Total Drek

Or, the thoughts of several frustrated intellectuals on Sociology, Gaming, Science, Politics, Science Fiction, Religion, and whatever the hell else strikes their fancy. There is absolutely no reason why you should read this blog. None. Seriously. Go hit your back button. It's up in the upper left-hand corner of your browser... it says "Back." Don't say we didn't warn you.

Wednesday, June 08, 2011

And you thought your ex was an asshole.

As if yesterday's news wasn't enough to make your brain melt out through your nose, today we get to hear about this fresh hell:

A New Mexico man's decision to lash out with a billboard ad saying his ex-girlfriend had an abortion against his wishes has touched off a legal debate over free speech and privacy rights.

The sign on Alamogordo's main thoroughfare shows 35-year-old Greg Fultz holding the outline of an infant. The text reads, "This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!"


No, I'm not kidding. Oh, no:



What is there to say about something like this? It's horrid, spiteful, venomous and all around terrible.* It's also probably largely covered under free speech, except perhaps for one tiny detail:

The woman's friends say she had a miscarriage, not an abortion, according to a report in the Albuquerque Journal.

Holmes [Fultz's attorney] disputes that, saying his case is based on the accuracy of his client's statement.

"My argument is: What Fultz said is the truth," Holmes said.


And yeah, he better be basing his case on the accuracy of that detail because if it isn't accurate this could very easily transform from a free speech case into a libel case. And since Fultz's ex isn't a celebrity, she wouldn't even have to prove intent to harm. Despite my fondness for free speech, I honestly wish her luck on this one.

Personally, if I had a mullet like that, I'd be pleased a woman had consented to let me touch her at all.


* I'm not sure, but isn't it also poor grammar? I mean, shouldn't it read, "...decided not to kill our child" rather than "...decided to not kill our child"? Grammar nazis, let's hear it!

Labels: , , ,

3 Comments:

Blogger Ken Houghton said...

We can quibble split infinitives ("you can't do it in Latin, so you can't do it in English" is less unreasonable than it sounds), but, yes, his syntax sucks even if you let the splitting of "to kill" go. "...had not decided to kill.." would still split a verb, but at least sounds as if it was written by a human.

More problematic is his intent. (This is one reason your version may be more correct, if words are intended to convey thoughts.) He's using a passive version with a subjunctive clause. The text emphasizes KILL, but "had decided" is wishy-washy at best.

But saying what he really thought wouldn't have gotten the (initial) support of the pro-life group that went in on the billboard with him.

His ex-girl friend is the luckiest woman in the world right now. Her questionable taste and poor decision is in the past.

Wednesday, June 08, 2011 9:43:00 AM  
OpenID sassafrasjunction said...

He's 35 (so he says) with that ghastly mullet, has a penchant for barely legal girls (his gf was 15 years younger) and is into groups that shit on women's rights.

WHAT A FUCKING TREASURE.

In case you're interested, ladies, in this prince, here is his FOREAL online girlfriend application: http://www.greg.fultz.com/gfapp/index.html

Yes. That is a thing.

In other news, he is a likely candidate for the upcoming mayoral race for Doucheville.

Wednesday, June 08, 2011 9:45:00 AM  
Blogger scripto said...

Oh, I get it. At first, I thought it was a picture of some grandma holding a black cat. Pretty lame and the cheesy smile is kind of creepy considering the text. It would have been a lot more effective if he was holding a dead fetus.

Thursday, June 09, 2011 4:18:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter