Slashdot Mirror
Appeals Court Finds "Nuremberg Files" Site Unlawful
Greplaw writes "The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this evening that an anti-abortion website that featured "wanted" posters of various abortion doctors constituted a "true threat." The website, called The Nuremberg Files, is therefore not protected by the First Amendment and is illegal under a 1994 law prohibiting threats against abortion doctors. The full opinion of the court is available on Findlaw. This case marks one of the first times that a website has been ruled to constitute such a threat." Our previous story has the background on the case. The District Court found the website was an unlawful threat; a three-judge panel of the Appeals court found that it wasn't; and now the entire Appeals court has found, by a 6-5 vote, that it was indeed unlawful. The case could be appealed to the Supreme Court next. The accepted definition of a threat unprotected by the First Amendment is one which "on its face and in the circumstances in which it is made is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate and specific as to the person threatened, as to convey a gravity of purpose and imminent prospect of execution", and there is considerable dissent among the judges over whether a website can or cannot meet that standard.
Understanding the Pro-Life movement's basic argument and agreeing with it are totally understandable. Understanding the steps to get from "life begins at conception" and "life should be protected" to "kill abortionists" requires understanding huge leaps in logic.
:) respecting their "privacy"
Is it the same logic that prevents the church from turning in priests that molests kids?
"life should be protected" --> 1."child molestation is wrong" -->
2."Priest molests little boy, its the devils work" -->
3."send to counciling" -->
4."send to new church far away" -->
Repeat step 2
So where are the websites against these people? oh thats right, the church won't release info on them
All hail they mighty bullshit called religion!
Religion isn't a joke, these people are. I hate it when people equate good religion with bad religion. You don't make obviously stupid generalizations based on sex or race (I guess I might be assuming too much here), why do so based on religion?
Religion is a total joke and those people are worse! there is no good religion in the world muh friend. Religion serves one purpose and always has.. Mass Control of people. thats what it was used for thousands of years ago and the ruling classes understood it could become a powerful tool to control the fools err commoners.
All religion does is hold back innovation and free thought throughout the past 5-10000 years at least and prevents advancement of our race.. if you don't beleive me.. study it.. its all there.
Religion simply builds a constraing force on any society to benefit a few.
And i'm sorry if your one of em.. have a great life.. when you die.. you'll be beetle food.. thats it.. move on with yer life and enjoy it while ya can..
Why are people so protective of children and babies? Because they're defenceless human beings who deserve the right to grow up and fulfill their potential. Unfulfilled potential applies doubly to unborn children. Why not allow murdering small babies? They can't talk, they have no personality and are otherwise useless, right?
Grow some moral fibre please. If you kill unborn children you deserve as much compassion as Hitler.
Fetuses are not children.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
How about if americans in general stop renaming every place they can't be bothered to pronounce right? Nurnberg, NOT Nuremberg.
And yes, the anti-abortionists are sick fucks.
I'm gonna go out and kill some unborn kids right now. Where are those tissues and the stump-porn I bought? If you want, I can send you the results to use in your propaganda campaign.
"It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
Fetuses are not children.
certainly not. however, there is debate as to if they are human. they may be, they may be not. it seems to me, that with such high stakes (potentially taking human life) that it would only be prudent to exercise some iota of caution.
You really have no clue, do you?
Then again, shouldn't expect better from an Anonymous Coward.
And for the record, I am libertarian. Which probably means that by comparisson, the stupid socialist fuck in this discussion would be you. Why am I not surprised?
I'm pro-death (pro-choice and support capital punishment), but I don't like the way many pro-choice groups try to ignore the Bill of Rights when pro-life groups exercise their constitutional rights.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Earn some first year biology -- a blastocyst is not a human being
thanks, i did take bio 101. and you'll get no argument from me about a blastocyst not being a human. however, the question remains: is that blastocyst alive? you did not answer that question, and even if you did, you'd be met with plenty (read: more than 1) disagreement.
A vegetable is not morally worthy of consideration when you apply rights to it that supercede the rights of a grown human being to self-determination.
not morally worthy to you perhaps, but certainly to many others.
Plus there is always the extremely kooky idea among the educated and/or enlightened that your body is actually your own and that you have the right to exert control over the natural processes that of your body.
so if someone does not agree with this idea, they are not educated? wrong: i'm plenty educated and i do not. am i not enligthened? that's certainly arguable, and if being enlightened means sharing in your group-think, i'll happily describe myself as unenlightened.
and it is those ideals that are used to deny women the right of controlling their reproductive processes through law.
i'm sorry, to what law are you refering? is there a law on the books in the US that "denies" a woman these "rights"?
You are absolutely too stupid to respond to in detail. Your rant on the logical equivalence of faith and lack of faith is moronic.
If some anti abortionists target a doctor then they should be targeted in return with added interest. For ever doctor killed there should be a massacre of anti-abortion activisits (dressed
up as an accident of course like Wacko) when they haved one of their bible thumping meets. They'd
soon get the message and if not they'd soon be all dead anyway,
No I'm not trolling , these are my genuine views.