1.877.51.SHINE (74463)


NAACP SUES THE RADIANCE FOUNDATION FOR EXERCISING RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH

The Radiance Foundation

Abortion doesn’t advance colored people. And since we’re all colored people, killing our posterity doesn’t advance any community. Abortion is a violent injustice that, like slavery, requires that we accept the lie that some human beings are less than human.

The NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) believes and promotes the lie. Since April NAACP-Press-Release-Feb2004-Boasting-of-AbortionPolicy2013, the nation’s oldest civil rights group has spent over half a million suing The Radiance Foundation and one of its co-founders, Ryan Bomberger, for what it charges as “trademark infringement, confusion and dilution.” This “infringement” includes Radiance Foundation’s news articles that detailed the NAACP pro-abortion actions, suggesting a name more befitting of the abortion-pushing organization. Apparently, truth and parody are not protected under the First Amendment.

In federal court, the civil rights group convinced Judge Raymond Jackson to disregard our civil rights as well as all of the documentation proving how radically pro-abortion the NAACP is. The judge ruled against The Radiance Foundation, declaring we cannot use the parody we created to describe the NAACP and that the parody isn’t, technically, a parody. Defying any explanation, Judge Raymond Jackson declared “the NAACP has no formal or policy regarding abortion” despite the fact that the NAACP, itself declared in its own press release back on February 24, 2004 that it “took an historic pro-choice” position back in 2004. (Download the Opinion and Order as well as the outrageous Permanent Injunction Ruling.)

NAACP - 2004 Resolution supporting abortion

NAACP 2004 Resolution supporting abortion.

There is no question about the NAACP’s declared position on abortion. They passed a resolution at their annual convention in 2004 (hence the press release to the right) erroneously entitled: “The March For Life”. Never let it be confused that the organization which historically fought for the most disenfranchised among us actually supports the annual March for Life that brings hundreds of thousands of prolife advocates to the nation’s capital each year. This resolution actually supported the National Organization for Women (NOW), Planned Parenthood and NARAL’s radical pro-abortion march on DC originally named the “March Against Fear” but renamed to “March for Women’s Lives”. This unapologetically pro-abortion event was originally pushed by NOW because Congress had passed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban. So the NAACP’s public foray into advocating for abortion was to demand what most Americans consider the most heinous and most violent form of abortion–partially birthing a child, then (for no medical reason), severing the child’s head from its body and dismembering the rest of the child, piece by piece.

NAACP "family planning" resolution #47, 1967

NAACP “family planning” Resolution #47, 1967

The judge wrongly claimed on page 41 of the Order: “The NAACP has intentionally refrained from taking a stance on abortion, and certainly has not been alleged to advocate for the abortion of people of color.” No, sir. It didn’t. And if the 2004 resolution wasn’t about abortion, did the NAACP pass a redundant resolution? Not according to the NAACP. Resolution #47 (see embedded lettter), passed in 1967 states: “We support the dissemination of information and materials concerning family health and family planning to all those who desire it.” So, in 2004, the NAACP took their support much further, boasting that “women of color seek abortion at rates higher than their percentage in the population, and overwhelmingly describe themselves as pro-choice”. The NAACP acknowledged in the 2004 resolution that they already passed a pro-contraception resolution back during their 59th annual convention. So, the NAACP resolved that the “NAACP adds its endorsement and support for the March Against Fear and urges all who believe in equal rights to attend on April 25, 2004 in Washington, D.C.”

Former NAACP President Julian Bond was a featured speaker at the 2004 “March for Women’s Lives” as well as the keynote speaker at a fund-raising dinner for NARAL. The NAACP praised the fact that black women have high abortion rates.

Sixty percent of viable black pregnancies are aborted in New York City, the home of NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Statistics show that more black babies are aborted in New York City than are born alive: 1,223 black babies are aborted for every 1,000 born alive.

Over the years, The Radiance Foundation has published numerous articles on various news sites (all of which Judge Jackson ordered destroyed on our sites) about the NAACP’s pro-abortion actions. We’ve pointed out that Planned Parenthood co-sponsors the NAACP’s annual conventions and how the NAACP has shown its support of the nation’s largest abortion chain by frequently defending it. So, we satirically referred to the organization with a name more befitting of their pro-abortion advocacy–a name which we can’t even mention. We are prohibited by Judge Raymond Jackson of the U.S. District Court in Norfolk, VA to speak or write, not only of the parody that we’ve used to describe the actions of the NAACP, but to ever parody the NAACP in the future.

And what bizarre irony: the nation’s oldest civil rights group is suing a black man for exercising his second most basic civil right—the freedom of speech. This threat of legal action from the NAACP is nothing more than a multi-million dollar organization’s attempt to bully someone who’s simply telling the truth. Our inner-cities are crumbling, two-parent married families barely exist, 72.3 percent of black children are born into homes without fathers, and the NAACP wants to silence us for pointing out its documented support of abortion.

To add more ridiculous irony to this free speech issue is the fact that Rush Limbaugh has parodied the NAACP’s name since Clarence Thomas’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, claiming that the organization is only concerned about the advancement of a certain kind of folk–liberal colored people. He continues to use the parody any time he speaks of the leftist organization. However, the NAACP isn’t suing a wealthy white broadcaster (who has an audience of millions every single day) for causing “confusion” of their brand. They’ve chosen, instead, to sue a black man, with far less means for daring to call them out. It’s yet another example of black-on-black crime.

But this crime has to have a happy ending. We’ve appealed this case to the Fourth Circuit of Appeals–the last step before the Supreme Court. Our hope is that truth and justice prevail and that our guaranteed, precious right to free speech is protected.