Came across this little story in my browsing today. A woman who protested abortions outside a clinic has been ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation and take any drugs that are prescribed as a result. Now, suppose you don't agree with me on a particular political point, and I'm the judge. Should I be able to make an order like this? Apparently so. Worse, the case is reported to have been decided based on hearsay from Planned Parenthood (aka. the ghost of Margaret Sanger).
Now, if she were violent, or stated that she would kill, say, Mr. Smith on November 10th with a gun, I could at least understand why the court would do such a thing. But this has me genuinely clueless. I should not imagine that a Christian judge would order something like this if the shoe were on the other foot. I'd hope not, anyway. I may not agree with your opinions, but I most assuredly defend your right to have them, dopey as they may be.
But seriously. Read these two short paragraphs in which she pleads her cause:
"I believe psychiatry to be a pseudoscience on par with astrology, fortune telling, and palm reading. Must I be punished for my refusal to recognize psychiatry as a legitimate medical science? What gives this court the right to order medical help for which I have no need or desire? … Must I also ingest mind altering prescribed psychotropic drugs to satisfy this court order? Does this court routinely order psychiatric evaluations for misdemeanor convictions?"
"This court is acting as if it were lawful and morally righteous to slaughter the unborn. Yet 35 years ago it was unlawful, and unrighteous. Does changing the law change morality? … In 1856, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Negro is 'chattel.' By denying Dred Scott his freedom, slavery was made 'safe and legal.' Had I stood before this court for opposing slavery or the 'Jim Crow laws' instead of aborticide, would this court suspect me of being mentally deficient or ill?"
Um, yeah, probably if you started protesting in the Deep South in 1856...