Breaking News: Pro-Lifers Arrested Outside Wiston Clinic

For one reason and another, I did not attend the pro-life display outside the Wiston Clinic off Dyke Road, Brighton today. By the way, I don't know why it is not called 'Wiston BPAS Abortion Clinic', but I suppose that abortion clinics would rather keep their practises available and legal, post-the Abortion Act (1967), but retain the 'backstreet' secrecy and shadowy vagueness of their operations pre-the Abortion Act (1967).

Why aren't they honest? They need to sell themselves more. "Wiston BPAS Abortion Clinic: Premium Providers of Abortions to the Community of Brighton and Hove".

Anyway, the Abort67 representatives in Brighton today went back to the same place they did last week, with the same placards as they did last week, when they were confronted by a policeman who told them that he could "see no problem" with what they, or rather, we, were doing. For those who do not follow this blog, basically the Abort67 representatives turned up outside Wiston Clinic last week with big banners showing what an aborted foetus actually looked like. Unpleasant, yes, but to do that wasn't a crime last week...But guess what...this is!

The Abort67 representatives, according to one of the organisers of the pro-life display who just emailed me, were arrested by Sussex Police, yes that's the same Sussex Police who have just been rocked by the scandal of employing a policeman who used £80,921 raised through cocaine-dealing to top up his Sussex Police Salary (believe me, I imagine that is the tip of the iceberg), today for doing exactly what they did last week. Apparently, it all depends upon whether a member of the public is 'offended' and whether the banner is clearly visible.

According to the organiser...

'We returned to the abortion Clinic in Brighton today. There was a good number of us so we could divide ourselves between the clinic entrance and the prominent junction of Dyke Road and Old Shoreham Road. We had two banners set up showing an 8 week old aborted embryo and a 10 week aborted foetus. Whilst the women who were well practised at approaching the girls stuck to the entrance.

When the police came out they said that there had been several phone calls about the banners. They therefore asked us to take the banners down. We explained that we were not prepared to do this as we felt that we had a right to show a legal procedure under freedom of expression. They talked amongst themselves for sometime to decide what they were going to do. Two more officers came out and explained the same thing; that as people were offended by the images that we had to remove them under the Public Order Act section 5. We told them that we did not believe that the Public Order Act was appropriate as we were not being abusive, threatening or insulting.

We said again that we were prepared to be arrested and this was probably the best way forward. So Kathryn and I got a ride up to Hollingbury police station, fingerprints, DNA and photographs all taken. It seems though they were reluctant to charge us perhaps because of the weakness of the case against us so they gave us a fixed penalty notice of £80 each which we have refused to pay as we want this in the courts where it can be fought. We were then released.

We aren't interested in civil disobedience but in restoring civil liberties robbed from the general public over the last few years. We will not make abortion unthinkable until we can prove to society that it is an act of violence that kills a baby. That is why we need to challenge the law in the area of freedom of expression first. We may well go out again next week with the banners we have left.'

If it goes to court, which apparently it will if they refuse to pay the fine, I will, one way or another, endeavour to attend the court hearing and report on the proceedings. The perverse logic of both the police and some of the general public in Brighton would be comical if it were not so diabolical.

"Quick, someone! Call the police! Some mad men and women are attempting to persuade someone not to agree to having their child murdered and they're giving the abortion clinic free advertising! Call the cops!"

Well done to The Argus, our local rag, though, who revealed today the cocaine cop story and the fact that Poundland, the discount chain that pledges to offer everything for the home, is 'selling pornography for a pound across Sussex next to children's books, drinks and sweets'! Hmm...Is that the Trading Standards Act or the Public Order Act? Was the local area manager arrested? I don't think so. Is he angling for a job in the CES? Possibly!

In 21st Century Britain and certainly in 21st Century Brighton, you see, everything is tolerated. You can be an active homosexual, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered person and campaign for your 'right' to 'equality'.

Offensive: Ghastly lung cancer
Graphic images of sodomy, the heightened HIV risks associated with it and ghastly gender reassignment operations are rarely employed in their campaigning literature, just as the abortion industry shies away from the truth about abortion because, let's face it, if 'health warnings' were made widely available regarding sodomy and its effects, gender reassignment operations and abortion in the way they are with cigarettes, none would appear so appealing to the general populace, nor would human law endorse all three so readily.

A whole raft of new 'rights' are being embraced by society, but I'm yet to see men and women at the Pride parade, to be held next Saturday, rounded up and taken to Hollingbury Police Station and arrested for campaigning for 'gay marriage', something still illegal in the UK, much to the chagrin of Tatchell and Co Ltd.

Warning: The above video may contain some scenes of nudity!

Now that's what I call a breach of the Public Order Act! Heck! Maybe this whole Public Order Act offense lark depends upon how many people are doing it at the time! I haven't seen any of the 'naked bike riders' arrested under the Public Order Act, an Act which they yearly violate by cycling around Brighton stark bollock naked, but I'll bet you what I own, which isn't much, that if I walk out of my house now with my knackers hanging out I'll spend the night in the cells. I'm sure there must be a couple of old grannies who call the police every year and say, "Excuse me, but there's a load of men and women stark bollock naked outside on bicycles on London Road and I don't want my grandchildren to see that!"

Neither, for that matter, are the hoards who descend upon Brighton for Pride, every year, arrested for street drinking, copious amounts of class A drug abuse, noise pollution and shagging in the bushes, even though the homeless are persecuted by Sussex Police and the CPSOs everyday just for having a can of Special Brew in their hands. I might spend Pride weekend this year on a mobile phone camped on London Road calling the police and telling them that I've spotted some men and women breaking the Council's by-law against street drinking, while wearing a 'God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve' t-shirt, but I doubt they'll arrive since that law only applies to the homeless community, who are, clearly, targetted.

Everything is permissable because Britain is a permissive and 'tolerant' society. Yes, everything is permissable and nearly everything is tolerated. Everything, everything, that is, except the open expression of the Christian faith and the championning of the rights of the unborn by men and women who regard abortion clinics to be the places of industrial genocide that they daily and routinely are. It is all too easy to forget that only a hundred years ago in this country it was abortionists who most considered 'mad', not Christians.

There will be more news to come on this when I receive it, but suffice to say, I shall conclude by saying that it is quite clear to all and sundry that Sussex Police neither know the law, nor do they uphold it.


JoannaB said…
I think this is going to be sign of the times here and in America where the only freedom is no freedom at all.
Sussex Crew said…
Sorry to be rude, I know you're fighting the good fight and all, but this seems almost on the verge of being mentally ill. They were standing in the street with pictures of bloodied babies. Some old boot was posted on 'entry duty' pestering members of the general public as they tried to go in. She was trying to frighten young girls into doing what she wanted so she would get a pat on the head by a hypothetical supreme being who, although he likes having souls in his kingdom, is upset because a little ball of cells is being killed and he will reward a pointless old woman if she shouts loud enough at people.

I'm surprised one of them didn't lamp her to be honest, but they obviously have more civility than she does. Do you seriously think this is like the Insider? You will get to court and a rather bored sounding judge will tell you 'look mate, no one in their right f***ing mind thinks a foetus is a person, that's why almost every country allows abortion. You are a mentally enfeebled madman who is simply unable to digest the simple fact that the value ascribed to human existence cannot be ascribed to non-sentient matter. Go away and stop trying to get attention'
Sussex Crew said…
Regarding homosexuals you say "graphic images of sodomy or gender reassignment operations, strangely, are rarely employed in their campaigning literature" - surely this is the whole point? If they DID use them, they would be detained under the same laws that those anti-abortion militant lunatics fell foul of.

Secondly, you miss the point entirely about WHY these people had broken the law. You are not allowed to target your campaign at any specific group. Allow me to explain. The EDL and BNP are legal, they can assemble and demonstrate. If, however, they are deemed to have 'targeted' that demonstration, say, by 'visiting' a Mosque, they have instantly broken the law. You must know that anti-abortion campaigning is legal, but if you are specifically targeting people outside a clinic, you are breaking the law.

I am led to wonder why you live in Brighton at all. You hate everything about it, surely there is somewhere more suited to your acerbic negativity. You might even enjoy living in the Beamish Museum, they pretend it's the 1840s all year long
Er...No, that imagery isn't used because what they are campaigning for is offensive to the public.
Sussex Crew,

Let's face it, you think anyone who stands outside an abortion clinic and says, "This is wrong," is mad. Therefore, anything they do, think or say, in your eyes, should be stopped.
I think your understanding of the law is on more shaky ground than that of Sussex Police, who last week, did not think the Pro-Life group's actions were at all criminal.
Sussex Crew said…
I don't think it is mad to believe something is wrong, but turning up at a clinic with pictures of aborted foetuses and huge crosses for a Kumbayah shindig is the sign of someone with too much time on their hands. I struggle to comprehend what your view of 'life' is in this pro-life message. You strip existence of anything meaningfull in order to insist upon the most pointless and reductive definition of 'life' there is. Why is it only Christians of a certain stamp that do this? If it's so glaringly obvious that abortion is murder, so obvious that you have to verbally assault people on their way to a clinic, why do only you and the six or so other twisted lunatics who campaign see it? Sort it out mate, it's beyond a joke
Sussex Crew said…
"Er...No, that imagery isn't used because what they are campaigning for is offensive to the public." I doubt very much being gay is offensive to the public (especially in Brighton). People don't like to see graphic depictions of anything when they're walking to the shops - be it gay or straight sex, murdered kittends, aborted foetuses, cancered lungs, tortured soldiers, whatever the particular nutty campaign is. You see the sign, quicken your pace, and mutter the c word under your breath. Great way to spread your message!
As far as I know there was no 'verbal assault'.
'You strip existence of anything meaningfull in order to insist upon the most pointless and reductive definition of 'life' there is.'

Sorry, isn't that what abortionists do? They're the ones reducing 'life' to something that takes place outside of the womb!
Sussex Crew said…
Well I would ask you what is life and why is it valuable? OK grass and weeds are forms of life, so it can't be biological. Something else then perhaps. Something only humans have that animals and plants do not. What ever this is, it is not soemthign a foetus has.

p.s. I entirely agree with your image of cancered lungs - the government's attempt to coerce smokers is despicable. Either something is illegal or it's not - you can't target 'users' who are not breaking the law. Low and behold, that's what you and old Mrs. O'Flannerly from the anti-abortion unemployed & retired nutters knitting circle are doing.
Dominic Mary said…
Sussex Crew;

you say that 'no-one in their right f****** mind thinks a foetus is a person'.

Have you ever tried using that argument on a woman who has just had a late-term miscarriage, or had a stillbirth ? Told her that it must just be thrown out with the clinical waste, rather than allowed a proper funeral, because 'it's not a person' ?

No ? I didn't think so, somehow.
Sussex Crew.

Humanity. A foetus is human. It is a human being. We were there...remember!
Sussex Crew said…
"Have you ever tried using that argument on a woman who has just had a late-term miscarriage, or had a stillbirth ?" - you must mean a woman who has a miscarriage in a late term pregnancy, right? In the early days most women do in fact have miscarriages; you probably have several dozen 'brothers' and 'sisters' you never knew about - I hope you will now spend a suitably long period mourning their loss. That's the point at which this whole argument becomes absurd to me. Most young girls who turns up at an abortion providers are not, if your logic is correct, terminating their first pregnancy. Presuming they have been sexually active for a while and not taking precautions then, even if they were having sex during a fertile part of the cycle, the 'babies' were still 'murdered' by nature. You know, why don't you and those two senile old women start doing a prayer vigil around the bellies of married women, they are slaughter houses too when you look at it with the 'foetus is a person' slant.

Why does a woman grieve after a late term miscarriage then? Because she WANTED a baby. Probably painted the bursery etc. That means it's a tragedy on a par with losing a new born. As you can see, there is a world of difference between a couple who are expecting and WANTING a child feeling sad because those expectations are ripped up by a cruel and murderous God who snatches babies from their mothers and a couple who have a little blob of cells they DON'T WANT to become a child and so have a termination.
Sussex Crew said…
"Told her that it must just be thrown out with the clinical waste, rather than allowed a proper funeral, because 'it's not a person' ?"

I repeat my point - if I have sex with my wife and she does not fall pregnant should I hold a 'proper funeral'? She will, in all liklehood, have conceived. Would anyone, to use my earlier expression, in their right flipping minds do this? Course not. They're not that dumb
Sussex Crew said…
"Humanity. A foetus is human. It is a human being."

That is such a confusing and reductive definition that I can't even be bothered. "Why shouldn't we kill cows mummy?"

"Bovine. Cow is a bovine dear. That's all there is to it"

It's like a joke out of a Molière play

Anyway, I disagree. A foetus cannot possibly hold the properties held by my sister or wife (or even you and that mad old bad who shouts at women in the street while weeing herself). Ergo, it is not a human being
Shepherd said…
Bravo Laurence, my prayers and masses will be offered up for you. This is the stand that we all need to take.
Pastor in Valle said…
If these people need any help with the fines, or whatever, please call me. I don't have a lot, but I would like to help if they need it.
Mike said…
"A foetus cannot possibly hold the properties held by my sister or wife."

Could you clarify which properties they are, please?
Sussex Crew said…
Any properties anyone I love or care about holds, in other words attributes which I deem to be valuable, cannot be held by a foetus. I asked a fairly simple question, namely, other than saying 'it's human' (which means tap all other than a truism), what properties can you assign to a foetus that make its life ethically similar to your own? It just makes no sense - the only argument you have to go on is, if you didn't have a termination, but gestated the foetus for a while, then gave birth, it would be a baby in the world. This is spurious stuff, it hardly demonstrates that, at the time of conception, a foetus holds any of the properties you deem to be relevant when thinking of what makes humans unique. You will of course never accept this, since for your argument to work, when that first single cell is formed at conception, a little soul must miraculously fly out of the clouds and pop into the cell ('activating' the matter, morally speaking). I do not think this is true. If I did, I would have to believe that a cell had a soul, and I do not. Hence, a foetus cannot hold any properties that make me care about human life, and I see no reason to spend my life fighting a feutile campaign intending to upset young girls in the name of a truly whacky belief in souls flying out of the clouds.
Physiocrat said…
Looking in from the outside, it seems to me as if the Brits are rushing to hell as fast as their legs will carry them.
rosaMaria said…
A "foetus", "fetus" is the Latin word for "little one". And that "one" is human, a little human. A foetus is a little human in development. I remember once reading about a woman who went to a Confession, sacrament of Penance with Padre Pio and finishing, he asked her, "have you forgotten anything"? She replying, "No, I haven't", and Padre Pio responding, "Think a little more", She, "No, I've mentioned everything". So he asks her to "Close your eyes and tell me what you see"?, She does so, and so Padre Pio asks, "what do you see"?, so she responding, "I see a Pope dressed all in white and surrounded by a group of people, clamouring to speak with him, get close to him, etc.; it's obvious he is well-loved by the crowd". So then Padre Pio tells the woman, "You see that Pope in white? Well, he was one of the babies that you aborted"! Hearing that, the woman screams loudly and faints. That was the sin that the Padre Pio was asking "did you forget anything"? That woman's husband was a doctor who would give her "medicines" to "abort" whenever she became "with child", pregnant. This incident of Padre Pio's "reading of souls" can be found in several books about his life and also on a wonderful site, www. Lots of prayers that he'd pray are found there as well and many testimonies. Thought I should share this as it always impressed me strongly and have never forgotten it. God bless you, Laurence and ALL your readers here..

Popular posts from this blog

So Now That We're All Saying What We're Thinking...