Anonymous #3 1w

Disturbing the Peace and violations of the FACE Act

-5

Anonymous OP 1w

How does this violate the FACE act?

17

Anonymous #4 1w

The law forbids it, depending on the distance lmao

1

Anonymous #3 1w

It can discourage and potentially prevent people from seeking medical care

-1

Anonymous #1 1w

The law also forbids throwing bricks at people

2

Anonymous #1 1w

This is specific to three states, and I don’t see info that he is within a buffer zone within a specific state?

1

Anonymous OP 1w

The FACE act does not criminalize “discourage”ment. It criminalizes physical obstruction, threat, or assault to an abortion clinic

15

Anonymous #3 1w

The priest is in Denver, COLORADO

4

Anonymous OP 1w

That doesnt address my point either way

8

Anonymous #3 1w

The priest could very realistically be drawing a crowd that physically threatens people. The priest would have to be stupid not to assume what type of crowd he would draw

0

Anonymous OP 1w

The priest is performing mass. The FACE act does not prevent protest. If people go to break the law, that doesnt implicate the priest unless he encouraged it

6

Anonymous #1 1w

Nah the kid r dead he is good

-2

Anonymous #3 1w

He also is clearly in the 100 foot buffer zone. There is a sign saying “enter here” in the background obviously within 100 feet of him

0

Anonymous OP 1w

And even peaceful protest is illegal within a buffer zone

0

Anonymous OP 1w

(1) This has nothing to do with the FACE act, (2) youre referencing Colorado Rev. Stat. § 18-9-122 which talks about 100 feet within an “entrance door to a health-care facility” which is not clearly shown by the enter sign on a fence. Plus, it bans (3) approaching people within 8 feet within that buffer and not holding mass

4

Anonymous #3 1w

Eating a meal? A succulent Chinese meal?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Did I say it doesn’t?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

this post is about a priest possibly breaking the law and your only response is "b- bu- but the liberals!!!" because you have nothing to say when people you agree with break the law. whataboutism at it's finest

1

Anonymous #8 1w

Oh no I very much disagree with the priest. I’m pro choice completely. But what he’s doing is the right way to go about protesting

1

Anonymous #4 1w

if he's doing this within 100ft of an entrance door and 8ft of a person he's breaking the law, and you can't possibly know how he's conducting himself from a still image my point stands - bringing up liberals allegedly "throwing bricks at people" is whataboutism idc if you're pro or anti choice. your argumentation is intellectually dishonest and juvenile

1

Anonymous #8 1w

Your complain is Whataboutism. You’re trying to distract from the point I’m trying to make

1

Anonymous #4 1w

i already addressed your point bud

1

Anonymous #8 1w

What was my point then?

1

Anonymous #8 1w

And your response was based on making the assumption that this priest was being violent while supposedly celebrating mass?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

nobody said "violent" except you. you're the only one making assumptions. try again

1

Anonymous #4 1w

whataboutism AND straw manning? pick a struggle

1

Anonymous #8 1w

“You can’t possibly know how he’s conducting himself” it’s called reading between the lines, you’ve been through 5th grade language arts you know this stuff

1

Anonymous #4 1w

yes, i said you can't possibly know how he's conducting himself because you said it was "peacefully" and "the right way". there is a buffer zone law in colorado that prohibits people from protesting, counseling, etc. within 8ft of a person while within 100ft of an entrance to a clinic and this still image doesn't show whether or not he's been in that exact location - so i'm absolutely 100% correct... you can't possibly know. try again buddy

1

Anonymous #4 1w

you're the one assuming he was peaceful and doing it the "right way" lmao. not the other way around

1

Anonymous #8 1w

Well it’s very obvious that he’s not within 100 ft of a door to the building, so let’s get that out of the way. And yes, I’m making the assumption that a priest (who is in public and not with little kids that he can touch) is behaving in a peaceful manner. I feel like that’s a fairly reasonable assumption to make, and I would need evidence otherwise to move off of that opinion. Do you have any?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

it's not obvious. the left half of the building is cut off from the image and the right side of the building juts out. the left wing of this building - not shown - may very well be <100ft away. this is why i said a still image isn't evidence of anything and you can't possibly know. why on earth would he pose himself breaking the law? don't be foolish

1

Anonymous #8 1w

Ok you’re obviously trolling

1

Anonymous #4 1w

hey buddy if you wanna straw man, do whataboutism then act like a cropped image shows every detail i can't stop you. that's your own intellectual insufficiency to live with

1

Anonymous #4 1w

by this logic as long as those alleged brick throwing liberals had an image of them standing peacefully near their alleged targets with no bricks they'd be"peacefully" "doing it the right way"

1

Anonymous #8 1w

‘Well what if there’s a Harry Potter style entrance to the building hiding under the table and he’s currently blocking it? You ever think about that? 🤪’

1

Anonymous #8 1w

‘Yea he actually has a stack of bricks hidden under his robe that he’s about to throw at innocent pregnant women! You can’t tell me I’m wrong because you’re not there!’

1

Anonymous #4 1w

i'm saying the image is cropped. you have no clue where the entrance is, because there's a massive fence, but there is an "enter here" sign to the left right before where the image is cropped. no secret tunnels necessary - just a likely chance that there is an entrance nearby that's not being shown

1

Anonymous #4 1w

now you're just being bitter and childish lol

1

Anonymous #8 1w

You’re basically trying to convince me that there’s an entrance in the middle of the main road. I’m gonna guess that’s not the case

0

Anonymous #4 1w

why tf would it need to be in the middle of the road? that road is at most 20ft wide, plus 5 or so for the sidewalk. that leaves around 75ft beyond that fence where a door could be. you also don't know whether or not the cropped out part of the building is even flush with the road. for all you know there's a turn. my whole point is that you have exactly as much/little info as i do yet you're making bold assumptions that what he's doing is okay and that he hasn't moved from that spot

1