Abortion Protestors Target Fathers

BY  |  Friday, Mar 23, 2012 4:42pm  |  COMMENTS (29)

The protesters across Bloomfield Ave. from Montclair’s abortion clinic are taking a new tack — holding up signs talking about the deprivations felt by would-be fathers. The men didn’t look up when I went to take their photo; the man in the center read scripture quietly while his companions avoided eye contact.

29 Comments

  1. POSTED BY montoverrated  |  March 23, 2012 @ 5:12 pm

    Ugh. Glad to see that they are across the street though. It is disgraceful to see them right in front of the clinic, with the police office chatting amiably away with them.

  2. POSTED BY Pork Roll  |  March 23, 2012 @ 6:04 pm

    Debbie, this post confuses me. The headline suggests that the protesters were directing their protests at fathers, but the photo and the text of the post itself indicates these men are protesting against abortion because it deprives the fathers of the company of their offspring, in which case the protest remains targeted at women.

    Considering that 100% of pregnancies are caused by men, it would indeed be refreshing if some of these anti-abortion folks were to acknowledge that women do not spontaneously (or immaculately) conceive.

    However, given the position of many abortion opponents that even fetuses conceived out of rape or incest should be carried to term, I don’t expect them to soon acknowledge that the fathers are just as responsible as the mothers – or even more so – for unwanted pregnancies.

  3. POSTED BY cathar  |  March 23, 2012 @ 6:13 pm

    This is hardly “disgraceful,” montoverrated. Surely you support the legal right of peaceful protest, regardless of who the protesters are.

    It certainly was a confusing headline, however. I first assumed it meant that if fathers had been more involved once pregnancy was determined, this might in fact result in less abortions.

    Of course, it might also have been useful, even journalistically illuminating, if some intrepid Baristanet reporter had actually asked the protesters (politely, to be sure) where they in fact were from, and what brought them to Montclair. This would certainly have been a more useful approach than merely taking the protesters’ picture. So would that have been too hard?

  4. POSTED BY PAZ  |  March 23, 2012 @ 6:33 pm

    Who was holding the sign “Even irresponsible men can be fathers too.”?

  5. POSTED BY jcunningham  |  March 23, 2012 @ 8:29 pm

    “Women do regret abortion”

    —pithy. who says they don’t? these folks are mind readers as well, apparently.

    this is about more than controlling women’s bodies. this is about controlling how people think and feel. THAT is disgraceful.

  6. POSTED BY Jimmytown  |  March 23, 2012 @ 9:16 pm

    I’d like to protest across the street from them holding a sign protesting the spaying and neutering of dogs and cats.

    I’ve never heard of someone who is pro-life have a solution to raising an unwanted child, whether it was the outcome of incest, rape, or adolescent pregnancy.

  7. POSTED BY crazycat  |  March 23, 2012 @ 9:25 pm

    Porkroll It takes two to tango

  8. POSTED BY Nellie  |  March 23, 2012 @ 9:25 pm

    There is a solution, jimmytown. Adoption. These men look peaceful. Any protest is an attempt to away majority opinion. To jump from that to mind control is a but extreme.

  9. POSTED BY Nellie  |  March 23, 2012 @ 9:33 pm

    away= sway

  10. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  March 23, 2012 @ 10:47 pm

    gee, isn’t that swell. maybe they should learn to keep their dicks in their pants or spend some money to buy condoms. honestly, the hypocrisy.

  11. POSTED BY cyndella1  |  March 24, 2012 @ 12:56 am

    OMG-there was a sign I saw once I LOVED…

    “If you are against abortion, then dont have one”

    ITS none of their business, to agree or disagree. IF they would like, they can take the babues that are unwanted into THEIR homes and pay for the HIGH medical isurance, daycare and all of that. They can provide if THEY are so concerned. Stnading around with a sign for a few hours, wow. These women are making a choice, rather than have a child in poverty-that wil wind up abused, or god forbid in a dumpster somewhere.

    IS that better-if the child is BORN, then killed…? Well, at least they were born….

    Good thing I wasnt out on Bloomf ave today…sheesh

  12. POSTED BY DagT  |  March 24, 2012 @ 1:13 am

    It is without a doubt, according to some reports, that some women regret having an abortion. Just ask the guy hoding that sign. But there’s a truth rarely mentioned. Some women are relieved that the choice they makes to abort a fetus is done in a medically safe environment. Relieved too that she does not have to bear an unwanted, for whatever reason, pregnancy.

  13. POSTED BY PAZ  |  March 24, 2012 @ 9:23 am

    Dag T…..Better keep that on the QT. In Herb’s post-Obama land,you will be dragged off in the dead of night to a rehabilitation center and thumped with bibles by the very guys in that picture.

  14. POSTED BY the28thfish  |  March 24, 2012 @ 9:51 am

    Yeah, I was driving down Bloomfield ave this morning and was shocked with a large poster of an aborted fetus on it. My question is, why make children see these horrific images on a Saturday morning?

  15. POSTED BY Bill Courson  |  March 24, 2012 @ 10:07 am

    If males got pregnant, the Church would consider abortion to be a sacrament.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Catholicism-Today/207387722701836

  16. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  March 24, 2012 @ 11:54 am

    How about trying not to get pregnant (or getting someone pregnant) in the first place, if you don’t want a child? Condoms are available, affordable, and while no form of birth control is 100% effective, I can guarantee you that the odds of getting pregnant are higher if you don’t use any birth control at all.

  17. POSTED BY the28thfish  |  March 24, 2012 @ 12:22 pm

    Mrs Martta: Although what you are saying is practical and makes sense, how do we fix the problem for rape victims who did not choose to have unprotected sex?

  18. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  March 24, 2012 @ 12:25 pm

    The28thfish: Obviously I don’t include rape and incest victims in my comments above. For the record, I am pro-choice but I would like to see more folks not use abortion as a means of birth control.

  19. POSTED BY the28thfish  |  March 24, 2012 @ 12:33 pm

    I don’t think people really want to have abortions, nor do I think they even use it as birth control. After all, don’t you think $1000 is quite a lot to spend in comparison to a condom? Sometimes it seems like people are being left without many options; Banning abortions, defunding Planned Parenthood, (which supplies people with preventive materials to avoid abortions.) They can’t take everything away and leave people without any options.

  20. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  March 24, 2012 @ 12:55 pm

    “After all, don’t you think $1000 is quite a lot to spend in comparison to a condom?”

    Exactly! So what does that tell you? It tells me that not a lot of thought went into the situation.

    I agree with you to some extent about decreasing options (especially in rural areas) but as long as stores sell condoms, there is that option. Some places (college campuses) even give them away for free.

  21. POSTED BY hf12  |  March 24, 2012 @ 1:05 pm

    Mrs. Martta – If birth control was 100% effective and had no side effects (i.e. the pill), i think this argument could have some weight. however, i personally know two people who used condoms every time they had sexual intercourse and still got pregnant. So, i disagree with your assumption that people who have abortions got pregnant due to negligience on their part. While that obviously happens (and i don’t know the statistics about how many people), we need to keep in mind individuals who do what they are “supposed to” and still get pregnant.

  22. POSTED BY aflarfin  |  March 24, 2012 @ 1:45 pm

    I have yet to see one of these protesters bring their adopted special needs kids…;)

    Tell me who’s adopting all these kids and who’s paying for them and ect ect ect.

    I enjoy giving them the finger as I drive by with a toot…and like one of the ticket writters from parking wars said…”he wasn’t saying hi” Nor am I telling them they are number 1.

  23. POSTED BY kit schackner  |  March 24, 2012 @ 3:52 pm

    Years ago, there was a vacuum store next door to that clinic. I took my 3 year old to buy bags. We entered through the rear and exited out front. When we came out onto Bloomfield Ave, my daughter walked smack into one of those posters of a dismembered fetus which a woman was leaning on. It was eye-level to my child. I spun my daughter around so she faced me and told the woman to move it away from the child. She looked right through me, not moving. I don’t believe the right to peaceful protest includes frightening a child. I find those people despicable.

  24. POSTED BY thirtyseconds  |  March 24, 2012 @ 4:54 pm

    Sadly, I was aborted as a fetus. I later found out my mother didn’t regret it at all. That guy’s sign lies! Can’t wait until Tebow joins the protest. Get your autograph books ready!

  25. POSTED BY theprimroseplath  |  March 24, 2012 @ 8:11 pm

    I don’t see how protesting outside of a clinic makes any bit of difference at all…..maybe you’ll intimidate a few people into not having an abortion. Is that the goal? I guess the bright side is that if a few protesters is all it takes to make you reconsider having an abortion, then maybe you aren’t ready to make that big of a decision. I am a big proponent of animal rights, but I don’t sit outside of steak houses with pictures of slaughtered cows, because that’s dumb…and it’s probably not going to change anyone’s mind…nor do I really want to. I trust people to make decisions for themselves, especially if those decisions have nothing at all to do with me. If you oppose abortion, isn’t the abortion clinic kind of a late intervention?

  26. POSTED BY spicoli  |  March 24, 2012 @ 9:02 pm

    I don’t agree with the protesters view points, but I absolutely support their right to peacefully protest.

  27. POSTED BY theprimroseplath  |  March 24, 2012 @ 10:08 pm

    I agree, that’s a constitutional right….but when you are forcing children to see blood and gore photos of aborted fetuses, I would argue you are then infringing on their rights and innocence. The men in the picture have tasteful signs, but I’ve seen fairly graphic ones quite recently, and children holding them. I suppose that is the prerogative of those parents, but why subject other people’s children to the same?

Leave a Reply

Baristanet Comment Policy:

Baristanet has specific guidelines for commenting. To avoid having your comment deleted -- or your commenting privileges revoked -- read this before you comment. Violators will be banned from commenting.

Report a comment that violates the guidelines to comments@baristanet.com. For trouble with registration or commenting, write to comments@baristanet.com.

Commenters on Baristanet.com are responsible for all legal consequences arising from their comments, including libel, infringement of copyright or actions that threaten a third party. By submitting a comment, you agree to indemnify Baristanet LLC, its partners and employees from any legal action arising from your comments.

In order to comment on the new system, you need to register a new Baristanet account. To get your own avatar next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Featured Comment

The coffee is fantastic. So is the food! It is around the corner from Nicolo's bakery, for those readers not familiar with the area.

Tip, Follow, Friend, Subscribe

Links & Information

New Jersey Gas Prices provided by GasBuddy.com
Click here to add this map to your website.