Planned Parenthood is not the problem

That is unless, of course, you are one of those individuals who can’t look past the title Planned Parenthood to realize this particular outlet won’t even be offering that medical service when first open. Maybe later, maybe not. But not now.

Besides, a zoning decision is not about abortion.

That is unless, of course, you’re one of those individuals who think the organization’s offering of a legal, albeit controversial, medical procedure negates all the other less debatable services it provides — the disease and pregnancy prevention, the counseling, the cancer screening.

Or, perhaps you are one of those people so blinded by the notion that abortion is wrong that you spend your days hoisting graphic signs, driving around in what could be called the fetus-mobile, writing letter upon letter to the editor trumpeting the same arguments in the name of God and the unborn, risking arrest for trespassing and exploiting the sensitive minds and eyes of children just to make a point. These people probably think the planning decision coming before Redwood City officials for a clinic is about abortion and abortion only.

With such blinders on, it is rather hard to fault them.

Unfortunately, though, there is another group mixing controversy with commercial real estate. And, frankly, they are the ones whose arguments are the most muddled.

Some of the folks who spoke out against the clinic moving into the commercial building aren’t even necessarily pro-life or anti-choice, however one prefers to describe the platform. Instead, they are decidedly anti-protesters.

This group, according to reports of the dozens who attended last week’s zoning hearing, do not want the protesters the Planned Parenthood might attract. The signs, the vehicles, the ranting, the traffic jams — this is not what they want in their neighborhood, in their city, on a main street.

And why would they? Why would anyone?

So this group asked the city to deny Planned Parenthood an operating permit not because of something it does but because of something others do. In other words, it’s not you and it’s not me, it’s them. So please go set up shop in some dark, quiet little corner of the county where nobody will have to acknowledge the controversial issue, take a side or explain. While you’re at it, throw out Obamacare just because it might cover the procedure.

Maybe Planned Parenthood can share space with the methadone clinic, the jail and every other land use that throws the NIMBYs into a tizzy. After all, everybody acknowledges the need for drug rehab and incarceration; they just don’t want to acknowledge it on their street or in front of their cars. The same is being said about Planned Parenthood.

Fair enough.

There are certainly days any one of us want to just get a cup of coffee or drop the kids at school or sing along with the radio and not be confronted by opinionated folks ready to share anti-abortion propaganda and tell those who disagree they’re on a fast track to hell.

But Planned Parenthood is not the enemy in this scenario. Planned Parenthood is not the one that should be politely asked to leave or told not to show up at all. The ones who should get the boot are the protesters.

The only glitch is the law provides for free speech, allowing these protesters the right to set up shop within a certain distance. Remember, though, the law also provides that Planned Parenthood has the right to set up shop if it meets the right land-use requirements.

Again, this is not an abortion issue.

Instead, it is a chance for residents not to let a small group of opponents win by default.

The issue is not whether abortion is right or wrong; the issue is that the abortion issue has no role in the city’s decision.

Michelle Durand’s column "Off the Beat” runs every Tuesday and Thursday. She can be reached by e-mail: michelle@smdailyjournal.com or by phone: (650) 344-5200 ext. 102. What do you think of this column? Send a letter to the editor: letters@smdailyjournal.com.