Billboard firm rejects pro-life ads

A billboard company has blocked a national pro-life group's latest effort to post ads linking a congressional candidate to abortion funding – in the wake of a similar 2010 effort that resulted in a defamation lawsuit.

The Susan B. Anthony List ads argue Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., supports taxpayer-funded abortions because he voted in favor of President Obama’s health care overhaul legislation.

The group two years ago contracted with the same firm, Lamar Advertising, to post similar ads against then-Rep. Steve Driehaus, an Ohio Democrat who lost his re-election race and sued the Susan B. Anthony List. Lamar declined to accept the Driehaus ads under pressure.

The group calls Driehaus' suit “frivolous,” and it argues Lamar Advertising's recent decision not to run the anti-Donnelly ads on its billboards raises First Amendment questions.

Continue reading at www.foxnews.com

« Previous Article

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

John Adams

I believe that it is certainly the right of the billboard company to accept or reject whatever business they choose. However, Christian business men also MUST be allowed to also accept or reject whatever business THEY choose. The same goes for B&B owners, etc. We've all heard the stories of bakers, printers, B&B owners, etc. who have been taken to court for refusing service to queers, "pro-choice" (pro-death) supporters, etc. Christian's freedom of religion, expression, association MUST NOT be taken away!!
- Evermyrtle
  
  You are right but does that right extend to Conservatives as well as to liberals, alsot??
  
  What if a conservative refused to print liberal anti-GOD posters, what would happen?? I might ask, also, are there any conservative billboard companies, who would dare refuse to print such??
  - John Adams
    
    I believe that EVERY businessman, whatever their political, moral, religious beliefs, has the right to accept or reject any business. NO ONE should be forced to do business with someone with whom they disagree or do anything against their beliefs.
    - fort9erdon
      
      Absolutely CORRECT! And this should apply to motels, hotels, Bed and Breakfast's, printers, bakers, ANYONE IN BUSINESS, who operates on private property should have the right to set standards for that business, including Chick-fil-a! If you are a business, that leases your facilities from the government, then AND ONLY THEN, should the government be allowed to meddle in your affairs of business. If I am a baker, and I refuse to bake a wedding cake, depicting "two grooms", I should be able to say "Hell no", I won't bake the queer cake, without legal repercussions. AND, CONGRESS, WE NEED LEGISLATION GUARANTREEING THIS "RIGHT OF CONSCIENCE"!
      - John Adams
        
        Exactly!!
Evermyrtle

I believe there are two basic sets of religious groups. There are the Christian group and there are the Satanist groups. I am often wrong and could be now, but I believe every person is a part of one of these groups. We cannot be wishy-washy, we are one or the other, in my opinion. groups.
- John Adams
  
  You are absolutely correct. Those who are not for Christ are against Him.
Public Citizen

Lamar may be risking the loss of any franchise rights granted by the states it does business in for refusing advertising of this type.
If any of their billboards are located on state right of way there is a definite First Amendment issue in play. Only if ~~all~~ of their billboards are located on private property then they are in a position to assert right of editorial control.
- judy64
  
  if they can refuse, then anyone ought to be able to refuse anyone for anything of their choice.
dntmkmecomoverther

It doesn't 'raise' 1st amendment questions, it CONFIRMS them. Sue the bas tards.
lostproton

Research the court decision against the Port Authority in New York City over refusing pro-Israel ads on busses. Yes Lamar is a private business. However if they post ads for the pro-abortion side then they must answer for the disparity. It is the same as privately owned bed and breakfast refusing to rent to a homosexual couple or the photography studio refusing to do wedding pictures of a homosexual marital affair in a state that outlaws homosexual marriage; in both cases the homosexuals won. It is called "descrimination" and the courts have been given the right to decide.
http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/QHRUML5XFH7AMSWH63TQH7F7E4 MalikTous

Wonder if they'd accept my preferred 'Get the government out of the abortion issue!' messages? I reject both public prepaid abortions for other than health of mother issues or rape pregnancies, and efforts to restrict abortions through bad laws; I feel that whether or not to abort is a decision between a woman, her own faith, and possibly her husband. And I'm fully supportive of contraception so the kids who are born are much more likely to be wanted, and research into artificial womb decanters along with promotion of adoption, embryo transfer between wombs, surrogate pregnancy, and other ways to minimise the need for abortion. Just keep the government's hands out of it!
- js
  
  As long as it is paid for by a government fund the people should be involved. Majority rules.
David S.

A company can do business with whomever they wish. End of story.