Praying is now illegal

[Desk trauma]

Respectfully, that is nonsense.

Nope.

 

[Larniavc]

No, rather, I am simply pointing out the fact that abortion as a procedure is nearly 100% fatal for the infant. I should have modified my number to account for those children severely injured as a result of attempted abortion.

Now they are children?

They are foetuses. Good grief.

 

[The Liturgist]

Now they are children?

Firstly, I was referring to infants injured in failed attempts to abort them, but secondly, since you ask, yes, a fetus is most definitely a child and a human being, which is why it is common in many countries including the US to charge someone who assaults or kills a pregnant woman, resulting in the loss of her unborn baby, for the homicide of the baby.

You know you might consider reading up on Christian perspectives on personhood and human dignity, so that you might be able to communicate with us with greater ease or at least understand our perspective and also the diversity of views that exist within the Christian faith. I hope that as an atheist posting on a Christian site you might take advantage of the opportunity for cultural exchange and learning about our religion.

I would specifically suggest The Orthodox Way by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, memory eternal, and Dignitatis Humanae, the influential encyclical by Pope John Paul II.

 

[Larniavc]

a fetus is most definitely a child and a human being

Don't be silly. A foetus is not a child (unless definitions have changed in the last 5 minutes).

 

[The Liturgist]

Don't be silly. A foetus is not a child (unless definitions have changed in the last 5 minutes).

As Christians, we believe that our life begins at the moment of conception.

 

[Whyayeman]

As Christians, we believe that our life begins at the moment of conception.

This is the difference between us, and is slightly off-topic here.

The issue is one of competing liberties. In the UK women have the right to an abortion in certain circumstances. It is true that abortion on demand is now a fact; the law has been interpreted that way. There is also a right to protest against things, including the right to pray - anywhere, any time. What I suspect has happened here is that the woman has already been given warnings about her conduct in the area of Kings Norton where the clinic is. The police had 'reason to believe' she was in contravention of the Public Order ruling for that place and acted accordingly.

The existence of the video shows that her protest was not entirely a solo effort. She had company...

 

[The Liturgist]

This is the difference between us, and is slightly off-topic here.

The issue is one of competing liberties. In the UK women have the right to an abortion in certain circumstances. It is true that abortion on demand is now a fact; the law has been interpreted that way. There is also a right to protest against things, including the right to pray - anywhere, any time. What I suspect has happened here is that the woman has already been given warnings about her conduct in the area of Kings Norton where the clinic is. The police had 'reason to believe' she was in contravention of the Public Order ruling for that place and acted accordingly.

The existence of the video shows that her protest was not entirely a solo effort. She had company...

That wasn’t the case, and furthermore the clinic was closed at the time.

Also I would note a junior minister in HM Government regarding a proposed Parliamentary extension of the ban throughout the country expressed the view that such an act would be in contravention of the ECHR, and I expect legal challenges against this legislation will be successful.

 

[Whyayeman]

That wasn’t the case, and furthermore the clinic was closed at the time.

Also I would note a junior minister in HM Government regarding a proposed Parliamentary extension of the ban throughout the country expressed the view that such an act would be in contravention of the ECHR, and I expect legal challenges against this legislation will be successful.

There is no chance of that happening. You will see that the government is not proposing any such measure and without government support any Bill would never reach the point of being debated.

The court will decide on whether the woman was in breach of the order.

 

[Desk trauma]

This incident reminds me of one of the spurious cases where US Christians were whingeing about alleged persecution: The hallway Tebowers.

A bunch of high schoolers decided to start imitating Tim Tebows kneeling in prayer after scoring a touch down, in the middle of the hallway, during class changes, impeding others travel. School tells them to knock it off and it was latched onto as persecution by the professionally outraged commentariat.

Very similar thing here.

 

[Larniavc]

As Christians, we believe that our life begins at the moment of conception.

Your beliefs don’t change reality.

 

[The Liturgist]

Your beliefs don’t change reality.

No, but they do align with it.

 

[Whyayeman]

No, but they do align with it.

It is an issue for which there are many forums already here. The issue here is different - ostensibly about the right (undisputed by anybody) to pray, but actually a way to skew some events in the UK to look as if liberty was under attack on the streets there. Some liberties are threatened by recent legislation, but not that one.

 

[All Becomes New]

People going to the clinic don’t need people protesting outside to make a difficult time even worse.

Pretty sure the baby insider her is going to have a far more difficult time.

 

[The Liturgist]

It is an issue for which there are many forums already here. The issue here is different - ostensibly about the right (undisputed by anybody) to pray, but actually a way to skew some events in the UK to look as if liberty was under attack on the streets there.

It is under attack, but this is nothing new; the UK government has often been paternalistic and guilty of legislative overreach. I suspect aspects of this like the unpopular ID cards scheme were why Labour lost in 2010.

Of course since then the extreme hypocrisy of Partygate I could see leading to a Labour comeback unless the Tories are very careful over the next 18 months. Although the fact that the Tories removed Johnson themselves helps I think.

Some liberties are threatened by recent legislation, but not that one.

Only because it seems likely that these bylaws will be overturned by the ECHR. They are a specific infringement of the freedom of speech and religion.

 

[Darren Court]

Praying is not what she was arrested for. She broke the exclusion zone around the clinic. If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.

People going to the clinic don’t need people protesting outside to make a difficult time even worse.

Firstly, it's not an exclusion zone that's your definition not the terminology used.
.
Secondly, there is no prohibition to stand inside this stand. The POPO prohibits protesting or doing anything that indicates approval or disapproval of abortion within the specified zone. The problem here was that she was doing nothing except standing there silently and in appearance doing NOTHING. Those reporting to the police said they didn't know what she was doing. The video that shows the police approaching her ask what she's doing.... which makes it pretty darn obvious she couldn't be indicating approval or disapproval or they'd have known what she was doing!
.
Thirdly, you need to read the detail. She was stood there when the clinic was CLOSED. There was no-one to protest too as there were no "People going to the clinic" (and again even if there were if neighbours and police couldn't determine what she was doing how could she be protesting?)

 

[Whyayeman]

Firstly, it's not an exclusion zone that's your definition not the terminology used.
.
Secondly, there is no prohibition to stand inside this stand. The POPO prohibits protesting or doing anything that indicates approval or disapproval of abortion within the specified zone. The problem here was that she was doing nothing except standing there silently and in appearance doing NOTHING. Those reporting to the police said they didn't know what she was doing. The video that shows the police approaching her ask what she's doing.... which makes it pretty darn obvious she couldn't be indicating approval or disapproval or they'd have known what she was doing!
.
Thirdly, you need to read the detail. She was stood there when the clinic was CLOSED. There was no-one to protest too as there were no "People going to the clinic" (and again even if there were if neighbours and police couldn't determine what she was doing how could she be protesting?)

This might be so if she was alone. She wasn't. She was filmed for the duration of her encounter with the police.

My thought is that she was inside the PSPO and her supporter(s) were filming just outside it. In short, a set-up designed to get the responses of anti-abortionists we see here. The appearance before the beak is ten days away. Then we might know a bit more (and no doubt her supporters will be there, outside making free with their allegations about the 'Police State which has made praying illegal'.

 

[Larniavc]

Pretty sure the baby insider her is going to have a far more difficult time.

Not a baby. Maybe not even a foetus.

 

[Larniavc]

Firstly, it's not an exclusion zone that's your definition not the terminology used.
.
Secondly, there is no prohibition to stand inside this stand. The POPO prohibits protesting or doing anything that indicates approval or disapproval of abortion within the specified zone. The problem here was that she was doing nothing except standing there silently and in appearance doing NOTHING. Those reporting to the police said they didn't know what she was doing. The video that shows the police approaching her ask what she's doing.... which makes it pretty darn obvious she couldn't be indicating approval or disapproval or they'd have known what she was doing!
.
Thirdly, you need to read the detail. She was stood there when the clinic was CLOSED. There was no-one to protest too as there were no "People going to the clinic" (and again even if there were if neighbours and police couldn't determine what she was doing how could she be protesting?)

What say we wait until she goes but before the Bill? If she is innocent of all wrong ding she’ll be fine and have a story to dine out on with her radical friends for years to come.

 

[Whyayeman]

I think the real issue is modern secular society has become politically correct and now are attacking thought as a crime.

No, I don't think so. I don't like PSPOs. They are, I think, an infringement on people's right to protest. I think that 'pro-life' protesters should be allowed their right to oppose abortion. But PSPOs are intended to prevent certain actions in very limited and local circumstances, not to police thoughts - or prayers. To maintain that 'prayer has been made illegal' is disingenuous.

The rather dirty tactic of harassing clients and staff at a medical centre is repugnant. The people who live nearby must also be affected by the constant harrying.

 

[Darren Court]

No, I don't think so. I don't like PSPOs. They are, I think, an infringement on people's right to protest. I think that 'pro-life' protesters should be allowed their right to oppose abortion. But PSPOs are intended to prevent certain actions in very limited and local circumstances, not to police thoughts - or prayers. To maintain that 'prayer has been made illegal' is disingenuous.

The rather dirty tactic of harassing clients and staff at a medical centre is repugnant. The people who live nearby must also be affected by the constant harrying.

I don't think you've actually read the PSPO in question because it does SPECIFICALLY outlaw prayer. It's therefore not disingenuous at all to suggest that this forms at least part of the infringement.