Abortion Protesters Sue to Hand Out Rubber Fetuses in Public School

I wonder if the Thomas More law group will chime in on this one:

" Parents claim the Roswell Independent School District violated their children’s rights by prohibiting them from “sharing the Gospel” at school - by handing out religious, anti-abortion statements attached to rubber fetuses, in Albuquerque Federal Court."


Public schools are for education; not that sort of thing.

The lawsuit wording is here:


You can see a photo of the fetus doll here:

Here is a photo of the doll:

According to the lawsuit, the church group previously handed out candy canes with a religious message attached, and the school district didn’t object. And the youth group painted some rocks for the school, one of which was labeled “Psalm 139.”

That the school district allowed those things may complicate its case regarding the fetus doll.


Aren’t there classes in public school where each student is given a computerized baby doll to take care of around the clock for a few days or so, and then the student gets graded on how well he or she attended to the needs of the “baby” when the doll gave indications of being hungry, wet, tired, etc? Part of home economics class, or parenting skills, or somesuch? The computer inside the doll is able to tell the teacher what kind of parenting went on, from attentive to neglectful.

In which case, having an unborn baby doll in school should be no problem. In fact, it would be nice if the pro-life groups could afford computerized unborn baby dolls that kicked their feet and sucked their thumbs and yawned.



I see you have this in hand!

Silly question- based on the above, why was there any objection to this IYHO?

If you can legally hand out rubber condoms in school, you should be able to hand out rubber fetuses :tsktsk:

I read the case through, and if the plaintif’s claims are accurate, then the school at the very least has been in consistent, and the student will probably be allowed to distribute such items after school, or other “non-instructional time”

I find the bolded quote to be funny. Is not showing students what an actual fetus educating? This is stuff the child should be learning in science class, what is so wrong with him having a 3D, model of a fetus?

This is an outside, religious group proselytizing. What if it were Jehovah Witnesses handing out anti-Christmas cards?

What does the growth of a child have to do with religion?

I think the important factor is that this is religious glad-handing in a public school.

So you’d be fine with the fetus and contact info for the Crisis Pregnancy Center?

I think the issue is the religious pro-life statement which was attached to each doll.

According to the lawsuit:

The Bible verse written on the card was Psalm 139:13-14 which states: “For you formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are your works.” See Ex. 2 (New American Standard Version).

  1. The side with the CPC’s contact information stated:
    If you have any questions or need
    counseling please come by or call
    Chaves County Pregnancy
    Resource Center
    2003 S. Main
    (575) 623-1217
    Or contact your school counselor
    (actual size and weight of a 12 week old baby).

A society or in this case a school that wants to maximize individual freedom ought to have no opinion on what students are doing and saying outside of structured class time. Outside of obvious issues of taste, decorum and overt harrassment by a school association getting getting their message out, the best schools ought to be a veritable marketplace of diverse and varied ideas and ideals competing with each other.
That is not really the case now with any western schools. The mere whisper of God in a school has become a direct affront to the secular values of the left.

The rule should apply equally to both.
No Church was passing these out at school, which would be highly inappropriate and rightfully struck down. The students were passing these out as individuals, and it is nothing but an exercise of free speech. Even a student group, if it did not represent a specific Church, should be allowed such liberties, if they are operating within the normal limits of such organizations.

I think the reason this sort of thing was opposed is obvious. Someone in the school system is pro-abortion and didn’t want this message available. I note from another news source that two different reasons are being given. The first reason is that the dolls were not pre-approved. This was the initial reason in spite of the fact that other items had been allowed without any approval and that there is nothing in the handbook about an approval being needed. Then, the reason evolved to the violaiton of an advertising rule because of the pregnancy help care center information attached to the doll. This is an actual violation and could be easily remedied. Yet the fact that a reason was sought after the fact reveals the motives of the district as being less than honorable.

The link to the lawsuit which was provided in the first post doesn’t seem to be working right now. However, the lawsuit was filed by Liberty Counsel, and they have a copy of it on their website.

An odd statement coming from a Roman Catholic. There’s no proselytizing in promoting life.


Not sure if Heritage House is the source, but this pro-life publisher does offer a wide assortment of fetal models:



The school district’s argument is that their action had nothing to do with religion, but with advertising.

An attorney for the Roswell Independent School District said in a response letter that the distribution of candy canes, hot chocolate and rocks without permission is different than the case with the fetus doll because the doll promoted the services of a pregnancy center.

“The fact that the alternate side contained a Bible verse is not relevant since the sides of the card could not be separated without destruction of the card,” contended the school district.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.