[tescocles]

Not even close.

The specific case I know you're talking about is the woman who was in an exclusion zone that was in place to stop people harassing women entering an abortion clinic.

If she doesn't want "praying silently in her head" to be interpreted as harassment, maybe she should think about the behaviour she and her cohorts have engaged in that might have lead to this interpretation.

Sure, you can disagree with that as well, but she wasn't arrested for praying. She was arrested for intimidation and harassment. She doesn't get a special pass just because of the method.

[sjducb]

This is a common misunderstanding. Harassing people near abortion clinics is a separate offense. The lady in question has harassed people in the past, but she was specifically arrested and charged for prayer in this case. This offense of prayer is separate to her harassment of people.

It’s like if you had drugs in your pocket while harassing someone. They’re separate offenses.

This video explains the situation and references the original police and court records.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FS5FT-4Kx7E

[flir]

If anyone wants to jump straight to the order itself, it's the first link under that youtube video.

> the council is satisfied on reasonable grounds that there are a number of activities, carried out or are likely to be carried out in a public space namely the area within and surrounding Station Road, Birmingham, B30, shown outlined on the map attached ( the restricted area) that have had, or are likely to have, a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality. The effect or likely effect of these activities is of a persistent or continuing nature such as to make these activities unreasonable, and justifies the restrictions imposed in this order

[...]

> The Activities prohibited by the Order are:

> i Protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means. This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling,

> ii Interfering, or attempting to interfere, whether verbally or physically, with a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff,

> iii Intimidating or harassing, or attempting to intimidate or harass, a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or a member of staff,

> iv Recording or photographing a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff or

> v Displaying any text or images relating directly or indirectly to the termination of pregnancy.

She was protesting. It's a persistent pattern of behaviour. It's harassment.

[sjducb]

By specifically calling out prayer the order does ban prayer...

In that case the woman was arrested for silently praying by herself. Her prayer was to stop the abortion clinic, but it was silent and in her own head.

I understand that the intent of the law is to ban prayer near an abortion clinic to stop harassment, but they have banned prayer.

(I support everything else in that order, I’m pro choice. I just don’t think we should ban prayer)

[pcrh]

She would have been guilty of harassment even if she were not praying.

Edit, these pictures show that "silently praying" is not an unobtrusive as it sounds:

https://i2-prod.birminghammail.co.uk/incoming/article2379330...

https://i2-prod.birminghammail.co.uk/incoming/article2379331...

[sjducb]

Is silent prayer illegal outside some abortion clinics in the UK?

Has the UK banned some prayer and arrested at least one person for thought crime?

The answer to both of those questions is yes.

It’s not about whether she would have been convicted for something else anyway.

[pcrh]

Any form of harassment is illegal. See the pics I posted in an edit above; the protestors make their opinions clear to visitors to the clinic, even while being silent.

[growse]

If she was "silently praying by herself" in her own house, or literally most other places in the country, she wouldn't have been arrested.

The context matters.

[DonaldFisk]

Thanks for providing the reference. In the specific case referred to, she was acquitted: https://news.yahoo.com/british-woman-priest-acquitted-charge..., https://adf.uk/not-guilty/