UK Ban Pro-Life Vigils Outside Abortion Clinics Nationwide, Says Labour MP

[gam197]

Ban Vigils Outside Abortion Clinics Nationwide Says Labour MP

Pro-abortion Labour Party MP Rupa Huq has called for a nationwide ban on protests outside abortion clinics by Christian pro-life groups.

www.breitbart.com

In 2018, the High Court of England and Wales ruled that the “public space protection order” (PSPO) that prohibited prayer groups from gathering outside the London abortion clinic was legal.

So abortion rates are way up in the UK and yet laws are even more strict on Christians offering an alternative. Will this pass?

 

[gam197]

Are their people from the UK who can tell us what is happening on banning prolifers outside clinics?

They already ban prolifers outside London clinics, is that correct?

 

[TheIttyBitty]

Are they able to hold Pro-Life Vigils in Public spaces instead, such as the nearest town/city parks? Maybe have the vigils in the public parks instead, and if it so happens to be near to an abortion clinic…it’s not on their sidewalk vicinity (so to speak).

 

[RhodesianSon]

Can’t interrupt molochs worship or risk a sacrifice being taken away.

 

[SeanF1989]

I live in Manchester and I think it has been banned here too.

 

[Kaninchen]

Not for want of trying by various groups, some of them American-linked, over the years - it always subsides as a general issue, though.

 

[gam197]

I live in Manchester and I think it has been banned here too.

So it has been banned in London and Manchester. I wonder what happened to freedom of speech. Again looking at it from an American lens.

Whether it is sidewalk or pavement, I am not crazy when any police tell others to move on. The right to assemble was crucial in Massachusetts and in 2004 when that was stripped away because of the democrat convention in Boston, it was truly frightening.

The problem even with Antifa is not its right to assemble, it is its destructiveness. It becomes a mob. And yes there were mobs during the tea party in Boston when tea was thrown into the ocean but that is not today.

 

[gam197]

That’s the key phrase - we aren’t looking at it from an American lens.
[/quote]

My understanding is they want a national ban on people outside abortion clinics. These prolife groups are already ban in London and Manchester, shame. Granted the Uk does not have American laws on freedom or speech and assembly but are there no laws which cover groups and protests. I have seen on the news large crowds of Anfifa or BLM, what ever they call themselves in the UK.

 

[_Ruby]

Are they able to hold Pro-Life Vigils in Public spaces instead, such as the nearest town/city parks? Maybe have the vigils in the public parks instead, and if it so happens to be near to an abortion clinic…it’s not on their sidewalk vicinity (so to speak).

Yes

The court decision states:

1. The terms of the PSPO were such as to prohibit the following activities within the “safe zone”:

"(i) Protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval/disapproval or attempted act of approval/disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means. This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling,

(ii) Interfering, or attempting to interfere, whether verbally or physically, with a service user or member of staff,

(iii) Intimidating or harassing, or attempting to intimidate or harass, a service user or member of staff,

(iv) Recording or photographing a service user or member of staff of the Clinic whilst they are in the Safe Zone,

(v) Displaying any text or images relating directly or indirectly to the termination of pregnancy, or

(vi) Playing or using amplified music, voice or audio recordings."

1. Protests were, however, permitted to continue within a “designated area” comprising a well-defined grassy space about 100 metres or so from the entrance to the Centre. Such protests were subject to some restrictions as to the numbers of participants, the size of placards on display and the like.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/1667.html

 

[gam197]

Protests were, however, permitted to continue within a “designated area” comprising a well-defined grassy space about 100 metres or so from the entrance to the Centre. Such protests were subject to some restrictions as to the numbers of participants, the size of placards on display and the like

Three hundred feet from the clinic in ridiculous. They put people in cages during th 2004 democrat convention and that was ridiculous. People should be allowed outside of clinics.

 

[vz71]

God have mercy on us and on the whole world.

 

[gam197]

The harm to staff is extremely small when one considers the death of 60 million human babies. It is not just evangelicals but it is also catholics who are outside most clinics. They are often small groups who do a rosary or hand the girl an alternative solution. They get a lot a bad press but still remain outside of clinics praying.

 

[gam197]

There are numerous laws covering assembly and protests in the UK.
[/quote]

It seem odd that in this document they have a first section which has a great deal on racial matters. However the section on religious freedom is thrown with sexual orientation. Very odd.

Religious freedom should have its own large section.

 

[gam197]

Then allow a prayer vigil with few signs.

 

[TheIttyBitty]

Is it possible to make comments on the content and not the language barriers? My fiance is British and would’ve been more gentle in his delivery.

 

[vz71]

I humbly submit that if a group praying the rosary is causing someone undue stress, that someone is the one with a problem.

 

[gam197]

Three hundred feet is way to far away. A prayer vigil in front of clinic even a silent prayer group and possibly a handout with alternative solutions. They could put the handout in a box so each person could take one. Most would get thrown away inside but some may look at the brochure.

British rate of abortion is soaring and they really need to address that.

 

[gam197]

The fact that they disallow people outside clinics in London and Manchester is not working. This new law to ban all prolifers outside clinics in all of the Uk seems misplaced considering the rate of abortion is soaring.

 

[Kaninchen]

Given that two-thirds of Brits only do religious attendance for weddings, funerals etc, it wouldn’t have the same kind of effect as in the US. More likely to annoy than anything.

 

[_Ruby]

Three hundred feet from the clinic in ridiculous. They put people in cages during th 2004 democrat convention and that was ridiculous. People should be allowed outside of clinics.

The very fact was that they were not just ‘outside’ the clinic. The Justices report makes very clear:

1. There was an online survey which generated 2,181 responses. Nearly two thirds of these came from people who identified themselves to be users of services, shops or facilities in the proposed safe zone. 16.4% lived in the vicinity and 7.4% were users of the services of the Centre.
2. The vast majority of those who responded confirmed that they had seen activists outside the Centre displaying material relating to abortion and approaching people using the clinic. Of course, none of this is surprising because the claimants have never sought to deny that this is what they were doing. However, 470 respondents gave narrative examples of what they had witnessed. These included:

(i) The display of lifelike foetus dolls;

(ii) Threats that users of the Centre would go to Hell;

(iii) Referring to users of the Centre as “Mum”.

(iv) The handing out of rosary beads to users and passers-by;

(v) Pursuing users of the Centre with leaflets;

(vi) Not leaving users with enough room to pass into the Centre;

(vii) The playing of loud music and chanting from pro-choice activists;

(viii) The taking of photographs of persons using the clinic;

(ix) Young children passing by exposed to images of foetuses.

1. On the issue of the detrimental impact on their quality of life, the results of the online survey were striking. Between 85% and 90% of respondents supported the imposition of the proposed prohibitions in the safe zone. A clear majority said that their quality of life had been detrimentally affected either “extremely” or “very much”.
2. Some examples of reports collected by the Centre were appended to its submissions, a flavour of which may be gained from the following:
   (i) Local resident – It is extremely stressful living opposite these protests. It is a regular occurrence seeing protestors standing in the way of clinic users grabbing their arms and shouting at them… Do I comfort the crying women on the street, or do they prefer privacy? Local residents should be able to live a peaceful life and should not have the weight of such things on their shoulders on a daily basis.
   (ii) Clinic/Unit Staff – Client very distressed because of protestors. Protestor holding pretend baby and trying to give client leaflets.
   (iii) Passer-by - The pictures displayed by those opposing abortion are truly awful. I walk past my local clinic with my children and they have images of dead foetuses on show. They create an awful environment for local residents.

People have the right to protest. They don’t have the right to interfere with the functionality of public spaces or harass service users.