No go zones for beliefs

[BMS]

Woman charged with breaching exclusion zone near abortion clinic

She was arrested close to the BPAS Robert Clinic in Kings Norton

www-birminghammail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org

Various reports..however she was arrested in a PSPO area. The police cant prove whether she was praying or not.

 

[BMS]

So there are now no go zones in place in the UK where people cant simply go if they have certain beliefs

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Praying? How can they talk to God and hear what He said/she said?

 

[BMS]

Praying? How can they talk to God and hear what He said/she said?

They can do anything they want in their imaginary world.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

They can do anything they want in their imaginary world.

If there is NOGOD, It seems irrational for them to worry about talking to The LORD.

 

[BMS]

Twitter erupts over clip of UK woman arrested for silently praying across from abortion clinic: 'Terrifying'

Conservatives reacted to a viral video of U.K. March for Life director Isabel Vaughan-Spruce being arrested for praying outside a U.K. abortion clinic.

www.foxnews.com

She should have asked the police 'what are you here for today?'

 

[romishpopishorganist]

Woman charged with breaching exclusion zone near abortion clinic

She was arrested close to the BPAS Robert Clinic in Kings Norton

www-birminghammail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org

Various reports..however she was arrested in a PSPO area. The police cant prove whether she was praying or not.

I saw this.

I admit I am conflicted on this. The problem is that whatever rights we grant to pro-lifers, we also have to grant to abortion supporters.

For example: if pro-lifers have the right to stand outside an abortion mill, praying, or otherwise witnessing to the sanctify of life, even possibly persuading a woman against an abortion, then abortion supporters have the right to stand outside of churches and do the exact same thing for their cause. This means abortion supporters could stand outside of a church and try to persuade people that abortion is good. They could persuade people away from the faith. They could be a presence also.

I do not want abortion supporters outside my Church making a statement anymore than abortion supporters want me outside an abortion mill making a statement. For this reason I am conflicted about the right of pro-lifers to protest outside of abortion mills. I obviously support that---but the problem is that--abortion supporters have to have those exact same rights then.

Conversely, if we say that pro-lifers may not stand outside of abortion mills and protest peacefully, then--we can also say that abortion supporters do not have the right to stand outside of churches and protest peacefully.

So again, what is the answer? I don't know. I just know that I am conflicted.

 

[BMS]

I saw this.

I admit I am conflicted on this. The problem is that whatever rights we grant to pro-lifers, we also have to grant to abortion supporters.

For example: if pro-lifers have the right to stand outside an abortion mill, praying, or otherwise witnessing to the sanctify of life, even possibly persuading a woman against an abortion, then abortion supporters have the right to stand outside of churches and do the exact same thing for their cause. This means abortion supporters could stand outside of a church and try to persuade people that abortion is good. They could persuade people away from the faith. They could be a presence also.

I do not want abortion supporters outside my Church making a statement anymore than abortion supporters want me outside an abortion mill making a statement. For this reason I am conflicted about the right of pro-lifers to protest outside of abortion mills. I obviously support that---but the problem is that--abortion supporters have to have those exact same rights then.

Conversely, if we say that pro-lifers may not stand outside of abortion mills and protest peacefully, then--we can also say that abortion supporters do not have the right to stand outside of churches and protest peacefully.

So again, what is the answer? I don't know. I just know that I am conflicted.

Ok so, she was standing there praying on her own, silently. What is your issue with that?

 

[romishpopishorganist]

Ok so, she was standing there praying on her own, silently. What is your issue with that?

Nothing. I was making a larger point. In this case, fine. Praying. The point, which, surprise, surprise you seem to have missed---is that whatever rights we grant to pro-lifers have to apply equally to abortion supporters. Not that I like this fact by the way....but we cannot grant one group of rights while not granting another group of people the same rights. Again--not that I like this.

I would love to say pro-lifers have the right to protect at abortion mills to save lives--but not grant abortion supporters the right to protest at churches. But I can't be a hypocrite in my values.

 

[BMS]

Nothing. I was making a larger point. In this case, fine. Praying. The point, which, surprise, surprise you seem to have missed---is that whatever rights we grant to pro-lifers have to apply equally to abortion supporters. Not that I like this fact by the way....but we cannot grant one group of rights while not granting another group of people the same rights. Again--not that I like this.

I would love to say pro-lifers have the right to protect at abortion mills to save lives--but not grant abortion supporters the right to protest at churches. But I can't be a hypocrite in my values.

Larger point taken. Though I could suggest the inequality already happens

 

[romishpopishorganist]

Larger point taken. Though I could suggest the inequality already happens

Of course it does.

The difference between Christians and everyone else is that--they do not cheat even when cheating means they can win.

In other words---the difference between a Christian and an abortion supporter is that the Christian will equally apply the rights even when it is detrimental to their cause---because if they have to cheat to win, winning isn't worth it.

Abortion supporters on the other hand will do whatever it takes to win, whatever underhanded thing, whatever it takes. They do not fight fairly.

But that is okay. Evil is allowed to cheat. That is what evil does. It is its nature. Christians are not allowed to cheat.

 

[Temujin]

I saw this.

I admit I am conflicted on this. The problem is that whatever rights we grant to pro-lifers, we also have to grant to abortion supporters.

For example: if pro-lifers have the right to stand outside an abortion mill, praying, or otherwise witnessing to the sanctify of life, even possibly persuading a woman against an abortion, then abortion supporters have the right to stand outside of churches and do the exact same thing for their cause. This means abortion supporters could stand outside of a church and try to persuade people that abortion is good. They could persuade people away from the faith. They could be a presence also.

I do not want abortion supporters outside my Church making a statement anymore than abortion supporters want me outside an abortion mill making a statement. For this reason I am conflicted about the right of pro-lifers to protest outside of abortion mills. I obviously support that---but the problem is that--abortion supporters have to have those exact same rights then.

Conversely, if we say that pro-lifers may not stand outside of abortion mills and protest peacefully, then--we can also say that abortion supporters do not have the right to stand outside of churches and protest peacefully.

So again, what is the answer? I don't know. I just know that I am conflicted.

A good point
I would point out that Christian and Abortion supporter are not mutually exclusive stances. There are Christians who support abortion and atheists who are pro-life. I for one would not support abortion activists demonstrating outside a church. I agree with you that this would be as objectionable as pro-life supporters demonstrating outside a clinic. I suppose the issue is whether demonstrations go beyond objectionable into abusive, threatening or harassing. That's dependent on the circumstances of the individual case.

 

[BMS]

It also depends what one means by protesting and demonstrating. The gatherings outside abortion centres are mostly about looking to support women with information sometimes unlikely to be available in the abortion centre, and sometimes definitely not available in the abortion centre.

However the thread and OP is about freedom of movement and expression and above all thought, which is clearly denied here once again

 

[Temujin]

It also depends what one means by protesting and demonstrating. The gatherings outside abortion centres are mostly about looking to support women with information sometimes unlikely to be available in the abortion centre, and sometimes definitely not available in the abortion centre.

However the thread and OP is about freedom of movement and expression and above all thought, which is clearly denied here once again

Rubbish. The demonstrations outside such clinics are proscribed because they are deemed to be harassment by the victims. The godly intent of the perpetrators is of no consequence. If the missionary zeal of the demonstrators is perceived as abusive or threatening by the women targeted, that's enough for an offence to have been committed. Help and support can be offered in a great many ways without breaking the law. Not least by the health care professionals dealing with the case, who will give information about such support to all women considering abortion.

 

[BMS]

Rubbish. The demonstrations outside such clinics are proscribed because they are deemed to be harassment by the victims. The godly intent of the perpetrators is of no consequence. If the missionary zeal of the demonstrators is perceived as abusive or threatening by the women targeted, that's enough for an offence to have been committed. Help and support can be offered in a great many ways without breaking the law. Not least by the health care professionals dealing with the case, who will give information about such support to all women considering abortion.

Not rubbish. Even the former ceo.of bpas agreed that there was extra helpful charity support available from the pro-life presence.
So.yes some think its harrasment and some dont.
The rest of your post is just your opinion and has nothing to do with the issue.

 

[BMS]

Rubbish. The demonstrations outside such clinics are proscribed because they are deemed to be harassment by the victims. The godly intent of the perpetrators is of no consequence. If the missionary zeal of the demonstrators is perceived as abusive or threatening by the women targeted, that's enough for an offence to have been committed. Help and support can be offered in a great many ways without breaking the law. Not least by the health care professionals dealing with the case, who will give information about such support to all women considering abortion.

The woke left have shown in the USA that they simply wont stand or allow abortion laws they dont like.

The issue here Temujin is breaking of human rights of freedom of conscience and freedom of expression.

 

[Temujin]

Not rubbish. Even the former ceo.of bpas agreed that there was extra helpful charity support available from the pro-life presence.
So.yes some think its harrasment and some dont.
The rest of your post is just your opinion and has nothing to do with the issue.

For an offence to be committed, all that's required is for a victim to feel harassed. That others brush it off is not relevant.

This is an opinion board. All opinions about this issue are as relevant as all others.

 

[Temujin]

The woke left have shown in the USA that they simply wont stand or allow abortion laws they dont like.

The issue here Temujin is breaking of human rights of freedom of conscience and freedom of expression.

No such thing as the woke left.
The issue here is that freedom of conscience and freedom of expression, just like all other freedoms and rights, have limits. You don't like the limits, which are placed there by law to protect the privacy and wellbeing of of other people, also a freedom and a right. Your right to freedom of expression ends when it interferes with my right to go about my personal business without being harassed. That applies to those whose personal business is attending a church just as much as to those attending an abortion clinic.

 

[BMS]

For an offence to be committed, all that's required is for a victim to feel harassed. That others brush it off is not relevant.

This is an opinion board. All opinions about this issue are as relevant as all others.

According to the PSPO an offense has been comitted, namely praying. You are now suggesting it might have been. You are dreaming again.

 

[BMS]

No such thing as the woke left.
The issue here is that freedom of conscience and freedom of expression, just like all other freedoms and rights, have limits. You don't like the limits, which are placed there by law to protect the privacy and wellbeing of of other people, also a freedom and a right. Your right to freedom of expression ends when it interferes with my right to go about my personal business without being harassed. That applies to those whose personal business is attending a church just as much as to those attending an abortion clinic.

Woke left is a widely held ideology Temujin, explained with examples and by posters here and links to youtubes. The only people who deny it are woke ideologues, which only goes to prove its a feelings based ideology in denial of reality.
Your opinions are against human rights, extremist and totalitarian.. in fact cultural marxist.