Federal court rules North Carolina 'Choose Life' license plate unconstitutional

  • Thread starter Thread starter RCIAGraduate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RCIAGraduate

Guest
RCIAGraduate said:
foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/12/federal-court-rules-north-carolina-choose-life-license-plate-unconstitutional/

Abortion is already a divisive issue and this policy could really unite people from sides(basically allowing a license plate with pro-life message to be. Now it’s being challenged. Please pray that pro-lifers to keep fighting for the cause and look for ways to connect and unite with pro-choice law-makers and individuals to protect and support life.
Click to expand...
Never call the killing of a baby ‘choice.’
 
The ruling suggests that believing that human life has value is merely a religious notion. What a dumb judge.
 
The problem with this ruling is the remedy of banning the license plate. The ACLU claims “Today’s ruling protects the right of North Carolinians of all political beliefs to have equal access to avenues for free speech,” when in reality it silences the voices of those who wanted the “Choose Life” plate.

The appropriate remedy should be to compel the state to produce a version of the “Respect Choice” plate and then let the people decide which cause or neither to support on their individual selection of a license plate.

The ACLU is more intent on silencing the religious groups than protecting free speech.
 
Do they allow a Pro Choice plate?

Either they should accept both or neither.
 
So what happens next? All those with the “wrong” plates have to spend money to get the acceptable variety? How Constitutional is that? And if they refuse will they be ticketed for having the offending plates? Does every person with those plates get a credit towards the acceptable variety? Did the State’s Legislators get involved? What a waste of tax dollars.

Glenda
 
ringil said:
Do they allow a Pro Choice plate?

Either they should accept both or neither.
Click to expand...
They do not, that was exactly the problem. The state argued it had a right to offer only a “Pro Life” plate and not a “Pro Choice” plate. In fact, “Respect Choice” was one of the options suggested but rejected by the state. The Court did not actually find that the state could not offer a pro life plate, only that it could not offer that plate and refuse to offer a pro choice plate.
 
TMC said:
They do not, that was exactly the problem. The state argued it had a right to offer only a “Pro Life” plate and not a “Pro Choice” plate. In fact, “Respect Choice” was one of the options suggested but rejected by the state. The Court did not actually find that the state could not offer a pro life plate, only that it could not offer that plate and refuse to offer a pro choice plate.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. Offer both or neither.
 
This seems less based on a Constitutional concept of “Free Speech” and more on some kind of a political-campaign “Equal Time”, which was not part of any Constitution, last time I checked.

If it were truly “Free Speech” then the state would have the right to remain silent for the cause of murdering children.

Let some other state take up the cause for murder, why should they all be alike?
 
The judge’s ruling says that vanity plates are essentially billboards, with a message paid for by the vehicle owner. As such, the state can not approve one political message while simultaneously forbidding an opposing viewpoint.

The decision is reasonable. There is nothing wrong with the “Choose Life” license plate, profits of which go to a pro-life organization. However, the state legislature repeatedly refused to approve a license plate with a pro-choice message, and that is what landed the pro-life license plate in court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top