stance regarding abortion.

“What an upside down world,” Ryan Bomberger told Life Dynamics in response to the decision.

In 2015 it’s radical to believe that every human life has purpose, and that we’re all equal. Along the way, the NAACP stopped believing this which would explain why they would spend over half a million suing us for accurately parodying their name: The National Association for the Abortion of Colored People. The U.S. 4th Circuit stopped that assault of the First Amendment and ruled in our favor. Not only will we continue to parody the NAACP’s name, we’ll continue relentlessly calling them out for supporting the violence of abortion and (the abject failure of) liberalism.”

Read the decision here.

We are incredibly grateful to ADF and our attorney, Chuck Allen, for defending what the NAACP claims to protect: our most basic civil rights,” Bomberger added.

In the documentary film, Maafa21, Life Dynamics also discusses the NAACP’s attitudes on abortion detailing how the organization tried to hide and prevent their convention goers from hearing about the abortion connection to black genocide.

One witness interviewed in the film states that ironically, the NAACP even went to the extent of using buses to block their demonstrations about black genocide in front of Cobal Hall.

Watch Maafa21 here.

Facebook reverses ban on mom’s pics of baby born w/o nose while pro-life ban remains

Posted in Facebook, Facebook and abortion ads, Live Action with tags , , , , , , , , on April 13, 2015 by saynsumthn

REPUBLISHING FROM THE LIFE DYNAMICS BLOG: (With permission)

The mother of a baby born without a nose whose image was banned from Facebook says their decision to ban her posts has been reversed.

Eli born without a nose 8874195131033237630_n

In late March, Life Dynamics published the story of Eli, whose parents called him perfect even though he was born without a nose.

Timothy Eli Thompson was born on March 4, without any sinus cavities or nasal cavities – a condition so rate that it only has a one in 197 million chance of occurring.

Shortly after Life Dynamics published the blog on Eli, the pro-life media began to tell Eli’s story.

When the group Live Action published a story on Eli, Facebook told the pro-life group that it could not be promoted in an ad on the social media site because “the image or video thumbnail may shock or evoke a negative response from viewers.”

Eli Facebook Live Action

Eli’s mom, Brandi McGlathery, quickly posted a link on her Facebook page to the Life News story about her son’s image where she condemned Facebook, “Excuse my language, Brandi began her post.

Eli and Brandi born without a nose Facebook 523647124_n

“but I’ll be damned if Facebook keeps me from sharing my baby’s story! It sickens me that I can see pictures of half naked women, drugs, & negativity, but my child is too “controversial”. What has happened to humanity?” she said.

Elis mom Facebook baby nose

But, Live Action was not the only ones asked to remove Eli’s pictures.

According to reports, Facebook also asked Eli’s mother to remove his pictures.

http://www.local15tv.com/template/flashplayers/jwplayer/dev/files/embed.html?video=2015/04/clips/YzFjNzFjMzk1ZDJh&cdn=wpmi&adzone=/4756/WPMI/Web/News/Top_Stories&autoP=false&poster=http://www.local15tv.com/shared/news/features/top-stories/stories//images/YzFjNzFjMzk1ZDJh_19560.jpg&event=iframeplayer&googleID=UA-37182509-2&parent=http://www.local15tv.com

In addition to Facebook’s reaction, Eli’s mother said she also received a messages asking why she did not have an abortion:

Eli abortion

That took a lot of maturity to not respond the way that the mom in me wanted to!” Brandi told WKRG.

ELi born without a nose 995325_738540928057580073_n

Now, Brandi has reported that Facebook’s ban has been lifted after users complained and the story was shared an astonishing 30,000 times in just six hours.

Brandi Eli Facebook Ban lifted

Eli Brandi Facebook ban lifted nose

Although Eli’s mother says that Facebook has reversed their decision regarding her posts on Eli, Life Dynamics has confirmed that Live Action has not received a reversal from the social media site regarding their ads promoting Eli’s story.

This is only a partial victory.

Continue contacting Facebook to share your views.

Read more about Eli here.

“Hate and war” how intolerant abortion advocates described pro-life crosses

Posted in Pro-choice People, pro-choice violence with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 8, 2015 by saynsumthn

Apparently today’s pro-choicers are a little soft and very easily offended!

Case in point, when a pro-life cross display representing children killed from legal abortion went up on a college campus, pro-choicers had a tizzy.

A video uploaded to YouTube shows the abortion supporters protesting the display at the Central Library Mall of the University of Texas-Arlington.

The 2,900 pro-life crosses were put up by the group, Pro-Life Mavericks.

Prolife Maverick Signs

Now, I have been in this movement a very long time and I have witnessed pro-choicers get upset about a lot of things before….but…crosses?

Apparently, as abortion advocate Olivia Frost explains – the crosses tell abortion supporters “we can go to hell.”

Olivia Frost

Then there was pro-choicer Cody Needham and he “just wants to have a discussion.

Really?

Cody Needham abortion disciussion

If you’re going to hate,” Cody said, “at least tell us why you hate. That way we can at least have this general forum without just yelling at each other. That’s what starts wars- that’s what starts fights.”

Hate? Pro-life crosses are hate?

Get a spine man!!!

So – what was the group’s solution?

Get the pro-life display taken down- removed- censored from their campus.

And when campus admin wouldn’t do it – someone did:

Prolife Maverick crosses stolen

Thankfully, the group later found them hidden behind some walls on the other side of the street.

Please fill me in, just who is hating here again?

CJ Pearson, a young black 12 year-old blasts Obama gets shut down by Facebook

Posted in Black Conservative, Censorship, Facebook, Obama with tags , , , , , , , , , on March 2, 2015 by saynsumthn

CJ Pearson, a young 12 year-old who blasted Obama last week saying the president does not love America says Facebook has retaliated by pulling down his personal page.

The video link I used last week to post his vid- has also been removed by YouTube:

Thankfully- the original is still online:

CJ Pearson  1

According to the Examiner:

    On Friday, C.J. Pearson, a 12-year-old conservative from Georgia who posted a viral video supporting Rudy Giuliani, discovered that his personal Facebook page was locked. In an exclusive interview with Examiner.com on Saturday, Pearson said he received a message from someone about 6 a.m. Friday. That’s when he learned his account and page had been locked for “suspicious activity.”

    He jumped through all of Facebook’s hoops, but wasn’t able to recover his account. So he created a new profile to take its place. His public page was not affected, he said, however, he can no longer administer the page. Fortunately, he said, a friend is helping post links to that page.

    As is so often the case in these situations, Facebook did not respond to his requests for help. Nor would they tell him what the alleged suspicious activity was. We reached out to Facebook, but the social media giant has so far refused to respond to our request for comments.

Young supporters are already taking action:

His story will get out- he says he will also appear on Hannity:

CJ Pearson

Stop Patriarchy blocks pro-life blogger

Posted in Stop Patriarchy with tags , , , , , , , , , on January 12, 2015 by saynsumthn

Stop Patriarchy confront MFL

Within hours of my blog exposing Stop Patriarchy’s plan to counter protest at the Washington DC and San Francisco March for Life events, the radical pro-choice group blocked me from their Twitter page. How Mature!

( Read that blog post here)

Stop Patriarchy Blocks Saynsumthn Jan 12 2015

The same group that covers themselves with blood to protest women who died prior to Roe while simultaneously forgetting about women brutally killed from legal abortion TODAY are not BIG GIRL enough to allow a pro-life blogger to see what they are doing.

Stop Patriarchy Blood

STop Patriarchy Die In

___________________________________________

The group, which pals around with leftists like former terrorist Bill Ayers, abortion clinic owner Diane Derzis and former abortion clinic operator, Carol Downer, co-founder of the Feminist Women’s Health Center, are threatened by this blog- really?

Carol_Downer400x400

Speaking of Carol Downer, Stop Patriarchy just linked to an article Downer wrote which was published in Counterpunch. I will cite from below to show you the warped mindset of these people:

I’d like to propose that women revive the meetings with other women to share vaginal self-examination to build a movement that could actually seize the means to gain sovereignty for themselves, and to change the power relationship between all women and the State?

“Unless a substantial number of us learn how to reliably and safely prevent or terminate pregnancy ourselves, reproductive rights activists’ strategies will be limited to demanding, begging, petitioning, voting, and/or, lobbying, suing, or rabble-rousing whenever the political climate changes worsens.

Stop Patriarchy women dead abortion

Anyway- Stop Patriarchy has put out a call for quality signs they can parade around during the marches of women who allegedly died duing the days of illegal abortion -so very many years ago!

Stop Patriarchy’s website explains, “THIS JANUARY we want to bring HUGE pictures of women who died from illegal abortion. In many protests, we have carried 11” x 17” enlargements of the pictures included here and the effect is dramatic.”

But the graphics are poor quality, very “pixalated” and we can’t enlarge these files any bigger without losing the image altogether.

“Can you recreate these images so they will be 6 feet tall? An artistic rendering? What’s your idea?

“ALSO, help develop a concept of how these can be effectively and easily displayed. Using PVC pipe? A better idea?

“We must have these graphics by Jan 19 at the latest. Contact us today at stoppatriarchy@gmail.com if you have ideas or want to get involved.”

Hey members of Stop Patriarchy, the pro-life movement already has plenty of LARGE images of women killed from legal abortion which you can use:

Tonya Reaves _3399880429594703002_n

Lakish Wilson 8846_450713531525543038_n

And here is a picture of a woman killed from legal abortion which I took myself – at her funeral!

img169
Carolina Gutierrez, bought the lie that abortion is a safe, legal procedure. It took her six weeks to die from an infection so bad after her abortion that she developed gangrene.

On December 19, 1995, Carolina Gutierrez, a young Hispanic immigrant woman and mother of two, went to the Maber Medical Center abortion clinic in Miami, Florida to undergo a “Safe/Legal” abortion. At the clinic, she was given a business card printed in Spanish — and a sheet in English warning about possible complications of the abortion, including infection. Neither Gutierrez nor her husband reads English. When Carolina returned home that afternoon, she was staggering and complaining of pain in her belly and chest. Fever set in. She called the clinic and someone hung up. During the next two days, Gutierrez called the clinic at least twice more and left messages on an answering machine but no one called back. By December 21, Carolina was barely able to breathe and the family dialed 911. At Jackson Memorial Hospital, doctors said Gutierrez was suffering from blood infection so severe that she was in septic shock with an infection that led to gangrene in her feet and fingers.

img165img168

Lawyers for the family said doctors told them that her uterus was perforated at least twice. Within days, doctors decided the threat of spreading gangrene was greater than the risk of surgery and they made the difficult decision to amputate both of Carolina’s legs just below the knees to contain the infection. Despite all of this, on February 5,1996, the 21-year-old woman died, according to an autopsy, of an infection “subsequent to termination of pregnancy.” When her death became public, the Maber Medical Center abortion clinic shut its doors. Operators Roque Garcia and Maria Luisa Garcia dropped out of public sight. Lawyers for the family say that their law firm received numerous calls from women who have developed complications following abortions performed at Maber or by its staff physician, Dr. Luis Marti. Their complaints mirror what happened to Gutierrez. The principal difference is that they survived, and she didn’t.

And there is always this one of Marla Cardemone- her autopsy was uploaded by a pro-life group at the request of her mother who wanted the world to know what legal abortion did to her daughter.

SafeandLegalabortion Marla Cardamone

Don’t be fooled- Stop Patriarchy is not interested in women or their health- they want one thing: Abortion on Demand W/O Apology!