Should Anti-Abortion Advertising be Banned?

[Link]

No. Government shouldn't be regulating private advertising, period.

Ugh.  Absolutely no thought given...

[Link]

No. Government shouldn't be regulating private advertising, period.

Ugh.  Absolutely no thought given...

That brings up a good point.  There is no private advertising in a sense.  The point of advertising is to make a message as public as possible.  To do that, advertising needs a public medium to grab people's eyeballs; the frontage of a public roadway, the public airwaves, public transit, etc.  If advertising appears in those collectively held areas, we can insist on a few modest regulations and fees. 

Yeah I think each individual person should have as many rights as possible.  But I don't think other people's rights should trample over mine with absolutely no regard.  It's like smoking in planes and restaurants.  Just because I have to travel for work and eat in restaurants doesn't mean I should have my cancer risk elevated just because someone else doesn't care about their health.  Smoke at home and look at obscene or disturbing advertising at home.  Don't plaster it where the rest of us are just trying to go about our day.

[Link]

I was considering going for option 3, but decided that advertising should be seen by everybody, and if its to graphic then it should be threatened to take down it should get enough criticism by people. But really for an advertisement exposed for the public it shouldn't be too graphic.

So you agree?  There should be certain community standards that don't need a case by case input from "the market."

I mean if someone wants to put up a picture of a vagina with semen dripping out of it on a billboard next to a primary school to advertise an adult video store you don't honestly think it should sit up there for a few weeks while you wait for a critical mass of emails to pour in to the government?

This is why libertarianism is a joke.  When you try and implement it strictly in real life it blows up in your face.  Of course there have to be preemptive government restrictions on advertisements that are displayed publicly.  Every adult video store that was looking for publicity would just put up billboards in front of schools, churches, etc. and wait for the news trucks to roll up.

[Link]

I think that's a fair point.

What's wrong with the case at hand is that its near impossible to interpret the signs as obscene. They're all variations of "Look at this cute baby, don't have an abortion". The author of the petition wants them removed because apparently women have the right to not feel bad about their decisions. Apparently anti-smoking and debt counselling ads are out the window. What complaints like this amount to is not a legitimate case about public standards, it's a case of a particular viewpoint trying to silencing contrary opinions.

The case at hand is not an example that I think should be subjected to a preemptive ban.  If you are going to have an abortion you should be able to deal with signs like that.  I think most people who have abortions don't view them as a happy thing... and neither should they.

[Link]

Why though, Link? I don't see having an abortion or being a nicotine addict, to use those as examples, of good things to feel bad about. Accidents happen, sometimes people have good intentions but imperfectly act on them, do not have enough information before making decisions, and are affected by forces that are honestly beyond their control. Getting help for it is already a huge hassle and source of stress, and adding clever forms of emotional abuse to the equation is horrible on the part of advertisers.

Personally, my defense of the ads is not on grounds that they are good or even harmless. The same could be said of many forms of political propaganda and hackery in the media similarly protected in spite of their detrimental affects on individuals and society alike.

I don't understand your point.  You never say sorry or feel bad after accidents?