Ex-Boyfriend Puts Up Billboard Blasting Ex-Girlfriend’s Abortion

When is the First Amendment officially being abused?  This scenario is a perfect example of abuse.  A man is not happy with his ex-girlfriend’s decision to have an abortion (which she insists was a miscarriage) and he goes out and pays for a billboard that reads:

“This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!”

Also on the billboard, he  is holding the silhouette of a baby.  Greg Fultz, 35, is arguing that his ex-girlfriend robbed him of his choice, but the ex got herself an attorney and took  him for to court for violation of privacy as well as harassment.  When is enough enough?  The first amendment argument has long been a point of controversy.  So many groups (and individuals, in this case) hide behind it and are not held accountable for their actions because of it.  There are very few cases where the first amendment is being used for the right reasons.

According to Fox News,  the court has suggested the billboard be removed.  This would be the first time that the argument over the first amendment rights would overshadow abortion rights.  Read more here.  Let us know what you think! Should you be able to say whatever and write whatever you want on a billboard, clothes, documents, etc., as long as you feel passionate about it?

3 thoughts on “Ex-Boyfriend Puts Up Billboard Blasting Ex-Girlfriend’s Abortion”

  1. I think the bigger issue is a man’s right to his child. In this case if she did in fact have a miscarriage and not an abortion then okay, he is out of bounds because you can’t help having a miscarriage. That’s a no brainer.

    BUT if she did in fact have an abortion and he wanted the child then, well I think that’s wrong. 100% wrong. Just because you carry the baby doesn’t make it more yours than his. This is why being Pro Choice can get really shady. If she wanted the baby and he didn’t, he’d be considered an ogre for asking her to abort it. But because it’s the other way around, the man is at fault in a case like this? If he wants it and not her, perhaps she should be required to have the baby and then give it to him or possibly have the embryo transferred to a surrogate. Fair is fair – and pro choice is SO not fair in a case where the man wants the baby but the woman does not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *