Jilted ex-boyfriend puts up abortion billboard

[slim 1,533]

Actually, I think he did from what I've read. He received press for the billboard before she got involved.

And that's when he released her name?

If the guy used the womans initials alongside a picture of himself - that identifies the woman. She would know he was referring to her and so would her friends and family.

As for free speech, writing on the walls in your own feces might be free speech but it's still fvcking nuts.

Of course he did, he's obviously a massive self promoter.

If he posted her initials than maybe there's something to it.

Even still, posting factual information should never be a crime.

BTW, her first name was on the billboard! Her name is NANI and apparently the "National Association for Needed Information" had supported the board and included their acronym.

It was removed after complaints.

The plot thickens.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And that's when he released her name?

If he posted her initials than maybe there's something to it.

Even still, posting factual information should never be a crime.

The plot thickens.

The billboard isn't factual if the ex-girlfriend the man is referring to didn't have an abortion. Even if she did, it's still dubious to advertise it publicly via billboard.

[slim 1,533]

The billboard isn't factual if the ex-girlfriend the man is referring to didn't have an abortion. Even if she did, it's still dubious to advertise it publicly via billboard.

Dubious is not illegal nor a violation of someone's rights.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Dubious is not illegal nor a violation of someone's rights.

Libel? Defamation of character? Harassment? These things are not a violation of rights?

Come on...

Edited June 15, 2011 by fishdude

[slim 1,533]

Libel? Defamation of character? Harassment? These things are not a violation of rights?

Come on...

Was it any of those things?

What I see in today's world is people choosing to be in the spotlight when they don't have to be and then claiming their rights were violated. "No comment." goes a long way, even today.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Was it any of those things?

What I see in today's world is people choosing to be in the spotlight when they don't have to be and then claiming their rights were violated. "No comment." goes a long way, even today.

The guy in the billboard is choosing to be in the spotlight. He doesn't have to.

No billboard, no legal action.

[slim 1,533]

The guy in the billboard is choosing to be in the spotlight. He doesn't have to.

No billboard, no legal action.

No names. That's not exactly putting someone's business out there.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

No names. That's not exactly putting someone's business out there.

I thought you'd conceded that there was more to the story...

Ugly Twists in Ex-Boyfriend Greg Fultz's Abortion Billboard Story

The story of Greg Fultz, the "jilted ex-boyfriend" who put up a billboard accusing his ex-girlfriend Nani Lawrence of aborting their baby, initially spurred some sympathy on both sides. Twists in the story reveal a deeper, uglier picture than Fultz originally portrayed.

In May, Fultz, 35, of Alamogordo, N.M., bought billboard space on White Sands Boulevard. The billboard showed Fultz holding the silhouette of an infant. It read "This Would Have Been a Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To NOT KILL Our Child!"

Lawrence says she did not have an abortion but a miscarriage. Ellen Jessen, Lawrence's attorney, says either way, it's an invasion of her client's privacy. Fultz and his attorney, Todd Holmes, defend the billboard under the Westboro Baptist Church funeral protest law.

Albert Snyder, father of deceased Lance Corp. Matthew Snyder, at whose funeral WBC protested, sued the protesters. The Supreme Court found in favor of WBC''s right to free speech 8-1. Fultz's billboard is protected as free speech.

There are some interesting twists in the abortion billboard story. It seems Fultz may not be so much the victimized father fighting for his paternal rights that he has styled himself.

First, Fultz admits he isn't sure whether Lawrence had an abortion. When their six-month relationship ended, Lawrence lost the baby but would not tell Fultz what happened. She maintains she had a miscarriage. He says his billboard wasn't aimed at Lawrence but to spread awareness for fathers' rights.

Next, supporters of Fultz claimed the billboard was not harassment because he doesn't mention Lawrence by name. There are several issues with that. Alamogordo is not a large town; its population is 35,000. In a smaller town, people know each other. Fultz also did post his ex-girlfriend's name on the billboard, albeit in a subliminal way. The billboard proclaims three endorsements:

"Created for: N.A.N.I. -- National Association for Needful Information." This organization is of Fultz's creation and is an obvious reference to his girlfriend. "Nani" is not a common name. Fultz has since morphed the endorsement to read C.A.N.I. (Coalition About Needful Information).

The second endorsement from Right to Life New Mexico has also been pulled. The pro-life group rescinded permission to use their logo after it was discovered Lawrence may not have had an abortion.

Another twist is that Lawrence has since filed not only an order for protection but domestic violence charges against Fultz. In order to file DV charges, there must be issues not only of invasion of privacy, but also of harm or threat of harm. Otherwise, the only charges would be harassment. The court says if Fultz doesn't pull the billboard by June 17, he may face jail time. Fultz is calling the action a violation of his civil liberties, but the jail time may more to do with the violence charges than with the freedom of speech issue.

The last endorsement GEFNET is Fultz's company. Searching for Greg Fultz led to GEFBLOG which directed me to his personal website Greg.Fultz.com. At first, I wondered if they were maintained by a different person, but the blog refers to his billboard. On his Facebook, Fultz refers to himself as the "Billboard Guy". He clearly likes the notoriety. Just looking over his social websites paints a very different version than the billboard grieving father Greg Fultz.

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/jilted-ex-boyfriend-puts-abortion-billboard-194142831.html

[Stuart and Thea 95]

Even still, posting factual information should never be a crime.

Forgive me, but does his billboard not say that she killed his unborn child? In my opinion, that is untrue, she either had a miscarriage or an abortion, which is nobody's business and of no matter anyway. He's accusing her of murder, of which there was no such thing. He therefore was not posting factual information, no matter how personal, and therefore I'd like to vote none of the above to the poll and say that this should be a libel case. Clearly, neither miscarriage nor abortion amounts to killing a human being, because that's against the law.

Also, thankyou to this thread for introducing me to the terms ** and conservafreak. Hilarious.

I wonder if I can find an address for this woman to thank her for not bringing any of his DNA into the world?

[slim 1,533]

I thought you'd conceded that there was more to the story...

Obviously, there is more to the story. However, nowhere in there did it say he's identified her. What it does say is SHE is charging him.

Once again, had she simply said, "no comment" when asked about it, this whole ordeal could've been avoided.

Forgive me, but does his billboard not say that she killed his unborn child?

Who is she?

And while we're at it, who is he?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Obviously, there is more to the story. However, nowhere in there did it say he's identified her. What it does say is SHE is charging him.

Once again, had she simply said, "no comment" when asked about it, this whole ordeal could've been avoided.

Once again, had the guy not put up his silly billboard in the first place, this whole ordeal could have been avoided.

Once again, he has identified her - he created a fake organisation using the letters of her first name. He put the billboard up in the town where she the woman lives.

[slim 1,533]

Once again, had the guy not put up his silly billboard in the first place, this whole ordeal could have been avoided.

Are you saying if we don't exercise our 1A rights we'll never have any problems? Govt. reps everywhere just thumbs upped this post!

Every man has a right to put up whatever billboard he can pay for, provided it doesn't infringe upon the rights of anyone else.

Once again, he has identified her - he created a fake organisation using the letters of her first name. He put the billboard up in the town where she the woman lives.

He put an acronym with the same letters as her first name on the billboard. A far cry from "publicly identifying" her.

In the town where she lives? He didn't put it in her yard, did he? He didn't have an arrow pointing to her house, did he? A passerby reading that sign would have no idea who that dude was nor any idea who the ex-girlfriend was either.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Dude, it's harrassment, can you not see that? Whether he puts her name out there in full or in a form of code, it's still wrong.

[slim 1,533]

Dude, it's harrassment, can you not see that? Whether he puts her name out there in full or in a form of code, it's still wrong.

I disagree. I believe he's free to post a billboard of whatever he wants, provided it doesn't infringe upon anyone's rights. From what I can tell (and the average passer-by) this is a standard anti-abortion billboard.

Only when she took it public did it become a publicity issue. Prior to that, nobody knew who he was and they darn sure didn't know who she was.

When we start disallowing folks to voice opinions in public simply because someone disagrees with it then we all lose our freedom.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's harassment.