34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - Directions - (508) 222-7000
cars | jobs | place an ad | subscribe
Home News Sports Features classifieds milestones services photos tvlistings cars jobs realestate subscribe
News

'Guidance' eyed on city parks demonstrations
BY GEORGE W. RHODES SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
Monday, September 21, 2009 2:18 AM EDT




Top Headlines
Looking back to see ahead at Wheaton

Readers share life-changing stories from inside Witschi's arena

Witschi's wrestling wonder

'Guidance' eyed on city parks demonstrations

Chairman switches boards

Print this story
Photo Reprints
RSS
Forums
 AddThis
ATTLEBORO - Park commissioners have shied away from making decisions on the requests of anti-abortion groups to use city parks and kicked the matter up to a higher authority.

The commission sent two requests, one to use Angell Park and the second to use Capron Park, to city hall asking for "guidance."

"I'm not exactly sure where we stand on religious events or social issue protest events," Chairman Hans Schaefer said. "I suggest we refer this to the mayor and city solicitor for guidance."

The request to use Angell Park came from a group called 40 Days for Life, which hopes to convene a prayerful gathering of two or three people at the park every day from Sept. 23 through Nov. 1.

Angell Park is at the intersection of Park and Emory streets, just across from the Four Women clinic, which performs abortions. 40 Days for Life spokesman Stephen Marcotte said the event is part of an effort in 150 cities across the country to end abortion.

"The reason we seek to gather at Angell Park is to peacefully pray for the end to abortion at Four Women," he said in a letter to Sonny Almeida, superintendent of parks. "This campaign is not a protest, but a peaceful prayerful gathering."

Marcotte said signs will be held during the gatherings, but they will not include images of fetuses considered to be "graphic."

"The national campaign does not endorse the use of these images during the campaign," he said.

Marcotte said police will be notified if he is aware the number of people planning to attend increases.

The park was named for Cyril M. Angell, who was killed in action May 14, 1918 in France during World War I.

Angell park was formerly known as Cummings Park. It was renamed in honor of Angell in 1925.

Capron Park request

The second request came from the Celebrate Life Committee of St. Joseph's Church.

That group wants to use the Newell Shelter at Capron Park to house representatives of different groups who will talk to youth about "options and choices regarding life issues." Ten groups that oppose abortion have been invited.

They include Students for Life, Citizens for Life, Friends of the Unborn and Birthright.

The event is scheduled for Oct. 9 from 2 to 5 p.m.
Return to Previous Page  


 


*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
View Comments » 19 comment(s) « Hide Comments

Post Your Comments

jlc79 wrote on Sep 22, 2009 6:03 AM:

" And, I wonder, what the families that live in that neighborhood shoudl do to 'avoid' the posters and protesters? "

Report Abuse

jlc79 wrote on Sep 21, 2009 7:32 PM:

" I would LOVE to have my kids avoid the area when the signs might be out except their school bus drives them right thru that intersection! "

Report Abuse

harry hindsight wrote on Sep 21, 2009 6:01 PM:

" If NORML has their prayer vigil AND their signs and no-one else showed up or went by, would their message be spread? This article is two fold, it gets their message heard by those that would not normally listen to them ( evne bad press is postive press) and it allows those that do not like their tactics and are worried about their kids seeing graphic images the notice to stay away from this area durring this time frame. Much like listening to the radio, if you don't like the song, turn the dial to something you like. If no one listens, no message is spread. "

Report Abuse

realist wrote on Sep 21, 2009 5:18 PM:

" Bear -- I was being a smart a$$ about the money for the parks. Of course I realize they are for the public good. I was aiming that comment at ChasorRob.
My point is that we cannot set up committees of taste or judgment, nor should we try. Free speech is free speech. If they violate the law, ie become disorderly then they should face the consequences.
When you start limiting freedom for one you limit it for all. "

Report Abuse

bear wrote on Sep 21, 2009 4:43 PM:

" TO SKEPTIC & REALIST: I believe that this group should be allowed to have their "prayer vigil", without the signs. Since this the colony of olde and we are a much bigger community - we have people working for us to uphold the best for the majority. In this case Sonny is doing just that - "hold your prayer service without the signs."

My point about the signs I stated previously, was to point out the fact that people who believe in the "good" of these signs are hypocritical because they would NEVER be in favor of the signs depicting dead or dying soldiers as a protest against the war.

As for asking for you tax dollars back, it's "part of the greater good of Attleboro". Unlike the rubbish or water (which are enterprise funds) it fits into the same category as the schools. "

Report Abuse

Liza5326 wrote on Sep 21, 2009 4:17 PM:

" I have no issues with the protestors themselves, they are ertainly free to protest whatever they want. However the posters that they display are unacceptable. In an area where children play and pass frequently, no less! I wouldn't want my children subjected to them. Why aren't they out there offering council to those who might need it without judgement? Or helping set up programs to help promote safe sex and prevent the pregnancies? "

Report Abuse

skeptic wrote on Sep 21, 2009 3:15 PM:

" Bear -- while I can't recall protesters recently with posters of casualties I do recall in the 70's then Congressmand Ron Dellums of Oakland using posters of what was alleged to be war crimes committed by US troops in Vietnam. They were quite graphic. No one would have dreamed of stopping him and denying his first amendment rights.
Okay he was in DC and not Attleboro, but free speech is supposed to be guaranteed to all. "

Report Abuse

realist wrote on Sep 21, 2009 3:10 PM:

" It used to be we had a long standing tradition in this state, back to when it was a colony, that public areas were not just for recreation but for airing political views whether others like them or not.
I am offended by NORML yet no one denies them permits. To pre-judge an assembly and deny them a permit is about as anti-American thing as I can think of. Take a look at the first amendment to the constitution on free speech and assembly. It doesn't say anything about as long as we don't offend others' sensibilities. I am against abortion but I don't like those graphic posters. They don't work anyway. But they should not be denied a permit.
As for parks being for kids -- where do I go for my tax refund since I pay to support those parks and I don't have kids. "

Report Abuse

ChasorRob wrote on Sep 21, 2009 2:47 PM:

" Hello Attleboro,
Re:Anti-Abortion Groups in Puplic Parks.

I think that to promote anti-abortion is a self-serving act by people who do not believe in freedom of choice in America. Without the legal privledge of proper medical accessability,there would be NO choice for families of different backrounds and beliefs.

I also feel that use of parks or other locations supported by public funds should not be allowed. As a self-serving organization the anti-abortion groups need to find more appropriate forums to discuss this "Adult Topic" with Adults. Parks are for kids.
Better that minors are not subjected to the information in demonstrations that are historically enhanced with
graphic,gruesome images designed to scare and shock people into emotional submission.
Thank You and Good day all. C "

Report Abuse

bear wrote on Sep 21, 2009 1:38 PM:

" " These pictures should NEVER be allowed on display in a public park where children are at play. So to take it in another direction, there is a group that until recently have demontrated in Attleboro center in support of our troops since the start of Bush's war. These are noble people doing a good thing supporting our troops. Supposed there was another group who happened to be against the war (not against the troops) and they had huge pictures of dead and dying soliders. Would you be in favor of such a display? " "

Report Abuse

bear wrote on Sep 21, 2009 1:37 PM:

" " These pictures should NEVER be allowed on display in a public park where children are at play. So to take it in another direction, there is a group that until recently have demontrated in Attleboro center in support of our troops since the start of Bush's war. These are noble people doing a good thing supporting our troops. Supposed there was another group who happened to be against the war (not agianst the troops) and they had huge pictures of dead and dying soliders. Would you be in favor of such a display? " "

Report Abuse

bingo wrote on Sep 21, 2009 1:29 PM:

" To skeptic:
I dont think that anti-war protesters would be so callous as to hold posters of war casualties.
What this group wants is political - to change our laws on abortion. How is this different than someone standing in Capron Park with a picture of someone that I want to win an election - which is not permitted. What is the difference?
Children in this city should not be subjected to these people and their posters. Deny the permit. "

Report Abuse

skeptic wrote on Sep 21, 2009 12:57 PM:

" I detect a certain amount of hypocrisy here.
If these were anti-war protesters holding up posters of war casualties this would not be an issue. But since any one against abortion is mentally unbalanced the government has the right to pre-censor them by denying a permit.
I know, facetiousness is unbecoming but the government does not have the right to deny a permit on the basis of what might be shown. "

Report Abuse

sunshinesonfire wrote on Sep 21, 2009 10:53 AM:

" I don't understand the point of those grotesque signs anyway. Are they implying that when a baby is aborted, that is what happens to it? My 9-year old could never get into a rated R movie, and those signs would definitely constitute as rated R material, and yet it is supposed to be acceptable for him to view that on the side of the road?

Over the summer, a protester had made his way to the center of Attleboro, across from Fortune House in that center island. Apparently an officer passed by, stopped his car, took the man's sign, and shredded it right in front of him. I wonder if those signs are truly "approved" by the Supreme Court. Or maybe the man was "protesting" too far from the clinic, I am not sure. But I think this should be the solution every time.

RATED G POSTERS ONLY! "

Report Abuse

common_sense wrote on Sep 21, 2009 10:39 AM:

" Bingo, I agree this is political speeach and it should not be allowed in our city parks. These parks should be preserved for use by citizens wishing to enjoy the open space, not groups looking to harass other users of the park in a bid to pass their political adgenda. Which in my opinion is waste of time, this is mass and we are bunch a liberals - sorry had to get that out there because it seems as soon as u have opinion that differs from anyone else the liberal label comes out. "

Report Abuse

HARRY HINDSIGHT wrote on Sep 21, 2009 10:33 AM:

" Since the basis of freedom of speech and assembly are the right to voice one's political stance, to what degree can these groups be silenced? A public place is just that, a location where people can congregate and share ideas, even if you don't agree with them. I may not agree with these issues, but all sides of these issues should be put out there for the public to choose their own sides. Everyone should see those images, then decide if it's an issue that they support or don't. If only one side of an issue is able to be presented, then we have a narrow minded populas. "

Report Abuse

attlebororesident2008 wrote on Sep 21, 2009 10:17 AM:

" These people scream and yell at women going into the clinic...they need to be stopped! "

Report Abuse

bingo wrote on Sep 21, 2009 9:40 AM:

" I do not want our city parks to become the home of these zealots that want to push their political and religious agendas. I believe that they are dangerous and the parks are full of children, that should not be subjected to what these people are espousing. This moving into our parks and becoming so agressive, is the beginning of a new agenda for them. I hope that no permits are issued. A political sign cant be held on city property, but the agenda of these people is political - to change our laws that govern abortion. The more that you cave in to these people - the harder they will push and the more agressive they will become. "

Report Abuse

jlc79 wrote on Sep 21, 2009 5:52 AM:

" I have passed these people with elemnetary children in my vehicle. My children used to wave and smile until the dead baby poster was introduced. Thinking the protester were PRO dead babies, they now scare my children.

Please deny their request or moniter their signage carefully. "

Report Abuse