This isn't the only school with a no-hug policy.
Many,many others are doing the same thing.
And it isn't just because they're litigation averse.
It's for the chiren.
The statistics don't lie.
Many of the worst and most far-reaching cases of abuse happen at the hands of trusted adults,
be it a priest or a teacher or a relative.
Does this policy go too far?
I'm sure some would say it does.
But on what side do we want to err here?
it's not just happening at schools.
Many corporations and businesses now forbid physical contact.
It cuts down on sexual harassment lawsuits.
Perhaps with the continued evolution of smartphones and mails and video conferencing,
we'll find a way to keep people from ever being in the same room together.
Won't that be wonderful?
Years ago they did an experiment with an orphaned baby monkey.
They gave it two choices for a surrogate--
one which could provide milk,the other a hug.
The monkey chose the hug.
I'm sure we all saw this picture in the newspapers a few months ago.
Yes,very sweet.
But for my money,one case of child abuse trumps a cute monkey.
Yes,your honor.
I grew up... with...
various social disabilities.
I had no friends.
I got a job that only required I write memorandums.
I lived,basically,a life with no real human contact.
My client is an objectophile.
Both of us improved through the kindness,compassion and yes,
physical affection of others.
The human touch cannot be quantified.
It cannot be analyzed with statistics.
We can't place a number on it,but it is much,
much more than a doorway to sexual molestation.
It's the best,the most direct,
thmost lasting way of affirming another person's humanity.
Leigh swift was trying to comfort a student who was suffering.
What policy can possibly justify
firing her for that?
Six years ago...
isolation had brought me to the point...
I considered taking my life.
I picked up the phone and punched out 4-1-1,
so desperate was I to hear just the sound of another person's voice.
I got some automated recording that said,"what city and state,please?"
And I wept.
We are living in such an increasingly isolated world,your honor.
We I.M.
And text message and have virtual relationships online.
It gets lonelier and lonelier
while teenage and adult depression continues to rise.
There are perhaps many things we can do about it.
Banning the hug...
can't be one of them.
The thing about women,carl,if you reject their opinions,their principles,
they feel you're rejecting them,which is so wrong,
since with most relationships,we're in it only for the sex.
Uh,you won't be getting any,by the way,from shirley,unless you agree with her.
I don't know,denny.
Maybe shirley and i aren't right for each other.
Don't go overreacting now.
You ever wonder if all relationships are finite?
Of course they are.
That's why we have kids,marriage vows,onerous divorce laws--
all to make it too impossible to leave once we know it's over.
We're a pro-marriage nation.
That's very cynical,denny.
Would you marry shirley?
In a second. May I?
I think she would want a say.
Yes,therein lies the problem.
Marriage,abortion,you name it...
we were much better off in the old days,before women got a say.
Supreme court will get us back there.
Just give 'em time.
all right,before we begin,ms. Tiggs,no singing.
If you so much as accidentally hit a note while clearing your throat,I will rule in his favor.
- You got that? - Yes,your honor.
All right,now,mr. Shore,you can't stand before me
and tell me you expect this court or any court to order that a woman get an abortion.
That's exactly what expect.
The idea is appalling to you because next to the "n" word,only the "a" word is more controversial.
Only the "a" word can stir up such deep-seated passion,not of love,
which one might hope for when thinking of life and its conception,but rather of anger and rage.
In fact,there isn't any issue in this country as combustible.
My advice here would be to not think of it as the "a" word at all.
Let's just think of it as requiring this woman who flagrantly and deliberately defrauded my client,
requiring her to simply take a pill,some medication.
We do it all the time.
We force medicate in psychiatric hospitals,a place where,
ironically,this woman should certainly be stuck.
Will you slow the hell down?
Under the law,judge,there is no life here.
She's five weeks pregnant.
At five weeks,there is no life recognized by the law.
Mr. Shore is incorrect.
The relevant case law goes only to viability.
It makes no determination as to when human life begins.
And whatever one's opinion may be on abortion,we can't dispute that life,
however embryonic,originates at conception.
But the only issue today is can the court invade the autonomy of her body.
And I would say yes.
We're not talking about an intrusive procedure.
We're asking that she take a pill,a little tablet,like an aspirin--the ru-486.
It's very effective,the side effects are rare,and it's safe.
I can't speak as to when mr. Shore had his last abortion,
but they are anything but a breeze,even with the ru-486.
It presents the same symptoms as a miscarriage,including cramping,bleeding.
It could take days or even weeks,and that's not even accounting for the emotional aftereffects,
which could last a lifetime.
- This woman hijacked my sperm. - Mr. Maxwell--
I love it when he calls me woman.
I did not have intercourse with her that night.
Why?
Because I did not want to run the risk of getting her pregnant.
I would submit that mr. Maxwell has various legal remedies.
He can sue her in a civil court for damages,though she's not asking for child support--
oh,and now who's not accounting for the emotional aftereffects?
Where is it written that,"hey,if he doesn't have to contribute to the raising of the child,
then it's no harm,no foul"?
Mr. Shore--
it's my flesh and blood.My child.
And you want to kill it.
All right.
Tempers are starting to flare--
yes,they are,judge.
As I said,this is an angry topic.
And one of the reasons we're also enraged is we never got a say.
The american public never got a vote on abortion.
It was decided by fiat-- nine men sitting on a court.
Why we don't put the issue on a ballot completely escapes me.
Especially since our judicial selection process has now become so corrupted by the politics of abortion,
as our presidential and congressional campaigns have.
But we the people,we don't get a vote.
And it leaves us feeling frustrated and angry,powerless.
Can you imagine?
This issue that goes to the core of our human values,and we don't get to weigh in?
We have to sit back and watch a president puppeteered by the religious right,
stacking the deck,in the supreme court--
you're getting off point.
No,I'm very much on point.
You take that sense of helplessness and rage that the public feels,
multiply it times 1,000,and you get a sense of what my client feels.
Somebody would be having his baby,and he doesn't even get a say?
He wasn't careless or cavalier.
He was tricked,deceived,defrauded,
and he has no rights here at all?
He should be afforded all his rights under the law,and under the law today,
the court cannot and should not order a woman to undergo an intrusive medical procedure.
Can there be anything more medically,physically and emotionally intrusive than an abortion?
I'm sorry,but at the risk of sounding very politically incorrect,
as much as we're all supportive of multicultural families--
it's become so fashionable to adopt exotic babies from different lands and places--
but I'm sorry,that woman makes julie andrews seem like a black panther.
She has no conception of black culture.
This is wrong.
There,I said it. Everyone can start writing their letters.
Maybe the should be some kind of a test one has to pass. But that...
I've probably said enough.
Yes,you have.