Simply, yes. Objectively, no.
The difference, of course, is that the Catholics didn't bring the school girls there as a shield against physical assault or attack. They didn't go there expecting to be subjected to physical abuse by counter-protestors.
No one? Ever heard the phrase, "ribbed for her pleasure"? For that matter, why even use birth control if not to assist sex?
I took the phrase "condom shower" from your post. Had you not used it, I wouldn't have. However, I do thiink that the person who threw them knew exactly what he was doing, which was incitement. It would be like throwing crosses at a Muslim rally, although the Catholics are less likely to riot as a result. For that matter, throwing crosses at liberals would have had the same effect.
Disturbing the peace, assault (remember, the legal definition of assault is any unsolicited and unwelcome physical contact), incitement and, at the very least, littering.
They are fixated on the children in womb, but I agree. When I was in college, one of our classes was in a building that had a Planned Parenthood office, and while protestors often talked to women entering the building, I never saw the kind of graphic images that you presented. OTOH, when Giuliani tried to remove the doors on stalls in the bathhouses in NYC at the height of the AIDS epidemic (the bathhouse owners claimed that they could not police the sexual conduct in their bathrooms because of the closed stalls), gay activists put up posters with an explicit photo of a man on all fours, from the back, nude, with the caption, "Giuliani wants to watch you f***." Those posters were all over the west side of Manhattan, including my block, which had a high school and a junior high school on it.









