Dan Dobson beat me to the punch in raising an important point about civil liberties in this community, specifically with regard to how the response to Operation Rescue was handled by the city back in the 1980s when OR was trying to shut down Planned Parenthood on Ford Parkway. As much as I might despise the tactics of that organization, as much as I might disagree with their viewpoint, they have a right to express it. They had a right to be on the sidewalk protesting, and they should have been permitted to allow themselves to get arrested by blocking the clinic entrance if they so chose. That's, in part, how the Vietnam War came to an end, because people were allowed to disrupt the government, tie up police resources in getting arrested, and get leaders to start rethinking just what we were doing over there.
So when I see how little outrage occurred in St. Paul over the tactics used to thwart Operation Rescue, how there seemed to be not a word from the left or the abortion rights folks about the manner in which an unpopular group was being dealt with, I began thinking about how the tactics might someday be used against the left. Which is exactly what has been happening in this country and around the globe the past five years or so. Whenever the president travels, law abiding citizens who want to express their displeasure with his administration are kept miles away. Ditto for WTO events, GATT conferences, etc. Everywhere it's now seen as a legitimate government response to rope protestors off far from where they can confront the targets of their protest, leading to a minimal impact. Think we'd ever get out of Vietnam in this day and age with how the police dealt with protestors in Seattle, Miami, Genoa, etc.? But, to keep this on topic, I'd argue that the attempt by the Farmer's Market to exclude political groups from their "premises" is a microcosm of this phenomenon. Lots of petty bullies are being produced who think they know the law (even when they may not), who think they can decide who does and doesn't have the right to be in the public square. Quite honestly, any group that would be there to solicit folks, distribute literature, etc., will likely do so respectfully, if for no other reason than it's just bad from to be rude and expect somebody to care about your message. I suspect that the canvassers weren't being impolite, just spreading a viewpoint that some people didn't like. What the head of the Farmer's Market should have said is that "as long as they're being polite, they're free to be here." But instead, he chose to create an issue that I suspect is more reflective of his political views than any desire to keep the FM free of politics. As Paul Wellstone once said, saying hello to someone is a political act. The ruling regarding the rights of groups to protest at the Mall of America was a poor one, especially given the public investment in that structure, but I suppose there's enough of a private nature to that indoor behemoth that the court found a way to justify its ruling. But I don't think the Farmer's Market comes anywhere near to meeting that test, and how they might choose to interpret their lease with the city doesn't mean they're correct or even right. If someone doesn't want to risk coming in contact with an unpopular opinion, they should stay at home. If you don't want to be in the public square, shop at Cub or Rainbow or Kowalski's. But I think the people own the space that created the Farmer's Market, and if that can be altered by the whims of a few select folks, then St. Paul is far worse off than I thought. Tom Goldstein Mac-Groveland ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Dobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 4:25 PM Subject: [StPaul] Re: Stpaul Digest, Vol 7, Issue 17 Paul asks the question how I would feel if the people at the Farmer's Market were Republicans or Pro-Lifers and the answer is very easy. I would fully support their right to be there. I am a First Amendment absolutist. Just a bit of history, back in the late 1980's I sued Pro-Life Action Ministries and 141 of their supporters for blocking Midwest Health Center for Women and preventing people from entering their clinic. However, I fully supported their right to be on the sidewalk in front of the clinic, so long as they did not block the entrance. Later, when Pro-Life Action Ministries announced "Operation Rescue style" activities in the Twin Cities, the City of Saint Paul built a fence in front of Planned Parenthood on Ford Parkway, totally preventing anti-abortion protesters even on the same side of the street. Even though I had sued this same group, less than a year earlier I supported their right to peacefully protest in front of PP, as long as they did not block access. I even gave a deposition in favor of Pro-Life Action Ministries in their case against the City and said I thought their First Amendment Rights were violated. Thus I still maintain that any group, any politician should have the right to gather at Taste of Minnesota or the Farmer's Market to petition, speak, and politic. Renting the land does not abolish the First Amendment. I find it disturbing that so many people here seem so ready to exclude people from public land. What's next, people saying people can't politic on Grand Old Days because GABA (Grand Avenue Business Assoc.) has use of the streets, or banning politicing on St. Patrick's Day. _____________________________________________ To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____________________________________________ NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
