Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Thought Crime - part deux


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, provoman said:

Protesting is not prohibited.

A person lawfully present in the UK, would have the "right" to be in the "safe zone" and protest everything except abortion. 

Unless they tell the police that they are protesting the law or something else (he never did), there is "reasonable suspicion" that they are protesting abortion. 

3 hours ago, provoman said:

A person lawfully present in the UK, would have the "right" to be in the "safe zone" and prayer about everything except abortion. 

Is that true?  Does it specify what they can and cannot pray for?  Or is the law simply about praying?

3 hours ago, provoman said:

The government poorly wrote the safe zone order; 

agreed

Link to comment
57 minutes ago, pogi said:

Is that true?  Does it specify what they can and cannot pray for?  Or is the law simply about praying?

Based on a plain reading, I would say the PSPO covers in two specific instances. One instance is about for or against abortion. The other instance is about audible prayer when a person seeking clinic services walks by.

The PSPO is referenced in a link in the opening post.

B5D07AE0-6597-46E4-8780-643373B642C4.jpeg

Edited by provoman
Link to comment
2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Well, in the UK...

Yep.  And note that the fellow in the OP admitted to praying, but about his deceased son.  And yet he was apparently still cited by the police.  

Moreover, I think the UK ought to be ashamed of itself for squelching nonviolent, nondisruptive, appropriate-in-time-and-place-and-manner speech via a "Protection Order."

Yes, the Protection Order is too broadly worded, but I think that was intended as a feature, not a bug.  The Powers-That-Be wanted to be able to use the broadly-worded Protection Order to suppress what would otherwise be entirely lawful speech.

Thanks,

-Smac

Yeah it was disappointing to hear the police fail so poorly at enforcement of the safe zone order

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The Protection Order is broad because they know they are dealing with weaselly cowards who are going to deliberately skirt the line the whole time to intimidate people.

Which is exactly what happened.

The nebulous and threatening “Powers-That-Be” want this whole stupid thing to go away and for protestors to stop harassing the clinic and the people going to it. Instead they have a bunch of protestors doing a ‘not actually protesting’ schtick to drum up outrage in media. This is why there are always cameras there. They know exactly what they are doing and are getting exactly what they want. Playing along with their narrative about being victims requires a level of deliberate self-deception about their intent that it boggles my mind that people are capable of it.

Somehow the liars are the heroes? Black is white.

I would have more respect if they would just go out and protest and get arrested. That would at least be honest civil disobedience instead of this asinine juvenile “I had my fingers crossed” rubbish.

I am curious as to way compliance with the safe zone order - even an 'I'm not touching you' compliance - elicits such vitriol. 

If we take the video at face value, police ask what he is doing, he say praying (which in and of itself does not violate the pspo)

The Officer incorrectly asserts that prayer is out right prohibited. Then says "we believe" what is going on in your mind is crime.

Link to comment
42 minutes ago, provoman said:

I am curious as to way compliance with the safe zone order - even an 'I'm not touching you' compliance - elicits such vitriol. 

If we take the video at face value, police ask what he is doing, he say praying (which in and of itself does not violate the pspo)

The Officer incorrectly asserts that prayer is out right prohibited. Then says "we believe" what is going on in your mind is crime.

Because I have known people who are dealing with an unwanted pregnancy and the effect that protestors can have on vulnerable people who are often in a very fragile emotional state.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, provoman said:

 

Protesting is not prohibited.

A person lawfully present in the UK, would have the "right" to be in the "safe zone" and protest everything except abortion. 

A person lawfully present in the UK, would have the "right" to be in the "safe zone" and prayer about everything except abortion. 

A person lawfully present in the UK, would have the "right" to be in the "safe zone" and sprinkle holy water, pray out loud, genuflect, so long as a someone seeking services at the clinic is not passing by.

As praying in ones bedroom, the "safe zone" appears to cover the entire sqaure footage between four roads, which means no abortion related prayer even in a personal residence in the "safe zone".

The government poorly wrote the safe zone order; exact compliance is not a crime, though people may not like it.

He was protesting. He was not praying.  Why do you keep pounding on this one note.  This isn't about religious freedom. No one cares who prays or not.  The issue is with protesting.

Link to comment
14 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  Including public spaces.

We need not create an either/or situation here.  A person living in a 21st-century democratic nation ought to be able to silently prayer in his bedroom or in a public space.

I think it becomes a dangerous thing when we cede to the State power to decide when a person's religious observances are "needed" and when they are not.

And these days both are thoughtcrimes in the UK.

George Orwell intended 1984 as a cautionary tale, not a how-to manual for the State.

Thanks,

-Smac

This isn't about thought crimes.  No one is trying to take away anyone's right to their religion or their rights.  They are just trying to guard the rights of others who want to visit a woman's health center without being badgered by fanatics. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, sunstoned said:

He was protesting. He was not praying.  Why do you keep pounding on this one note.  This isn't about religious freedom. No one cares who prays or not.  The issue is with protesting.

The police cared who was praying, even though the pspo only prohibits prayer audible prayer if done in the presence of someone seeking to utilize the clinic or prayer that either supports or opposes abortion.

The PSPO, also does not prohibit protesting.

If we are to assume what was on his mind to find him "guilty"; then we are openly condemning someone for thought-crime.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, provoman said:

The police cared who was praying, even though the pspo only prohibits prayer audible prayer if done in the presence of someone seeking to utilize the clinic or prayer that either supports or opposes abortion.

The PSPO, also does not prohibit protesting.

If we are to assume what was on his mind to find him "guilty"; then we are openly condemning someone for thought-crime.

From ChatGPT:

Quote

I am not aware of any information regarding the arrest of a person named Adam Smith-Connor for a "thought crime" in the UK. It is possible that this information is inaccurate.  In the UK, there is no such thing as a "thought crime" as freedom of thought and expression is protected by law.

Welp, that settles it!

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, provoman said:

The police cared who was praying, even though the pspo only prohibits prayer audible prayer if done in the presence of someone seeking to utilize the clinic or prayer that either supports or opposes abortion.

The PSPO, also does not prohibit protesting.

If we are to assume what was on his mind to find him "guilty"; then we are openly condemning someone for thought-crime.

The police cared who was protesting.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The Protection Order is broad because they know they are dealing with weaselly cowards who are going to deliberately skirt the line the whole time to intimidate people.

Which is exactly what happened.

The nebulous and threatening “Powers-That-Be” want this whole stupid thing to go away and for protestors to stop harassing the clinic and the people going to it. Instead they have a bunch of protestors doing a ‘not actually protesting’ schtick to drum up outrage in media. This is why there are always cameras there. They know exactly what they are doing and are getting exactly what they want. Playing along with their narrative about being victims requires a level of deliberate self-deception about their intent that it boggles my mind that people are capable of it.

Somehow the liars are the heroes? Black is white.

I would have more respect if they would just go out and protest and get arrested. That would at least be honest civil disobedience instead of this asinine juvenile “I had my fingers crossed” rubbish.

I would respect them more if they dressed up in black paramilitary with masks spray painted and fire bombed the clinics at night. Much braver.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

I would respect them more if they dressed up in black paramilitary with masks spray painted and fire bombed the clinics at night. Much braver.

Me too.

I would still find it reprehensible but it would be a more respectable method of instituting change rather than this weaselly garbage.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, pogi said:

Unless they tell the police that they are protesting the law or something else (he never did), there is "reasonable suspicion" that they are protesting abortion. ...

Legally, that's not how reasonable suspicion works.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...