S.F. Examiner file photo

S.F. Examiner file photo

Wit and wisdom of the S.F. pro-life movement

I’m definitely in favor of abortion rights, but I understand that abortion is a complicated subject over which reasonable minds can differ. However, there were few, if any, reasonable minds at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting commenting on a recent abortion-related law.

The law at issue would expand the size of the “bubble zone” around the entrances of reproductive health care facilities from 8 feet to 25 feet. People are not permitted to demonstrate, picket or distribute literature inside that bubble zone.

At the meeting, a number of anti-abortion activists came to register their opposition to the law, and while I usually listen to the meetings while doing other work, I stopped multitasking when the first activist said, “This is my daughter. She was born on April 22, much to the chagrin of my husband. April 20 — 4/20 — might have been more fun, living in San Francisco.”

So, yes, it started with drug humor and got worse. “I have a question for the supervisors and all the people present here. Have y’all heard of the Emancipation Proclamation?” said the next activist. “There was a time when, if I had the means and the desire, I could own slaves.”

Then, pointing to various supervisors, two of whom are black, she said, “I could own you. I could own you. I could — usually the black people — I could own them. Yes I could. You would belong to me.” She went on to say that eventually, we will all view abortion like slavery, as something we can’t believe we tolerated. At least that’s what I think she said. By that point, I had crawled completely under my desk.

I emerged in time to hear a woman, who identified herself as a “psychological counselor,” warn about RU-486, a pill that induces abortion. “RU-486 happens to be the grandchild of a company which was started in Nazi Germany to kill Christians, Jews and gay people and anybody that the Nazis didn’t seem to like at the time.”

With arguments like these in opposition, it should come as no surprise that the law passed unanimously.

Children who misbehave, indeed

Dear Supervisor John Avalos,

I watched your performance at the May 2 hearing of the Board of Supervisors Neighborhood Services and Safety Committee with amusement. I use the word “performance” because your eye-rolling, peacocking, disrespectful demeanor toward Chief Juvenile Probation Officer Bill Siffermann and Assistant Chief Allen Nance was not your usual style. Luckily, they are used to dealing with juveniles.

It’s clear that you were incensed at the proposal to allow a few members of the Juvenile Probation Department to carry guns. And you quite rightfully asked for more statistical data to support the notion that probation officers who deal with the most dangerous juveniles are actually facing more guns and violence now than ever before. A change in policy demands it, and the department promised to provide it.

But you went further than that, and you accused Siffermann and Nance of “using” me and my March 28 column on the subject to “promote this program” of arming six juvenile probation officers. You angrily accused Nance of engaging in “media advocacy.”

Now, you may want to sit down, John, because what I’m about to write may shock you: I reached out to them to ask about the program. I saw a letter from the Juvenile Probation Commission in the publicly available communications to the Board of Supervisors, went to the website of the Juvenile Probation Department to get the department phone number, then called and asked to speak to Siffermann, whom I had never met.  

Had you bothered to ask me, I would have explained all this.

I also would have explained that the picture you were “disgusted” by was taken from a PowerPoint presentation that Nance had given to the Juvenile Probation Commission and that I (all by myself!) found on the Internet. That’s why the caption on that picture of real juveniles with guns in a real place in San Francisco, where real officers have to go to enforce court orders, said “Courtesy of Allen Nance.” Instead you berated Nance for reaching out to me on the baseless assumption that it couldn’t possibly be the other way around.  

Perhaps in your world, women sit around and wait for the phone to ring, but in mine, every day is Sadie Hawkins Day — and every column is my own, including this one.

Melissa Griffin’s column runs each Thursday and Sunday. She also appears Mondays in “Mornings with Melissa” at  6:45 a.m. on KPIX (Ch. 5). Email her at mgriffin@sfexaminer.com.

Bay Area NewsBoard of SupervisorsJohn AvalosLocalMelissa Griffin

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at www.sfexaminer.com/join/

Just Posted

San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott leaves the scene of an officer-involved shooting at Brannan Street and Jack London Alley in the South Park area on Friday, May 7, 2021. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
Chief Scott issues rare apology to man shot by SF police

Officer says he ‘did not intend for his firearm to go off’

Despite the pandemic, San Francisco has ended the fiscal year with a budget surplus. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
Better than expected tax revenues leave city with $157.3M surplus for this year

As the fiscal year nears an end and Mayor London Breed prepares… Continue reading

Passengers board a BART train bound for the San Francisco Airport at Powell Street station. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
BART bumps up service restoration to August 30, offers fare discounts

Rail agency breaks pandemic ridership records, prepares to welcome more passengers

Ashley and Michelle Monterrosa hold a photo of their brother Sean Monterrosa, who was killed by a Vallejo police officer early Tuesday morning, as they are comforted at a memorial rally at the 24th Street Mission BART plaza on Friday, June 5, 2020. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
State Department of Justice to investigate Sean Monterrosa shooting by Vallejo police

Attorney General Rob Bonta steps in after Solano County DA declines case

Gov. Gavin Newsom, show here speaking at the City College of San Francisco mass vaccination site in April, faces a recall election due to anger on the right over his handling of the pandemic, among other issues. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
Why Gavin Newsom’s popularity could work against him in the recall election

Top pollster: ‘We’re not seeing the Democrats engaged in this election. And that may be a problem…’

Most Read