3 ms·

Are you deliberately taking this out of context? Based on your commentary of the video link provided, it seems like it. They are standing out front of an abort

Are you deliberately taking this out of context? Based on your commentary of the video link provided, it seems like it. They are standing out front of an abortion clinic. It’s a form of intimidation, it’s intentional and specific. Laws also exist in Australia that restrict protest in and around an abortion clinic. It does NOT mean you can not protest against abortion. It simply means your protest should not involve the intimidation and harassment of other specific citizens as they exercise their right to engage with abortion services. Your out of context statement has close to nothing to do with this new law change, which from first read seems unreasonable to me.

gruez 4y ago
>They are standing out front of an abortion clinic. It’s a form of intimidation, it’s intentional and specific. I don't find this to be a satisfying explanation. Basically it boils down to "well there's a law on the books for this, and there's a plausible reason for implementing it, therefore it's okay". The same excuse works for protesters in china being arrested for "disturbing social harmony". The objection that the parent poster is raising isn't that the people are being arbitrarily detained, it's that the reason behind the arrest was unjust. >Laws also exist in Australia that restrict protest in and around an abortion clinic. It does NOT mean you can not protest against abortion. It simply means your protest should not involve the intimidation and harassment of other specific citizens as they exercise their right to engage with abortion services. Would you agree with this statement if this was flipped to protect a group that you don't like, eg the cops? "Laws also exist in [insert red state here] that restrict protest in and around a police station. It does NOT mean you can not protest against the police. It simply means your protest should not involve the intimidation and harassment of other specific citizens as they try to do their jobs."
TheFreim 4y ago
> They are standing out front of an abortion clinic. It’s a form of intimidation, it’s intentional and specific. Praying while standing is not a "form of intimidation"
- RileyJames 4y ago
  This is such a deliberately naive take, Im unclear if you’re being honest. Why has she chosen to stand and pray out front of an abortion clinic? She hasn’t chosen a random place. She hasn’t chosen her home, or place of worship, or a public square. If I stood out front of your house and silently prayed for your family as they came and went, you’d eventually call the cops too. Especially if I brought my 20 mates and we stayed all night. Protest should be utilised to bring attention to issues, and change the opinion of the majority, to enact change. It shouldn’t be used to intimidate a minority into changing their opinion or behaviour.
  - Georgelemental 4y ago
    What if you are, say, an animal rights activist, silently protesting in front of a slaughterhouse? Or an advocate for criminal justice reform, silently protesting in front of a private prison? Or an environmental activist, silently protesting in front of a polluting factory? Do you believe all that should be illegal too?
    - growse 4y ago
      > What if you are, say, an animal rights activist, silently protesting in front of a slaughterhouse? Or an advocate for criminal justice reform, silently protesting in front of a private prison? Or an environmental activist, silently protesting in front of a polluting factory? Do you believe all that should be illegal too? If the aim is to intimidate and harass vulnerable people, yes.
    - RileyJames 4y ago
      Again, the context is different. And I think you’re deliberately ignoring it to make a more general argument. I’m not sure that’s helpful. Patients and employees turn up to an abortion clinic. The patients being the ones who could be intimidated, less so the employees. A slaughterhouse and a private prison are only frequented by employees. But likewise, if the protest was held outside the houses of employees from the slaughterhouse or private prison, this is again blurring the line of protest vs intimidation. What is the intent? Is it to gather support and influence public opinion to change the rules around an activity? Or is it to intimidate participants in an activity to affect their behaviour?
namlem 4y ago
She clearly isn't intimidating anyone if she's just silently praying.
- RileyJames 4y ago
  If I followed you around for the next month, “silently praying”, would you feel intimidated? This is the argument of a child who states “I’m not touching you” while holding their hand directly in front of another’s face. Technically true and contextually irrelevant. An obviously bad faith argument.
  - prepend 4y ago
    But the protester isn’t following an individual. I agree that if she was following a single person, then that would be specific and harassment. But standing in a single public place and holding a placard or whatnot is not harassment. No more than a war protestor standing in front of parliament for a month silently protesting is harassing the lawmakers in the building.

gruez 4y ago

>They are standing out front of an abortion clinic. It’s a form of intimidation, it’s intentional and specific. I don't find this to be a satisfying explanation. Basically it boils down to "well there's a law on the books for this, and there's a plausible reason for implementing it, therefore it's okay". The same excuse works for protesters in china being arrested for "disturbing social harmony". The objection that the parent poster is raising isn't that the people are being arbitrarily detained, it's that the reason behind the arrest was unjust. >Laws also exist in Australia that restrict protest in and around an abortion clinic. It does NOT mean you can not protest against abortion. It simply means your protest should not involve the intimidation and harassment of other specific citizens as they exercise their right to engage with abortion services. Would you agree with this statement if this was flipped to protect a group that you don't like, eg the cops? "Laws also exist in [insert red state here] that restrict protest in and around a police station. It does NOT mean you can not protest against the police. It simply means your protest should not involve the intimidation and harassment of other specific citizens as they try to do their jobs."

TheFreim 4y ago

> They are standing out front of an abortion clinic. It’s a form of intimidation, it’s intentional and specific. Praying while standing is not a "form of intimidation"

RileyJames 4y ago
This is such a deliberately naive take, Im unclear if you’re being honest. Why has she chosen to stand and pray out front of an abortion clinic? She hasn’t chosen a random place. She hasn’t chosen her home, or place of worship, or a public square. If I stood out front of your house and silently prayed for your family as they came and went, you’d eventually call the cops too. Especially if I brought my 20 mates and we stayed all night. Protest should be utilised to bring attention to issues, and change the opinion of the majority, to enact change. It shouldn’t be used to intimidate a minority into changing their opinion or behaviour.
- Georgelemental 4y ago
  What if you are, say, an animal rights activist, silently protesting in front of a slaughterhouse? Or an advocate for criminal justice reform, silently protesting in front of a private prison? Or an environmental activist, silently protesting in front of a polluting factory? Do you believe all that should be illegal too?
  - growse 4y ago
    > What if you are, say, an animal rights activist, silently protesting in front of a slaughterhouse? Or an advocate for criminal justice reform, silently protesting in front of a private prison? Or an environmental activist, silently protesting in front of a polluting factory? Do you believe all that should be illegal too? If the aim is to intimidate and harass vulnerable people, yes.
  - RileyJames 4y ago
    Again, the context is different. And I think you’re deliberately ignoring it to make a more general argument. I’m not sure that’s helpful. Patients and employees turn up to an abortion clinic. The patients being the ones who could be intimidated, less so the employees. A slaughterhouse and a private prison are only frequented by employees. But likewise, if the protest was held outside the houses of employees from the slaughterhouse or private prison, this is again blurring the line of protest vs intimidation. What is the intent? Is it to gather support and influence public opinion to change the rules around an activity? Or is it to intimidate participants in an activity to affect their behaviour?

namlem 4y ago

She clearly isn't intimidating anyone if she's just silently praying.

RileyJames 4y ago
If I followed you around for the next month, “silently praying”, would you feel intimidated? This is the argument of a child who states “I’m not touching you” while holding their hand directly in front of another’s face. Technically true and contextually irrelevant. An obviously bad faith argument.
- prepend 4y ago
  But the protester isn’t following an individual. I agree that if she was following a single person, then that would be specific and harassment. But standing in a single public place and holding a placard or whatnot is not harassment. No more than a war protestor standing in front of parliament for a month silently protesting is harassing the lawmakers in the building.