Abort 67 "intimidating protests" outside Blackfriars/London clinic

[Pickman's model]

I wonder how these cunts would react to people doing similar behaviour outside their places of worship (assuming they attend such places)? I suspect they'd be quick to ring the police whinging about being harassed.

it's a tempting thought, giving them a dose of their own medicine.

 

[Pickman's model]

we could turn up with placards saying "born again? twice too often!" and that

 

[farmerbarleymow]

it's a tempting thought, giving them a dose of their own medicine.

I'm sure it would be quite easy to be suitably offensive to them with slogans and placards.

 

[farmerbarleymow]

we could turn up with placards saying "born again? twice too often!" and that

 

[Pickman's model]

.

 

[Athos]

it's a tempting thought, giving them a dose of their own medicine.

They thrive off that though. The more they're 'persecuted', the more they're convinced they're doing God's work.

 

[Pickman's model]

They thrive off that though. The more they're 'persecuted', the more they're convinced they're doing God's work.

i think they might have second thoughts when they're cast to the lions and tigers and leopards in the zoo.

 

[farmerbarleymow]

They thrive off that though. The more they're 'persecuted', the more they're convinced they're doing God's work.

True enough, but it might sway some of the less rabid ones to think again about how they approach the issue, when faced with it thrown back at them.

 

[Pickman's model]

True enough, but it might sway some of the less rabid ones to think again about how they approach the issue, when faced with it thrown back at them.

we could hammer the point home

 

[farmerbarleymow]

 

[farmerbarleymow]

i think they might have second thoughts when they're cast to the lions and tigers and leopards in the zoo.

I'd feel sorry for the animals if this happens - the 'pro-life' protesters probably taste bitter and nasty, just like their personalities.

 

[Citizen66]

i don't believe the issue was ever raised. nonetheless, while they have that right i and others like me have the same right to make our own feelings known. but there's nothing more liberal than demanding people you disagree with are jogged on by the state.

I didn't realise anyone was suggesting that - or not LBJ anyway.

 

[John Allman]

I wonder how these cunts would react to people doing similar behaviour outside their places of worship (assuming they attend such places)? I suspect they'd be quick to ring the police whinging about being harassed.

Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation. However, that has not discouraged protests held outside places of worship, such as this one:

http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/in.../468-pro-choice-events-on-sunday-4th-november

 

[J Ed]

Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation.

Yes it is you batshit right-wing cunt

How many women in distress have you managed to harass and intimidate today?

 

[J Ed]

I see from John Allman's twitter profile that he's also not very keen on gays or feminism. Surprising.

 

[Athos]

Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation. However, that has not discouraged protests held outside places of worship, such as this one:

http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/in.../468-pro-choice-events-on-sunday-4th-november

Hello John. Are you the same John Allman that was involved with 'Christians Against Mental Slavery'?

 

[John Allman]

we could turn up with placards saying "born again? twice too often!" and that

Abort 67 isn't attempting to deliver a religious message. Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation. Abort 67 has no beliefs other than that killing humans isn't morally acceptable just because the humans killed are very young, and those who decided that they should be killed happened to have wombs.

Because Abort 67 has no religion, Abort 67 cannot be opposed using placards that make fun of any religion, as you propose.

Instead, you will need to engage with Abort 67's argument. Nobody here is engaging with Abort 67's *content*, its *message*, its *argument*. Instead, people are just expressing anger towards one particular type of direct action activist, without explaining what they are angry about.

Abort 67 displays posters showing what abortion does, to whom, outside retail outlets of the abortion industry. Why are these displays any more "intimidating" than the contents of a butcher's shop window? Think about THAT question, and you shall have begun to think about Abort 67's message, and will become able to think about how to refute it, other than by mindless name-calling of the personnel.

A butcher displays dead animals in his shop window, to *encourage* hungry people to buy, cook and eat bits of the dead animals, not to shock them into never eating meat again. What Abort 67 is doing, is *advertising* BPAS' service for them, free of charge. Arguably BPAS should be grateful, rather "intimidated" by free advertising of BPAS' product on the part of Abort 67. If not, then (here's the challenge) WHY NOT?

Apparently, a lot of people think that what Abort 67 does isn't the equivalent of displaying pieces of meat in a butcher's shop window. But what they do about this, is to heap fairly mindless, ad hominem abuse upon Abort 67 activists, without actually answering the $64,000 question: Why isn't it GOOD for BPAS' business, for somebody kindly to advertise its product for it, outside its shops, graphically? The same way that it is apparently GOOD for the butcher's business for him to advertise graphically his product.

Abort 67 is simply telling the public that what they see, on Abort 67's posters, is what those who buy abortions from BPAS are getting. Somebody needs to complete the sentence: "What Abort 67 does, is intimidating towards BPAS, because ..." In this entire thread, nobody has done that job properly. There is no "because". It is taken for granted that Abort 67 are wrong, not argued. Abort 67 will never go away if that is the poor quality of the opposition to their message. They will eventually win, if nobody refutes them.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

This probably sounds very clever to you but it is bullshit. Go away please.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I didn't realise anyone was suggesting that - or not LBJ anyway.

He's thrown strawmen around like it's harvest time on this thread. I think it's time for the pedantick one to go back on ignore.

 

[butchersapron]

Abort 67 isn't attempting to deliver a religious message. Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation. Abort 67 has no beliefs other than that killing humans isn't morally acceptable just because the humans killed are very young, and those who decided that they should be killed happened to have wombs.

Because Abort 67 has no religion, Abort 67 cannot be opposed using placards that make fun of any religion, as you propose.

Instead, you will need to engage with Abort 67's argument. Nobody here is engaging with Abort 67's *content*, its *message*, its *argument*. Instead, people are just expressing anger towards one particular type of direction action activist, without explaining what they are angry about.

Abort 67 displays posters showing what abortion does, to whom, outside retail outlets of the abortion industry. Why are these displays any more "intimidating" than the contents of a butcher's shop window? Think about THAT question, and you shall have begun to think about Abort 67's message, and will become able to think about how to refute it, other than by mindless name-calling of the personnel.

A butcher displays dead animals in his shop window, to *encourage* hungry people to buy, cook and eat bits of the dead animals, not to shock them into never eating meat again. What Abort 67 is doing, is *advertising* BPAS' service for them, free of charge. Arguably BPAS should be grateful, rather "intimidated" by free advertising of BPAS' product on the part of Abort 67. If not, then (here's the challenge) WHY NOT?

Apparently, a lot of people think that what Abort 67 does isn't the equivalent of displaying pieces of meat in a butcher's shop window. But what they do about this, is to heap fairly mindless, ad hominem abuse upon Abort 67 activists, without actually answering the $64,000 question: Why isn't it GOOD for BPAS' business, for somebody kindly to advertise its product for it, outside its shops, graphically? The same way that it is apparently GOOD for the butcher's business for him to advertise graphically his product.

Abort 67 is simply telling the public that what they see, on Abort 67's posters, is what those who buy abortions from BPAS are getting. Somebody needs to complete the sentence: "What Abort 67 does, is intimidating towards BPAS, because ..." In this entire thread, nobody has done that job properly. There is no "because". It is taken for granted that Abort 67 are wrong, not argued. Abort 67 will never go away if that is the poor quality of the opposition to their message. They will eventually win, if nobody refutes them.

Homophobia is a legitimate, effective and desirable defence mechanism against homosexuality in the individual and in society.

 

[peterkro]

Abort 67 isn't attempting to deliver a religious message. Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation. Abort 67 has no beliefs other than that killing humans isn't morally acceptable just because the humans killed are very young, and those who decided that they should be killed happened to have wombs.

Because Abort 67 has no religion, Abort 67 cannot be opposed using placards that make fun of any religion, as you propose.

Instead, you will need to engage with Abort 67's argument. Nobody here is engaging with Abort 67's *content*, its *message*, its *argument*. Instead, people are just expressing anger towards one particular type of direction action activist, without explaining what they are angry about.

Abort 67 displays posters showing what abortion does, to whom, outside retail outlets of the abortion industry. Why are these displays any more "intimidating" than the contents of a butcher's shop window? Think about THAT question, and you shall have begun to think about Abort 67's message, and will become able to think about how to refute it, other than by mindless name-calling of the personnel.

A butcher displays dead animals in his shop window, to *encourage* hungry people to buy, cook and eat bits of the dead animals, not to shock them into never eating meat again. What Abort 67 is doing, is *advertising* BPAS' service for them, free of charge. Arguably BPAS should be grateful, rather "intimidated" by free advertising of BPAS' product on the part of Abort 67. If not, then (here's the challenge) WHY NOT?

Apparently, a lot of people think that what Abort 67 does isn't the equivalent of displaying pieces of meat in a butcher's shop window. But what they do about this, is to heap fairly mindless, ad hominem abuse upon Abort 67 activists, without actually answering the $64,000 question: Why isn't it GOOD for BPAS' business, for somebody kindly to advertise its product for it, outside its shops, graphically? The same way that it is apparently GOOD for the butcher's business for him to advertise graphically his product.

Abort 67 is simply telling the public that what they see, on Abort 67's posters, is what those who buy abortions from BPAS are getting. Somebody needs to complete the sentence: "What Abort 67 does, is intimidating towards BPAS, because ..." In this entire thread, nobody has done that job properly. There is no "because". It is taken for granted that Abort 67 are wrong, not argued. Abort 67 will never go away if that is the poor quality of the opposition to their message. They will eventually win, if nobody refutes them.

Well aren't you quite the pleasant person.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Abort 67 isn't attempting to deliver a religious message. Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation. Abort 67 has no beliefs other than that killing humans isn't morally acceptable just because the humans killed are very young, and those who decided that they should be killed happened to have wombs.

Because Abort 67 has no religion, Abort 67 cannot be opposed using placards that make fun of any religion, as you propose.

Instead, you will need to engage with Abort 67's argument. Nobody here is engaging with Abort 67's *content*, its *message*, its *argument*. Instead, people are just expressing anger towards one particular type of direction action activist, without explaining what they are angry about.

Abort 67 displays posters showing what abortion does, to whom, outside retail outlets of the abortion industry. Why are these displays any more "intimidating" than the contents of a butcher's shop window? Think about THAT question, and you shall have begun to think about Abort 67's message, and will become able to think about how to refute it, other than by mindless name-calling of the personnel.

A butcher displays dead animals in his shop window, to *encourage* hungry people to buy, cook and eat bits of the dead animals, not to shock them into never eating meat again. What Abort 67 is doing, is *advertising* BPAS' service for them, free of charge. Arguably BPAS should be grateful, rather "intimidated" by free advertising of BPAS' product on the part of Abort 67. If not, then (here's the challenge) WHY NOT?

Apparently, a lot of people think that what Abort 67 does isn't the equivalent of displaying pieces of meat in a butcher's shop window. But what they do about this, is to heap fairly mindless, ad hominem abuse upon Abort 67 activists, without actually answering the $64,000 question: Why isn't it GOOD for BPAS' business, for somebody kindly to advertise its product for it, outside its shops, graphically? The same way that it is apparently GOOD for the butcher's business for him to advertise graphically his product.

Abort 67 is simply telling the public that what they see, on Abort 67's posters, is what those who buy abortions from BPAS are getting. Somebody needs to complete the sentence: "What Abort 67 does, is intimidating towards BPAS, because ..." In this entire thread, nobody has done that job properly. There is no "because". It is taken for granted that Abort 67 are wrong, not argued. Abort 67 will never go away if that is the poor quality of the opposition to their message. They will eventually win, if nobody refutes them.

You really are a heartless bastard devoid of empathy, aren't you?

 

[BigTom]

Abort 67 is simply telling the public that what they see, on Abort 67's posters, is what those who buy abortions from BPAS are getting. Somebody needs to complete the sentence: "What Abort 67 does, is intimidating towards BPAS, because ..."

Is there some legal significance to you saying "more than 2 members"?

The reason I ask is that a few years ago I went to an abortion clinic with my then girlfriend, to be met with a small scale protest/picket of two people. We both found this annoying/unpleasant, but thinking about it now, I would agree that they had a reasonable right to protest which I don't think they were exceeding.

The picture in the article linked to suggests a far larger protest which might be considered intimidating and therefore unreasonable (to me personally), but I'm wondering if there is a clear legal definition which might be relevant.

(my emphasis)

Now fuck off you would be murderous homophobic cunt, you've lost your argument, on your own terms you have to give it up.

 

[John Allman]

Hello John. Are you the same John Allman that was involved with 'Christians Against Mental Slavery'?

I only joined this forum today, Athos, so the rules I agreed to keep to when posting here are still fresh in my mind. One of them precludes me from answering your question, or discussing here things that I am involved, which might be misconstrued as advertising. However, the information you seek is easily enough obtained.

 

[butchersapron]

A

Instead, you will need to engage with Abort 67's argument. Nobody here is engaging with Abort 67's *content*, its *message*, its *argument*. Instead, people are just expressing anger towards one particular type of direction action activist, without explaining what they are angry about.

No one needs to engage with abort 67s arguments. We've won. It's over. Apart from the small sale intimidation that you can get up to - but that's not your rational argument is it?

 

[Pickman's model]

Abort 67 isn't attempting to deliver a religious message. Abort 67 isn't a religious organisation. Abort 67 has no beliefs other than that killing humans isn't morally acceptable just because the humans killed are very young, and those who decided that they should be killed happened to have wombs.

Because Abort 67 has no religion, Abort 67 cannot be opposed using placards that make fun of any religion, as you propose.

Instead, you will need to engage with Abort 67's argument. Nobody here is engaging with Abort 67's *content*, its *message*, its *argument*. Instead, people are just expressing anger towards one particular type of direction action activist, without explaining what they are angry about.

Abort 67 displays posters showing what abortion does, to whom, outside retail outlets of the abortion industry. Why are these displays any more "intimidating" than the contents of a butcher's shop window? Think about THAT question, and you shall have begun to think about Abort 67's message, and will become able to think about how to refute it, other than by mindless name-calling of the personnel.

A butcher displays dead animals in his shop window, to *encourage* hungry people to buy, cook and eat bits of the dead animals, not to shock them into never eating meat again. What Abort 67 is doing, is *advertising* BPAS' service for them, free of charge. Arguably BPAS should be grateful, rather "intimidated" by free advertising of BPAS' product on the part of Abort 67. If not, then (here's the challenge) WHY NOT?

Apparently, a lot of people think that what Abort 67 does isn't the equivalent of displaying pieces of meat in a butcher's shop window. But what they do about this, is to heap fairly mindless, ad hominem abuse upon Abort 67 activists, without actually answering the $64,000 question: Why isn't it GOOD for BPAS' business, for somebody kindly to advertise its product for it, outside its shops, graphically? The same way that it is apparently GOOD for the butcher's business for him to advertise graphically his product.

Abort 67 is simply telling the public that what they see, on Abort 67's posters, is what those who buy abortions from BPAS are getting. Somebody needs to complete the sentence: "What Abort 67 does, is intimidating towards BPAS, because ..." In this entire thread, nobody has done that job properly. There is no "because". It is taken for granted that Abort 67 are wrong, not argued. Abort 67 will never go away if that is the poor quality of the opposition to their message. They will eventually win, if nobody refutes them.

i don't think people go to bpas to get food. why don't you do something decent and stand outside army recruitment offices with pictures of dismembered men, women and children?

 

[Citizen66]

I only joined this forum today, Athos, so the rules I agreed to keep to when posting here are still fresh in my mind. One of them precludes me from answering your question, or discussing here things that I am involved, which might be misconstrued as advertising. However, the information you seek is easily enough obtained.

So why did you advertise a pro-choice event in your opening post you disingenuous shit-stain?

 

[N_igma]

They certainly have a right to protest but I also have the right to call them fucking wankers - fucking wankers.

 

[John Allman]

So why did you advertise a pro-choice event in your opening post you disingenuous shit-stain?

It wasn't an event that I had organised, and it happened in the past, so I wasn't "advertising" it.

 

[Citizen66]

It wasn't an event that I had organised, and it happened in the past, so I wasn't "advertising" it.

You drew attention to it. Which is advertising. So now that's out of the way you're free to draw attention to the disgusting shit you get up to.