r/worldnews 15d ago

Western Australia has made it illegal to protest outside abortion clinics *Within 150 meters

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/western-australia-has-made-it-illegal-to-protest-outside-abortion-clinics
79k Upvotes

View all comments

5k

u/CaravelClerihew 15d ago

Just for context, Western Australia is the last state/territory to make it illegal. So, it's now illegal throughout Australia to protest outside abortion clinics, not just in WA.

790

u/WalterBishop85 15d ago

Also, these protesters have been known to injure/kill people that don’t see their way. They take a life because a person “took a life”….so idiotic

333

u/ChuckleKnuckles 15d ago

People need to start calling them what they are: pro birth. Nothing more.

222

u/CEOLadyOfAntifa 15d ago

Anti-choice - Forced births

Pro-Freedom - Supports access to abortions

47

u/ClosetIntrovert 15d ago

Or just call a spade a spade and label them religious terrorists.

They don't deserve a neat little political moniker that makes it seem like their viewpoint is equally valid.

6

u/Gruaiggorm 15d ago

And why isn't their viewpoint equally valid?

I'm extremely pro choice. I will fight to my death for your (anyones) right to be pro life. Its not necessarily a religious thing

10

u/ClosetIntrovert 15d ago

Because they want to force their own choice on others. That is where the line is drawn.

One side is about the right to choose. The other is wanting to force a certain choice on everyone else. They are not equally valid.

2

u/CerealGameplay 14d ago

The your same logic applies to any law that makes anything illegal.

Also, congrats on being on the top post today on r/prolife. You're famous.

3

u/ClosetIntrovert 14d ago

Well, I am heartened to know that the anti-choice subreddit has nothing better to waste its time with than pearl-clutching over being called names.

Always good to see a positive sign that a movement is in the process of dyinhg off.

→ More replies

4

u/knapton118 15d ago

Isn’t that how the law works though? We limit people’s freedom to do what we deem immoral? Isn’t that how murder works? I’m not free to kill because we think that killing is wrong.

Whether you think abortion is wrong is the debate, not whether we should force choices onto because because if you disagree with that, you’re basically an anarchist.

1

u/ClosetIntrovert 15d ago

Sure, but we don't pass laws making necessary medical treatments illegal just because some religious nutjobs think it will jeopardize their place in their fantasy afterlife. They can choose not to undergo the medical treatment all they want, but forcing others not to is the problem.

2

u/knapton118 15d ago

I don’t think all abortions are a medical necessity and to refer to them all as such is dishonest. Many of them are for convenience.

Also, not all prolifers are religious. I know a few people who are against medically unnecessary abortions who aren’t religious. The idea that prolife is a purely religious stance is an attempt to blanket condemn the position without much effort. It also only works against people who use their religion as justification, which many people (even religious) don’t do.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

12

u/Rhauko 15d ago

The opinion of being against abortion is to be respected. However Protesting outside clinics is repulsive. People deserve privacy in difficult situations. Threatening and using violence is what makes them terrorists.

5

u/Gruaiggorm 15d ago

I couldn't agree more. If the op I replied to only meant these POS that protest outside clinics or even initiate violence, I agree.

I just don't think we should ever be saying your opinion makes you a terrorist, which is how it came off. Certainly your actions can make you so

4

u/TacoTerra 15d ago

Yeah, but you're thinking sensitivity matters when in their eyes, you're literally murdering babies. Would you give a shit about sensitivity if LGBT people were being murdered or imprisoned?

2

u/[deleted] 14d ago

[removed]

3

u/Chezfuchs 14d ago

Because in most cases, having an abortion is fucking hard for the parents and especially for the mother.

Imagine being over the moon because you are finally pregnant after years of trying, of doubting yourself and your worth as a woman. You happily go to the Doctor just to learn that your child has severe disabilities and will most likely die within a few months after birth.

Your world implodes, your heart is shattered in so many tiny pieces that you know it can never be put together again. You curse god. Why does this happen to you?

Now you are confronted with an unfathomable decision. Do you have an abortion and give up the tiny chance that the child will live? Or do you live through the excrutiating eternity of the pregancy, ripped of any joy, while you break apart every single time someone congratulates you when they see your belly, only to watch your baby suffer horribly for months before it eventually dies?

You don’t know whats right or wrong any more. Who are you to interfere with God’s plan? But what kind of fucked up plan and fucked up God is this? You finally decide to spare your baby the suffering. You decide to have an abortion. You don‘t know if you will have the strength to do it. You grab your phone to cancel the appointment a million times. A million times you just sit there, with the phone in your hand, crying, unable to actually make the call.

Then the big day has come, all too sudden after an eternity of torment. You drag yourself to the abortion clinic. There’s a hostile crowd jumping at you, hurling the most vile insults and accusations. You are a murderer, a monster, you deserve to burn in hell for eternity. You pave your way through yelling, hate-filled grimaces. There’s that part of you that wants you to be pulled into the crowd, to be torn apart and devoured like the monster that you are.

So no, I don‘t think that it should be allowed to protest outside abortion clinics. There are some things that so inhumane and vile that they cannot be tolerated.

2

u/Rhauko 14d ago

I would say an occasional protest as freedom of expression should be allowed with a permit (so patients can avoid this disturbance). But day in day out picketing should be banned.

→ More replies

4

u/Sciencetor2 15d ago

Because their viewpoint is that OTHERS should never have access to abortion. Pro choice means you can make that choice for yourself. Worth noting as well that many Pro-Birth politicians don't think it applies to themselves, their family, and their mistresses. It's a Hypocrite stance and is not valid.

5

u/caracallie 15d ago

Plus, the stance of "pro-life but only for myself" is the definition of pro-choice, and not who we should really consider a part of the pro-birth crowd. If you're pro-choice but you defend the pro-birth crowd, you aren't supporting the right of preference -- you're supporting those who want to end choice entirely.

Something something "tolerance of intolerance leads to more intolerance" etc.

3

u/Gruaiggorm 15d ago

Right, but there is a legitimate argument to be made that that decision affects another being. Just like I'm not free to make my own choice to assault another person, it can be reasonably argued that we should not allow people to prevent a future life.

This is not my opinion, but its a pretty reasonable argument. Branding all pro life people as hypocrites is pretty childish. To say it's invalid is intolerant

→ More replies

2

u/Wayward_heathen 14d ago

Terrorists? For protesting? 🤣 What did you consider the people torching federal court houses in the US? Protesters? 🤣

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

40

u/sir-ripsalot 15d ago

Forced birth extremists.

8

u/spubbbba 15d ago

Considering how much violence has been committed by them over the decades we should add "terrorist" to that as well.

3

u/Aquinan 14d ago

You misspelled "terrorist"

9

u/borjsq 15d ago

More like Anti Woman

7

u/eyelessfade 15d ago

Religious terrorists is more fitting.

8

u/photenth 15d ago

Nah, needs to be negative, pro slavery?

No mother is getting paid to bare a child.

3

u/HortenseAndI 15d ago

I admire your faith in humanity, but sadly some mothers do accept money to bare their child. 'twas ever thus.

(Yes I know that was a typo and I just made a joke in bad taste, but what can you do?)

2

u/photenth 15d ago

Sure, but at that point they are willing to bare the child ;p

If you can't get an abortion and HAVE to, it's different.

→ More replies

3

u/Libra8 15d ago

What they are are ass holes who have their noses in other peoples bodies. People are idiots.

2

u/and-through-the-wire 15d ago

There was a sign posted here saying it best: keep your rosary out of my ovary

2

u/Libra8 14d ago

That says it all. Many people are atheist or agnostic and religion doesn't even come into the equation. Abortion is a moral and ethical issue. Everyone's morals and ethics are different, that doesn't make them wrong. I'm of the opinion do whatever you want as long as it doesn't negatively affect me or my environment. Do you have one for vegans?

3

u/and-through-the-wire 14d ago edited 14d ago

No I don't. This was posted in someone's front window. I'm with you or the most part. This whole country could get along so much better if people minded their own business. I don't really care what a person does or with whom. My biggest concern is that they own their actions and decisions. I don't think it's anyone's place to interfere.

Edit: remove wording that could be misconstrurd.

2

u/hereforthesportsbook 14d ago

Anti-choice you’d say?

5

u/ChemicalYam2009 15d ago

How about ignorant religious zealots.

2

u/v6_6v 15d ago

They’re anti women’s rights.

→ More replies

5

u/Charming-Talk5373 15d ago

You'd think that would already be illegal in Australia

2

u/Nulligravida 14d ago

Safe Access Laws have already passed in the following jurisdictions:

Tasmania - 2014
Australian Capital Territory - 2016
Victoria - 2016
Northern Territory - 2017
New South Wales - 2018
Queensland - 2018

and

South Australia 2020

WA was last. The other states say we are Wait Awhile. ;-)

16

u/-Distinct-Ninja- 15d ago

Shocking that the people that still base their entire lives on some badly plagiarized bronze age fairy tales are extremely quick to resort to violence to get their way...

3

u/iPick4Fun 15d ago

So mother’s health is not a concern?

3

u/BiggerBowls 15d ago

But they are pro life though...Seems legit.

3

u/CyberArtillery 14d ago

Tucker Carlson fully believes in killing people who do abortions. Well he doesn't actually believe that but he encourages his illiterate flock to do it then laughs at them after

12

u/Wolvesinman 15d ago

Was asked to pretend to be a female friend’s boyfriend. Due to an assault. On that day there were no protestors. Luckily. I honestly don’t know what my reaction would’ve been if we came across these people. You have to be one xxxxed up individual to take time out of your to do this to people. And when think of the things they could be taking action against…… Then, I think about I was just a friend. Not the person facing a hellish decision to have to make. And then I think of the women out there they don’t have a support network around them and facing these…….think I’ll stop here. Even picturing it…….arrrggghhh.

15

u/ChuckleKnuckles 15d ago

"Xxxxed up" lmao. It's okay to curse on the internet, buddy.

13

u/Ephemeral_Wolf 15d ago

Don't you try leading him astray, demon!!

6

u/Wolvesinman 15d ago

Considering the topic….thought I’d keep it tidy. Btw, do I have to swear on the web? I’m only 46, do I need my parent permission to not swear? Mmmm. Ps middle aged Aussie men are really known for their delicate use of English language. I think I can decide for myself mate.

3

u/RedEyedRoundEye 15d ago

Fair....dinkum?

Im canadian so im not sure i used it right eh

→ More replies
→ More replies

12

u/slightly-cute-boy 15d ago

Sounds like terrorism

2

u/soupa-hot-fire 14d ago

Oh the irony

2

u/lunaticbastard 15d ago

god's will according to those idiots

3

u/cloud_t 15d ago edited 14d ago

You mean like the death penalty?

(not saying it makes it right, quite the opposite. Just stating that it's not very different. Those who are in favour of death as legal punishment are usually also against terminating fetuses... Quite the hypocrisy)

2

u/SenorDuck96 15d ago

"Pro life" but lemme kill you for killing an unwanted fetus...

Yeah makes sense to me... Fucking idiots

→ More replies

721

u/Self-Awarican 15d ago

Good. This should be the global standard.

255

u/spread_panic 15d ago

Still a ways out considering we unfortunately haven't even gotten to the global standard of legal and safe access to abortions yet.

36

u/Pawneewafflesarelife 15d ago

Yeah everyone applauding this without realizing the reason we even have to HAVE separate clinics is because the Catholic hospital group throughout Perth refuses to do them on site. Also, there are still legal hoops to jump through. It's progress but definitely more to go - moved here from SoCal and it's one aspect about the move that makes me uncomfortable. As a woman, I don't like feeling like access to abortion might be restricted.

3

u/Alarming_Relation405 15d ago

What or where is SoCal?

3

u/BrassUnicorn87 15d ago

Southern California

2

u/Alarming_Relation405 15d ago

Oh lol I'm guessing that is the state of California in the U.S.A? I was thinking you meant a town in Australia and I was deeply confused because "SoCal" doesn't sound like a place name in Australia, most of our towns are named after Aboriginal names/places.

7

u/2ndtryagain 15d ago

Religous groups running hospital networks is a huge issue here in the US as well. Almost every hospital around me is Catholic run it sucks.

9

u/buefordwilson 15d ago

While agreeing with 100%, it's a start and gets the foot in the door for the rest of the world. I'm not happy with stagnation of progress, so this is still a big win. For reference, I live in the states and we have things like Alabama here.

11

u/Hotshot2k4 15d ago

Feels like it's only been going backwards in the U.S.

6

u/buefordwilson 15d ago

It sucks and it is tiring.

2

u/Toadstoolcrusher 15d ago

But every step forward is a good step. Should be leaps and bounds. But if all we can do is crawl to get there then at least we can crawl

→ More replies

19

u/Imgoga 15d ago

As a Lithuanian its really interesting to read these mind blowing stories of crazy people intimidating, scaring and in the past even killing medical staff and patients of women health clinics in the US. I don't think we have the law like the Australians, but i don't think there is a necessity for such law here, because there's literally no protesters at women health clinics were abortions conducted, in my whole life i never even saw or heard about crazy people protesting near women health clinics. In generally we don't even have a protesters who protest against abortions, all political parties since 90s support it. Even when we were occupied by Soviet Union there was easy access to abortions. Also I have family members who live all across Europe like Norway and even they never ever saw or heard about such bizzare incidents that happen in US or Australia that requires such law.

17

u/Self-Awarican 15d ago

I agree its bizarre, but it’s a very intentionally fanned issue. Many pastors and Republican politicians knowingly make the situation worse to rile up their bases.

And yes, it has led to actual violence including the 1996 Olympic Park bombings, the 2009 assassination of abortion doctor George Tiller, and the 2015 mass shooting at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs.

8

u/Imgoga 15d ago

Oh wow that's seriously really depressing... I heard that in US there are a lot of issues unnecessarily politicized especially by the conservatives like just mentioned abortion, gun laws, health care and even masks, this would be unimaginable here in Lithuania, how's this so far gone in America ?

7

u/Self-Awarican 15d ago

I don’t know. I’ve been asking myself that question for decades.

6

u/MyChipmunkFace 15d ago

I mean it’s bizarre as an Australian that anyone would stand outside an abortion clinic. Even most conservative Catholics wouldn’t actually harass people. I think it’s just the same kind of nuts who stand outside the town hall and scream that everyone is going to hell. I don’t know anyone who’s against abortion, some wouldn’t choose to have one, but nobody wants to ban them.

2

u/Jushak 15d ago

That's because in sane parts of the world abortion is not an issue. Hell, it wasn't an issue in the US either until Republicans realized they could turn it into one. Now no matter how hideous things they do, they automatically gain the votes of these single issue zealot voters who have long since lost their fucking marbles.

2

u/[deleted] 15d ago

Yeah those people turn criminal harassment into a pastime...

I mean how would they feel if people showed up and treated them the way they treat others when they're tryna go to church? They'd be furious and demanding prison time for the whole crowd.

4

u/gelinrefira 15d ago

Most civilized places do not have this problem in the first place.

8

u/NauticalPhoenix 15d ago

No it shouldn’t. The right to protest, whether you agree with the sentiment of the protest or not, is one of the pillars of a free and open democracy.

22

u/sunburn95 15d ago

This literally doesnt impact their ability to protest, 150m is nothing. All it does is provide safety to those accessing healthcare

10

u/alice-in-canada-land 15d ago

No one has stopped these people from protesting.

They are still absolutely free to voice their opinions at the office of their member of parliament, at City Hall, at the beach or a shopping centre or in front of schools (a favourite tactic of anti-abortionists here in Canada). The only place they can't "protest" is in front of medical clinics.

The purpose of this law is to prevent them from harassing women seeking medical care, because the rights of the protesters must not be allowed to outweigh the rights of the people accessing the clinics.

20

u/Self-Awarican 15d ago

They are free to protest. Just not at the door to the fucking clinic.

33

u/mmhawk576 15d ago

They not being forbidden to protest, they can protest in front of the halls of government, whom are the people that will make legal decisions on these sorts of topics.

0

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

17

u/Farmazongold 15d ago

I think medical centres ahould have some sort of protection for patients.

Including free pass without weird people acreaming at patients, who need surgical treatment.

0

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

5

u/Farmazongold 15d ago edited 15d ago

You mean like... psychotherapeutic-clinic?

That's not the same as surgical clinic, I guess.

If they found out someone is not a trans with scientific-methods - that's their obligation to inform. I suppose.

As not every trans people are trans, just like not every non-trans are non-trans. I guess.

I know nothing about such clinics, but I know they shouldn't be able to "convince" if it's just "their opinion". There should be some law regulation for psychoterapeuts (and there probably are).

→ More replies

2

u/mmhawk576 15d ago

What value do protestors get from harassing the people trying to access a service. The people trying to use that service typically have no capability to make the changes you want. Sounds like these protesters just want a day off work to fuck around, achieve nothing, and harass people.

→ More replies
→ More replies

34

u/barrydennen12 15d ago

They can protest outside the offices of their local member, then. Are you saying they should be allowed to protest outside a dentist or some other important medical facility? The rest of the world is trying to get on with its important business. These no-lifes can go have their tantrum someplace else, the fucking idiots.

6

u/ProgrammingPants 15d ago

Are you saying they should be allowed to protest outside a dentist or some other important medical facility?

Yes. Why the fuck should you be not allowed to protest in front of a dentist?? As long as you are not obstructing or preventing access to the place, which we all agree should be illegal, then the protest itself should be legal.

5

u/barrydennen12 15d ago

Because it's a fucking dentist. How the hell does this need explaining? These morons are wholly obstructing and preventing access, so now they get their toys taken away. It's a pretty fair shake.

7

u/ProgrammingPants 15d ago

Your right to protest isn't a toy, and it's incredibly disturbing that you see it that way.

3

u/barrydennen12 15d ago

Oh get fucked, hahaha. “I” don’t see it as such. They do. They have shown that with their actions. It’s almost like the right to protest should be treated with more respect by the people “protesting”.

→ More replies

6

u/CrazyKing508 15d ago

Imagine arguing against protests

1

u/Self-Awarican 15d ago

I seem to remember Republicans approving bills to run over protestors in the street that they deemed inconvenient.

5

u/AdmiralAkbar1 15d ago

The laws are obviously far more complex than just "you can run over protestors." The actual text of the laws (or at least the Oklahoma law) specify that it only applies to people where a.) they did not enter the area with the knowledge or intent to confront protestors, b.) the protest has already turned violent, c.) there are no safe avenues of exit, and d.) a reasonable person would fear for life & limb if they didn't leave immediately.

It's only applicable in narrow cases, i.e., if someone on the verge of ending up like Reginald Denny ran over someone trying to pull them out of their car.

7

u/6point3cylinder 15d ago

And they are assholes for that. Can’t use whataboutism to defend this here.

→ More replies

-6

u/Aapples 15d ago

Seriously half of these people have completely lost touch with reality

→ More replies
→ More replies

5

u/Lost4468 15d ago

Would you be ok with restricting all protests from what they want to protest? Surely the point of a protest is to cause disruption? What would you say about a law that didn't allow protests within 150m of pharmaceutical companies (e.g. like the Oxycodone shit)? What about not allowing it within 150m of politicians since it'd disrupt their life? 150m away from politics events so that people can protest the RNC/DNC, but as long as they're out of sight?

21

u/barrydennen12 15d ago

Disrupt the people who can actually change shit. Don't harass or intimidate civilians. All of this absolutely disingenuous discussion around protest really pisses me off.

-10

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

13

u/barrydennen12 15d ago

I’ve never seen so many shit takes in such a short space of time. Protest any issue you like - flat earth for all I care - but you know damned well, and don’t act like you don’t, that the events that rules like this are targeting are not legit. You don’t go after people who are getting their procedure done, you go after the people in charge, and when things don’t go your way, suck it up. I’m happy to live by those rules myself so at least do me the courtesy of not acting like I’m a hypocrite.

→ More replies
→ More replies

0

u/CodsworthsPP 15d ago

We should set up dedicated "protest zones" outside of the city so protests don't interrupt our daily lives.

13

u/superscatman91 15d ago

You're being sarcastic but that is already a thing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

8

u/Dick_Kick_Nazis 15d ago

And that is also wrong

8

u/barrydennen12 15d ago

not really what I said though, is it. If you actually care about an issue, you go and make noise where the people who can actually effect change can hear you - you don't harass people who are just minding their own business and trying to do their jobs.

1

u/CrazyKing508 15d ago

Tnats is litteraly a protest tactic used by MLK

5

u/logicWarez 15d ago

And often MLK ended up in jail for protesting racist segeration laws and eating at whites only counters. If you believe so much in the issue commit civil disobedience, face the consequences and write inspirational, epoch changing letters from jail as MLK did. Disabled people went to jail for blocking busses. The right to harass others is not the same as the right to protest.

→ More replies

-5

u/GitEmSteveDave 15d ago

As long as they are not blocking access, YES.

You are literally saying that protests should only occur out of sight where no one will be bothered by them.

Can’t protest outside city hall, there’s important business going on in there.

6

u/alice-in-canada-land 15d ago

You are literally saying that protests should only occur out of sight

Nothing about this law prevents anti-abortion protest in public spaces. They can make their voices heard almost everywhere, inlcuding to their members of Parliament. There is only a very narrow zone around abortion clinics in which they can't, so that they are prevented from harassing women seeking medical care.

We've had a law like this in Ontario for a few years; I assure you the anti-abortionists are out in full force everywhere else. They especially like to target high schools.

13

u/barrydennen12 15d ago

What are you missing here? They -are- blocking free access to a place. It’s happening whether you want to accept it or not. And don’t be a dick about city hall, the point is if you’re doing a protest, protest at the people who can do whatever it is you think they should be doing. It’s the difference between firebombing a car yard or having your event outside the office of the person in charge of whatever issue it is you think needs attention.

→ More replies

2

u/petiteaustralienne 14d ago

Then you will be glad to hear the right to protest is intact. The right to harass, intimidate and psychologically torment vulnerable patients seeking critical medical care is what the issue is.

→ More replies

6

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 15d ago

[deleted]

13

u/monkeysinmypocket 15d ago

There is protesting and there is harassment. This is the latter.

→ More replies

3

u/Abedeus 15d ago

You're not protesting shit if you scream outside of the abortion clinic. Go scream outside whatever legislative body you want to appeal to. Screaming at an abortion clinic is pure harassment, which I don't believe is legal.

→ More replies

30

u/TheHof125 15d ago

Well, I mean, the term 'liberal' is kind of varied in its meaning. I'm Australian, and 'liberal' is literally what the conservative, incumbent government is called (the Liberal Party). In this instance, being 'liberal' refers to that party's belief in the reduced power of the government (or, at least, that's what they purportedly want). Less social welfare, more personal responsibility, etc.

I find that, at least online, 'liberal' for the US generally seems to refer to (at least nowadays) people who are for social liberality. These people would not typically be seen as conservative, but progressive. Under this line of thinking, you have the power to express yourself and represent yourself in whatever manner you want, as long as it doesn't harm others (social issues like the freedom to have an abortion, or be referred to legally as gender non-comformist, come under this banner).

So it depends on who you're referring to. Sorry to play semantics, but the term 'liberal' is multiplicitous in its meaning nowadays haha.

Clearly, you're referring to the US version of the term (obviously, a lot of other places around the world use this version of the term, but the US is a good place to refer to just because of its ubiqitous nature). Even then, this belief in the ability to go to an abortion clinic without being harrassed by protestors seems to align with this version of the term, as protesting against clinics outside clinics restricts people's usage of these facilities (both directly, as some of the anecdotes in this thread indicate, about protestors misleading prospective patients intentionally by presenting themselves as authorities figures via language and uniform, and additionally, somewhat indirectly, by using the threat of confrontation to ward off people who want to avoid that kind of hostility). Given abortion clinics offer health services that are often necessary for the mothers, by restricting people's use of that facility, you are impeding on their freedom to seek out necessary aid.

I agree with some of the other commenters, in that preventing them from protesting immediately outside is the right course of action. If they wish to protest, they should be protesting the legality of these services at their local member's office, or at federal or state parliament. That way, people can still access healthcare efficiently, and people can still express their values and beliefs.

2

u/Alarming_Relation405 15d ago

"Liberal" means exactly what the definition is. The Australian Liberal party has had that name since the 40s when they were actually trying to be liberal (for the time) since then they have kept the name but completely abolished any sense of being liberal and are instead trying to go backwards.

3

u/Majormlgnoob 15d ago

They're Neoliberals now, so it's still kind of in the name

→ More replies
→ More replies

82

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 14d ago

[deleted]

13

u/showmeyourrecipes 15d ago

Yep - I believe you can't protest outside hospitals and certain levels of healthcare providers. Protests and grieving or large levels of people in high stress situations nos a bad idea.

One clinic here was delayed in getting their "standings" to make protests illegal, but they also provided a lot of safespace and treatment for.vulnerable homeless population - who it turns out made the protesters very uncomfortable haha

-35

u/ProgrammingPants 15d ago

Actually, it doesn’t remove the right to protest. It just creates a 150 metre radius around the clinic.

You're literally just playing semantics to get around the point.

"It's not removing literally all of their rights to protest, it's just removing their right to protest in these areas. So you can't say it's restricting their right to protest"

26

u/sunburn95 15d ago

People have the right to access healthcare without fear for their safety as well

150m is a very minor change to where you can protest, but a large improvement to the safety of those accessing health care

→ More replies

20

u/plugtrio 15d ago

Why do you care so much about allowing people to harass women just trying to access healthcare?

→ More replies

48

u/superscatman91 15d ago

it's just removing their right to protest in these areas

You already are not allowed to protest wherever you want. Hell, you need to get permits sometimes!

-17

u/theneoroot 15d ago

So it's okay to protest outside abortion clinics as long as you request a permit first, and the government has to give one to you otherwise they're infringing on your right to a peaceful protest, right?

27

u/superscatman91 15d ago

and the government has to give one to you otherwise they're infringing on your right to a peaceful protest, right?

Wrong. You can be turned down.

The fact that you don't know this is suprising.

→ More replies

6

u/ChonkerExpress 15d ago

Probably, probably be denied but im sure you can request it.

→ More replies
→ More replies

-21

u/Lost4468 15d ago

Isn't the entire point of protests to cause disruption? Would you think its ok to have a similar rule requiring 150m radius outside of political events? Or other similar distance based laws that make it so you can't actually impact what you're protesting?

18

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 14d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies

-2

u/An_Aesthete 15d ago

I remember George Bush's "free speech zones"

15

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 14d ago

[deleted]

1

u/An_Aesthete 15d ago

This is literally how the free speech zones worked. You weren't allowed to protest within a certain area, but you were more than welcome to fuck off and protest somewhere unrelated to what you were protesting. You think the free speech zones stopped people from protesting a local politician? They only limited very specific areas, but you were still welcome to protest in over 99.9% of the country

Your best position here is to just say Bush wasn't entirely on the wrong track

1

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 14d ago

[deleted]

2

u/An_Aesthete 15d ago

The problem with the free speech zones is that their existence implied non free speech zones

→ More replies

38

u/DominusDraco 15d ago

Lets face it, this is not protest, its harrasment and intimidation.

-21

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

11

u/Batmans_other_butler 15d ago

But I bet you have nooooooo problem protesting outside of a gun store, or a church, or a conservative school

I very much would, why are you protesting the stores, school or church? Unless the store, school or church specifically are casing the issue then you’re just being a moron.

Protest in public to gain a following or the ones who make the laws lol

Following a women and screaming “you’re a filthy fucking cunt” as a group is not protesting anything it’s 100% harassment and intimidation.

This law makes it so you can’t harass or intimidate women, you can still “protest” just in areas you should be. If people were being civil and just standing there with a sign saying “would you like to discuss why abortion might not be a good idea” we wouldn’t have any issue but clearly people can’t be respectful.

→ More replies

10

u/Farmazongold 15d ago

There are certain religious groups, who believe surgical treatment is a sin, or something.

Imagine they "protesting" near specialized places, where people go for surgery.

Shouting at people, who are here to cut hernia, that they will get to hell, or something. Scaring away people who NEED healing, but too socially insecure.

Doing it for so long and so annoyingly, that there are country-wide laws against them now.

→ More replies

8

u/DominusDraco 15d ago

If people are doing things that are legal, yes I have a problem with people harrassing them as they go about those tasks, be it buying guns, going to church, going to school, or going to a medical clinic.
The target of protest should be the government with the aim to change laws, not citizens doing perfectly legal things.

→ More replies

7

u/DrSeuss321 15d ago

If a school is a “conservative school” it’s not a school because school should give an unbiased education lmao

27

u/ForGreatDoge 15d ago

I can only speak for myself but I would absolutely have qualms about people harassing individuals trying to go into their church. Pretty sure law enforcement would as well. Also, why are you assuming that anyone who thinks women should be able to access abortions automatically are against guns, churches, and whatever a "conservative school" is?

→ More replies

7

u/hextree 15d ago

But I bet you have nooooooo problem protesting outside of a gun store, or a church, or a conservative school

What an odd assumption. Absolutely we'd be against that. Why harrass kids for something they probably had no choice in anyway?

3

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

7

u/hextree 15d ago

I have no idea what that is.

1

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

9

u/hextree 15d ago

The key point here is whether there is targetted harrassment or intimidation towards the customers who are using the facility legally. In the case of abortion there very clearly is, as history has shown. If protesters start harrassing the chicken shop customers then absolutely police come and break up the protest, that already happens and is within the law.

→ More replies

3

u/CX316 15d ago

They don't call themselves liberals though. The Liberal party in Australia is our conservative party (which is why when talking to Americans I call them the LNP because it's confusing to them) because they're economic neoliberals.

24

u/Stickguy259 15d ago edited 15d ago

Lol you don't understand anything about private property do you? Also like the other person said, feel free to protest, you just can't verbally harass women for doing something they have a right to do as they're entering a building. You can still protest from far away, people aren't allowed to just walk into the White House and protest either, or even on the front lawn.

Deal with it snowflake lol, sometimes people don't wanna hear your shit and that's their right on their property. Unless you're saying it's cool for me to come stand on your property with signs and call you a murderer. If you're alright with that then nevermind.

-17

u/PM_ME_UR_T1TTIES_ 15d ago

snowflake? you're the one who can't deal with some protesting and wants to violate other people's rights because of it.

22

u/Aussie18-1998 15d ago

Someone who literally just had to have an abortion or probably traumatic experience shouldn't have to cop abuse on the way out.

→ More replies
→ More replies

5

u/Phobos15 15d ago

lolwut? Protesting other people's medical choices is bullshit. It violates basic rights. Go protest in front of the legislature, protesting regular people just going to the doctor is straight up harassment. If you stood outside and ER protesting their healing of hurt people, you'd be quickly arrested, since there isn't any protest there, just harassment. It would also be no different than protesting black people in front of a public school.

→ More replies

6

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

14

u/CodsworthsPP 15d ago

Throwing shit at people is already illegal

5

u/ForGreatDoge 15d ago

Protesting governmental action is different from harassing individuals at a medical facility. I believe you're smart enough to understand the difference.

0

u/brokenchargerwire 15d ago

Protest ≠ screaming at people that they are baby killers

11

u/ProgrammingPants 15d ago

People saying mean things you disagree with is sometimes a part of protests.

4

u/CrazyKing508 15d ago

That is litteraly a protest. Just becuase you dont agree with them doesnt mean it stops being a protest

-2

u/GitEmSteveDave 15d ago

So if someone called the police baby killers, you would be ok with not letting them, because ≠ protest?

4

u/brokenchargerwire 15d ago

Yes? I don't think screaming in people's faces is a very effective form of protest, and nobody's taking their ability to protest away, just their ability to indiscriminately yell at people seeking family planning help

→ More replies

2

u/NightVoyage 15d ago

Hear hear

-16

u/Jukeboxshapiro 15d ago

Limiting the right to protest is good and should be the global standard?

17

u/Yablos 15d ago

This is such a stupid take (even if it's a joke). They are obviously talking about the right to protest specifically outside an abortion clinic.

Statements like this is why politics, nearly everywhere is munted. Jumping straight to extreme positions, shutting down all discussion and terminating any nuance.

→ More replies

19

u/wdjm 15d ago

No. Just limiting the right to harass and bully people.

Protest all you want - but you don't have the right to force other people (namely the clinic patients) to listen to you. Go yell at the trees in the park or something.

-5

u/Lost4468 15d ago

Would you be ok with applying that to all protests? E.g. what about people protesting pharma companies that pushed drugs like oxycodone, would you say it's ok making a 150m rule around them? What about a 150m rule around politicians? Or around political events like the RNC, would you say you don't have a right to force bigots to listen to you, so they should be out of sight yelling at trees in the park?

1

u/wdjm 15d ago

Yes. You can protest in highly-visible spots. But what you CANNOT do (should not be able to do) is position yourself so that you are yelling abuse at someone that HAS to walk through the abuse when they didn't sign up for that.

A politician signed up to hear people's complaints. That's quite literally what their job is (supposed to be) - finding out what people want done, then doing it. The bigots are expressing their opinions by attending an event - they signed up for having people express them back. The pharma companies get protested in front of buildings - but the CEOs & employees can use different entrances so they're not forced to listen to the protestors at all. (Yes, if ALL entrances were blockaded in such a way as they do abortion clinics, I would be against that, too.)

A woman entering a clinic only signed up for receiving medical care.

→ More replies

-6

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[removed]

9

u/wdjm 15d ago

Do they 'harass and bully' people that HAVE to be there? Or just the people that come to harass and bully them?

2

u/bigwillyboi 15d ago

Police officers that stand in line HAVE to be there. There have been many videos of people yelling, spitting on and throwing things in these officers faces all the time.

5

u/wdjm 15d ago

And they signed up for that job.

2

u/bigwillyboi 15d ago

And workers at abortion clinics signed up for theirs.

→ More replies

2

u/Virge23 15d ago

The people walking down the street? The grandmas crossing roads? The people stuck in traffic? The businesses that get brigaded... Are you really trying to say they were asking for it?

2

u/wdjm 15d ago

I didn't see this, so I'll take your word that they were doing this. If they were, then yes, that was wrong.

Doesn't mean the protest itself should be banned - but those protestors should have been stopped. Warned first, then arrested if it continued.

In short, abuse shouldn't be tolerated, in whatever hypothetical form you want to propose. That doesn't equate with all protests being banned.

1

u/drewbreeezy 15d ago

The first.

I'm sure the people at the CNN building had to be there for work. Them "protesting" outside and breaking the windows fits 'harass and bully' in my books (and a lot more).

→ More replies

12

u/morganjanx 15d ago

protesting outside of a healthcare facility you flat spare tire.

-3

u/Jukeboxshapiro 15d ago

Obviously if you try to stop someone from accessing said healthcare facility it's no longer a peaceful or legal protest. But once you let them say you can't protest outside an abortion clinic they have grounds to say you can't protest outside a corporation, police station, city hall, or congress.

6

u/thorpie88 15d ago

Anti protest laws in western Australia can already deem them illegal if it seems like you have the intent to trespass.

9

u/morganjanx 15d ago

i don’t think any religious nut-jobs are going to protest outside of their beloved police stations.

13

u/ihopkid 15d ago

Slippery slope fallacy mate. “Protesting” outside abortion clinics, aka harassing women and clinic staff all day every day, is not a legitimate protest. It’s targeted harassment. And it interrupts the staffs work constantly. That’s a safety issue and a labour issue. Has nothing to do with legitimate protests, which aren’t affected at all

→ More replies

-6

u/B_For_Bubbles 15d ago

The problem is once you give the power to ban one form of protest how do you keep from other forms being banned?

9

u/lafigatatia 15d ago

With this argument, why is burning containers or breaking windows banned? Doesn't that mean other forms of protest will be banned?

9

u/XooperTrooper 15d ago

You just... don't ban them.

Or if your elected representatives want to... you vote them out.

In any case, there is a recognised right to political communication in Australia enforced by the courts, but the Australian High Court recognises that that right can have limitations provided those limitations are no more than necessary to achieve some other necessary goal (like preventing the harrassment, abuse, and compounding of harm to patients and vulnerable women seeking medical treatment)

→ More replies

12

u/NightVoyage 15d ago

Are you being deliberately obtuse? This isn't "protest." This is deliberate and personal cruelty towards women in distress. Like most things so-called conservatives do, it's an excuse to practice cruelties thinly veiled as half-assed principles. If you want to protest abortion, protest at city hall or a state capitol.

2

u/momotye_revamped 15d ago

Who tf is going to get abortions at the city hall or state capitol?

→ More replies

2

u/Lost4468 15d ago

I mean it's definitely a protest? I don't like them doing it, but they're definitely protesters by any definition of the word.

0

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

5

u/Lost4468 15d ago

That doesn't prevent it being a protest? And shaming is a common tactic that has been employed in protests since forever.

0

u/Dick_Kick_Nazis 15d ago

That's what protesting is?

3

u/Virge23 15d ago

Exxon - Stop shaming us!!

→ More replies
→ More replies

3

u/Mybrainkindaworks 15d ago

In America this would almost certainly violate the right to peaceably assemble.

1

u/cym0poleia 15d ago

In developed nations there’s simply no need for it though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

→ More replies

4

u/pat_speed 15d ago

im suprised queensland got ther ebefore WA

4

u/mooseman2234 15d ago

It’s true that WA stand for “Wait A while”

3

u/dgblarge 15d ago

America take note. Rights are for everyone not just those you agree with.

Good for WA finally coming on board. Australia can be such an awesome place.

3

u/Nulligravida 14d ago

WA is a state. And a bloody big state too. Don't tell the Americans that both Texas and Alaska will fit inside WA with room to spare.

1

u/BelleAriel 15d ago

Good. It must be awful for woman having to go through having an abortion with protesters outside. I’d imagine it would feel intimidating and intrusive. I’m happy that protesting has been banned and feel it should be banned world-wide.

5

u/fear_eile_agam 15d ago

My mum had an unexpected but much wanted pregnancy when she was in her mid 40s. She had an IUS at the time, so between that, her maternal age, her own disability, and the fact both her previous children had been born with physical disabilities, it was considered a high risk pregnancy.

When she was barely 14 weeks, she developed DVT and PE, and was told in no uncertain terms that if she didn't terminate the pregnancy soon, there would be no third baby, and her two other children would no longer have a mother either.

It's an easy choice, but still an incredibly hard choice to be forced to make when you are someone who wants the baby.

She was admitted to hospital for the procedure because of her unstable health status, and the plan was to keep her there for several weeks to treat the PE.

When recovering in the general ward after PACU, she was sharing a room with a woman who upon finding out my mum had been admitted for a termination of pregnancy, decided to accuse my mother of being a murderer, would spend every waking moment telling my mum she should have put the baby up for adoption, that mum was trying to take "the easy way out" and loudly pray in tongues to try and save my mum's soul... while my mum was trying to sleep, until eventually the hospital was able to arrange a private room in the pulmonary ward.

2

u/BelleAriel 15d ago

Wow I’m so very sorry your Mam had to go through that.

1

u/aaron65776 15d ago

Is Australia like the US where the states are almost like different countries that have their own laws etc?

→ More replies
→ More replies