Yes, but afterwards. I see no problem with them being far enough away so women can choose to hear them or not.
-
-
True but I am unaware of a single prosecution or conviction for "harassment" after the event. Are we seriously suggesting changing the law based on a narrative rather than evidence that has been presented to a court?
-
It;s probably not considered harassment to make women about to have abortions listen to you at the moment.
-
Do you take Ann Furedi's position that abortion is a special case then? Otherwise where does that leave chuggars? Beggers? Cold-callers? Pick-up artists? Animal rights protesters outside Oxford University?
-
Not necessarily, no. But I think measures can be put in place to move people further away from doors of places people should have the freedom to enter unmolested. I supported banning Britain First from the entrances of mosques. They also claimed to be trying to have civil convo.
-
Fair enough but I don't think they are comparable. If you have the time, this is an interesting essay from a pro-choice perspective:http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/why-im-pro-choice-and-anti-buffer-zone/21301#.WtOJF4jwbcc …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.