I support freedom of speech, but this is disgusting, and specially when you see parents walking near by with their children that they bring to school. These people invaded all the street corner almost every days, even weekends. I find this aggressive and disturbing to say the least. Can this repeated event been categorized as harassment?

I agree. Exposing people, especially children to these images is an aggressive and violent act. More energy should be poured into supporting and advocating for education, healthcare, food security and endless other issues that children have in families that are struggling to survive and provide

Very, very disturbing images and it is hypocritical, to "save" children and also expose them to intentionally harmful images. And to violate the privacy of space or purpose of anyone accessing public school or health services.

While this is not curative, those are not real photos. These are fake images, created for exactly this impact/reaction: to provoke revulsion and brand a mental image that sustains and empowers these protesters. They were told and think they are real, to heighten their motivation and believes. They are provided by organisations that coordinate "grass-roots" activities while harvesting their donations. They are pure visual propaganda to motivate the protesters.

Hi David! Are you with the city? I don't agree with closing this issue because the image is "fake". Per my original example, so are the events in most PG13 movies. We protect our children from the images not because they are real, but because they have lasting impact.

Closing was not intentional. I understand and could not agree more. I have children and they saw different images there several years ago. We discussed this issue in this context, and others. I researched the Pro-Life Action League, spoke directly with them, and others. [Also I'm not a govt. official.]

Thank you for responding David! It seems like you handled the situation in such a thoughtful and strong manner. I'm not sure that I could stomach that much research, but I did stop to tell them they are hurtful and that other images are fine but not that one. Unsurprisingly they weren't willing to respond to my criticism but only wanted to declare themselves above me religiously and throw red herrings back toward their political agenda. Luckily they were chased away by the rain. They will be back! :/

To be honest, my wife was with them when this happened, had the same reaction and got the same responses. They have a manual "Closed: 99 Ways to Stop Abortion".

I believe the right to privacy, part of the argument in Roe v Wade, is violated if any person or group attempts to influence personal health-care choices by approaching anyone entering or leaving any health care facility. And more so - emotionally injurious with false content.

Hello! I'd like a response from the city on this. In addition, I would like to mention that the streets in New Haven are narrow and with the recent bicycling incident on State Street, perhaps there is a way to designate this practice as a public health danger. It is extremely distracting to drivers who might miss a pedestrian on this street, which has heavy pedestrian and bicycle traffic.

Specifically I'm referring to the block of Edwards between Whitney and Orange. Their signs are placed directly after the speed humps right when a driver might be speeding up to catch a green light.

Drove by this morning and was pleased to see that this group has moved further back from the driveway at Planned Parenthood and now has a picture of Mary instead of the grotesque and provocative imagery they had before. If someone from the city addressed this, thank you. I've not been taking Edwards with my children for months now, and have had to take a winding route to avoid the previous imagery, so I will feel grateful to be back to a more direct route.

Closing this for now, but will reopen if it becomes and issue again. Thanks.

Closed for now. Thanks.