Pro-life activist arrested for praying silently near an abortion facility

a reply to: dandandat2

No. Christians can go wherever they want.

If you go to the mall and spend 9 years screaming at people and throwing rocks at them, then get a restraining order for such behaviour, you’ll be arrested for going back. That’s why she was arrested.

a reply to: Ohanka

So now she was screaming at people and throwing rocks?

Why, I wonder, does it seem impossible to simply discuss this without hyperbole? And why do you believe she had been issued a restraining order?

a reply to: Maxmars

Because of the background and context to the case which has been pointed out numerous times but ignored because it contradicts Christian persecution fantasy.

For the record members of a few pro-abortion groups would face the same sanction as this lady did if they also violated the order.

a reply to: TzarChasm

"Are you christian?" "Yes sir"

"Do you belong to a congregation?" "Yes sir"

"Is their church on this road?" "No sir"

"Then go to church or go home" "Yes sir"

Is how that dialogue should play out.

But that's not how it played out.

"Were you praying?"

"I might have been."

"You're under arrest."

That's how it played out. I am discussing what actually happened; you seem to be discussing what you want to have happened.

So there you see opportunity, motive and contempt.

Yes, I do. The opportunity to silently pray, the motive of wanting to silently pray, and contempt that her very thoughts are being deemed reason for arrest.

The actual protection order was published in this thread. I went down every single item on that protection order, and none could have been violated at that time except for one: silent prayer.

People have the right to pray silently anywhere they choose, however they choose, whenever they choose. It's called "freedom of religion" and is now apparently illegal in the UK. Based on this thread, it may soon be illegal in the USA as well. On that day, I will be in prison.

TheRedneck

a reply to: AaarghZombies

She wasn't arrested for praying, that's simply what she was doing at the time of her arrest.

"She wasn't arrested for praying, praying is just why she was arrested."

Do you read what you write?

She was arrested because the abortion facility was in a specially designated exclusion area where any form of pro-life activity is prohibited, and she was carrying out a vigil. She'd have been arrested if she was sitting on a chair drinking coffee, or doing sudoku.

She violated none of the terms of the prohibition order, except for praying. That prayer was obviously not verbal, because the police had to ask if it was happening.

The problem was simply that she was somewhere that she'd been expressly forbidden from being. Not that she was praying.

Care to quote where in that protection order she was mentioned by name?

TheRedneck

Well this group named '40 Days for Life'' is taking the city to court to fight this buffer zone order.

Despite the order, protests have resumed near the abortion clinic on the edge of the buffer zone. Some local residents have called for the order to be extended beyond its current borders, claiming 40 Days for Life protests in their neighborhood have led to heated arguments and prompted police to be called.

"We were concerned at the outset that the boundary of the buffer zone would not be sufficient and would be too great a temptation for the protesters to resist," said one resident to Birmingham Live.

"The protest caused regular disputes and arguments outside the clinic; this is not going to be any different. We are calling on the council to extend the Buffer Zone further as this is causing distress and tension."

The litigation comes as Parliament is debating a measure that would create buffer zones around all abortion clinics in England and Wales. The measure still has several stages to clear, including a vote in the House of Lords.

In January, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a pro-life group's request to hear a challenge to a Pennsylvania city law that creates a "buffer zone" around abortion clinic entrances.

www.christianpost.com...

a reply to: Terpene

you'll have to admit the pro life bunch has had a significant hand to get that slipery slope in place... This buffer zone is exactly because of them and the pro choice bunch.

I'll agree with that. If she was in a group prayer, if she was approaching people, if she was yelling at people,if she was handing out leaflets, or if she was doing anything other than silently praying, I would be like "OK, she deserved it. Too damn bad."

But again, all she did was say a silent prayer in her mind.

The protection order did not say she could not go near the facility. It said she could not engage in a myriad of activities. One of those was prayer, which taken the overall tone of the order, I would take to mean verbal prayer... prayer that others could hear. She did not do that, but the term "prayer" was not specifically specified as verbal and two UK cops along with a UK magistrate think they have the power to control what she thinks. That's my problem.

Stick your opinion somewhere where you don't bother people...

Gonna remember that the next time there is a protest you agree with and I don't.

This hasn't been put into place because of some praying, but because of far more provocative actions, by both proponents of this political battle.

Of course it was. That's not the point of contention.

she is a political activist, that happens to be a praying christian and breaking directives of a place specially put there to keep these activists away...

Yes, she is. But the protection order did not say she could not be there. It said she could not perform a list of activities while there. The only one she could possibly have violated is... praying! And to deem that a violation, one would have to consider silent prayer... thought... as prohibited.

If one of the pro-abortionists walks by and thinks to themselves, "Gee, I really am glad this abortion clinic is here," are they subject to the same arrest? Or do they get a pass for not being Christian?

I guess so; none of the workers in the clinic have been arrested, have they? Have any customers been arrested?

Think you're a smart-ass and can go there and play victim when you get treated for what you are...

A Christian?

she and her ilk had a hand in making that buffer a necessity, because people felt uncomfortable by the presence of both pro life and pro choice groups, propagating their political crap.

That is irrelevant. The protection order is in place. Now, exactly what part of it did she violate?

I posted it earlier... should be easy to show what part of that order she violated.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Ohanka

You can't be arrested for simply being a Christian in the UK.

Seems like now one can be.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Ohanka

For the record members of a few pro-abortion groups would face the same sanction as this lady did if they also violated the order.

There's a whole staff of pro-abortionists who work there, and I assume plenty of customers who are certainly pro-abortion since that's why they are there. How many have been arrested?

There is no record of this woman being prohibited from being there. There is a record of no one being allowed to perform certain actions. The only action specified that she could have performed at the time was praying, and that was done silently.

So how was she not arrested for praying? What other violation did she commit?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

i just checked on google and apparently there are approx 27.5 million christians in the UK sooooo..... not sure who's gonna do all the arresting or where they're gonna put them or why a single arrest [that was actually for a decade worth of harrasment] is supposed to be indicative of a wider trend but sure okay fine

a reply to: TheRedneck
Oh God you can't get past the fact that a christian can be a political activist.
I know you're not stupid, but you sound very much so...

You must be part of that group, putting so much effort to twist that story trying to make her look oh so innocent.

If you use prayer as a form of activism to the extent that it has to be regulated, then thats what you did. Keep praying and see what happens.

But hey maybe that's just what Christians are... She must be the measuring stick we're going to use when using that big brush?

Who in his right mind associates themselfs with that sick club anyways... You want to hear what kind of people roam Christianity? Are you gonna stick up for them because they pray?

Should we equate everyone in a club to their worst individual participants, we do that all the time with the groups we don't like. We take the most extreme and disgusting individuals and equate the whole group, often unjustified, but when the group defends the bad behavior of an individual just because it's part of the group, well it gives legitimacy to use that big brush you want that to be part of your group Image, or ao it seems.

a reply to: continuousThunder

Because he likes to be a victim, it would be a shame to not ride that wave out. after all, they put all the effort for that little political stunt, have to keep the story going into the right direction...

a reply to: Terpene

Oh God you can't get past the fact that a christian can be a political activist.

And you can't read what I am saying.

If she violates the PSPO, LOCK HER TROUBLESOME BUTT UP!

If... IF... you cannot just arrest someone for being a pain in the butt. That is not how law works. That PSPO was very specific as to what a person could not do. If she violated the PSPO, then she can be arrested. If she does not violate the PSPO, she cannot be arrested. P.E.R.I.O.D!

Now, exactly what action did she take to violate the PSPO? Here's what it said... again...

The Activities prohibited by the Order are:

i Protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or 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 Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff,

iii Intimidating or harassing, or attempting to intimidate or harass, a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or a member of staff,

iv Recording or photographing a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff or

v Displaying any text or images relating directly or indirectly to the termination of pregnancy.

Now show me, in that list, what part of the PSPO she violated.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I rarely get a chance to post alongside you like this, so I'm going to take advantage.

In defense of those stalwartly expressing their approval of the treatment of the arrested woman, there is a body of experience that speaks to their angst.

First off, protest activities are - by design - meant as much to be intrusive, as they are meant to not be ignored. In that regard, many protesters have behaved badly, Christians being in no way excluded from the practice. People, being litigious and clever, have taken the self-contradictory idea of "Peaceful Protest" to the extreme of "Well... we didn't 'hurt' anyone" ignoring the reality that 'hurting' is subjective.

Others counter to protesting apply their own ideas of countering protest to include anything that might nullify any defense their ideological opponents might use to render their activities as an acceptable course of action.

Sort of how if you ask 15 people why they were in a brawl they will all point fingers and say 'They started it. Not me."

The result is a muddled account of how this happened. After many repeated instances of such clashes, it is not unreasonable that people will become infected with angst and resentment, on both sides.

Local governments create ordinances according to the mood of their communities. This ordinance seems to have been designed and applied to remove the possibility confrontation to that specific social irritant.

What I see here is that, like anywhere else in the world, people are virtue signaling, and politicians are exploiting the activity to crystalize their potential constituencies. The media amplifies and sensationalizes the phenomenon to exploit their own relevance. Where this leads is exactly where we are... you cannot successfully use the justifications you do because the target for reason is moving and relevant only so long as both sides discuss the same thing.

For the one side, we have the law being there to eliminate confrontation and all that comes with it. For the other, the issue remains true to a position which speaks to something decidedly different.

One side says "We don't want to hear this anymore," the other says "We cannot silently coexist with this practice."

There cannot be reconciliation - because neither side is able to accept the position of the other - since they define themselves as being unable to "win" if they other has its way.

Each side has made it's bed, and neither side will sleep in it.

Unfortunately, the legal question will always be de facto 'settled.' The religious side can never relent, as a matter of principle.

It is unfortunate that people will continually fall back to their "ideas" about "these people" as a matter of bias. It is also unfortunate that it appears 'en vogue and en time' to oppose any religious traditionality. Those who wish to project their support for one side or the other can no longer simply express themselves because they automatically are burdened with the past offenses of either side.

The information available to us is incontrovertible... but some continue to levy their past experience (mostly what they are somehow told) while their opposition refuses the relevancy of their own behavior in deference to their own brand of virtue.

Odd this conversation. You have remained true to the defense of the position that silent prayer can not be reasonably recharacterized to suit anti-religious bias. They remained true to the reality that this "law" was made for a reason, and having "experienced" the discomfort of enduring "these people," they will not allow the situation to repeat any longer.

I see an impasse. Because neither side can prevail without granting the other 'righteous virtue,' they will not agree to any form of compromise.

What will follow this post will likely be more extraneous projections of bad behavior, more righteous indignation about the practice of faith, and absolutely no deviation from either course.

I appreciate the consistency, but I don't appreciate the theatrical hyperbole of the anti-religious, nor the idea that religious people won't accept that their righteous attitude alienates the very people they claim to be reaching out to. (I mean this pejoratively, of course.)

Eventually, a sadness must set in here; before we all can sense the that disagreements between ideologies should never descend to legal legerdemain, and populist trickery - otherwise we will create one of two worlds, one where religion regrettably trumps law, and the other where law regrettably trumps religion... as if the two haven't already coexisted for centuries.

Absolutes suck, absolutely.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I don’t think the staff and service users of the abortion clinic are subject to a protection order for making a nuisance of themselves for almost a decade. Seems more likely they go about their business without incident.

originally posted by: Ohanka
a reply to: TheRedneck

I don’t think the staff and service users of the abortion clinic are subject to a protection order for making a nuisance of themselves for almost a decade. Seems more likely they go about their business without incident.

This place was closed... what are we talking about?

a reply to: TheRedneck

Right about there?

The Activities prohibited by the Order are:

i Protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or 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,....

a reply to: Maxmars

There's a whole staff of pro-abortionists who work there, and I assume plenty of customers who are certainly pro-abortion since that's why they are there. How many have been arrested?

a reply to: Ohanka

I don’t think the staff and service users of the abortion clinic are subject to a protection order for making a nuisance of themselves for almost a decade. Seems more likely they go about their business without incident.

Did the PSPO make an exception for staff and service workers? I must have missed that... can you point it out to me?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Terpene

Good! So you finally admit she was arrested for praying. Now... was she doing anything overt to indicate she was praying? Or was it completely within her own private thoughts?

TheRedneck