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

6k

u/slugsliveinmymouth 15d ago

I’ll never forget the time my girlfriend came back from a planned parenthood in tears because 50 or so women were shouting baby killer and whore at her. The best part is she wasn’t even getting an abortion. She was getting prenatal vitamins for a healthier pregnancy.

74

u/Kabouki 15d ago

I don't get how that's legal too. Protesting a organization is one thing, but targeted yelling and harassing of individuals wouldn't be accepted anywhere else.

2

u/KnightTemplar777 15d ago

If they have permits to protest nothing you can do.

-6

u/Decama- 15d ago

I think it’s because it’s such a slippery slope. Given a corrupt enough politician, a law like that could be used to justify silencing the public about opposing them, an individual. It sucks, but I think being able to say what you believe is probably for the best in the long run.

10

u/Kabouki 15d ago

The difference would be the politician represents a public agency where as a random person walking into a building, they have no affiliation to, dose not.

Also no one person can make laws. If the system is so corrupt, there are much bigger problems going on.

Vote your locals people. 10% turnouts is not enough.

being able to say what you believe

Threatening and harassing people is well beyond ones rights.

-1

u/KnightTemplar777 15d ago

So no more news reporters harassing accused criminals, no Paparazzi, no protest, no speech, no freedom. Just feelings and feelings of harassment, but my harassment is not the same as yours.

4

u/rwbronco 15d ago

I think you’re misunderstanding, or you’re conflating it on purpose. To be no longer be able to antagonize a patron of a business doesn’t mean you lose the right to protest or your “freedom” or even your speech.

And I’d be ok not being able to harass accused criminals and doing away with paparazzi. You’re arguing that not being able to confront a citizen walking into a business amounts to losing your freedom (you listed it individually). That’s not freedom, that’s being an asshole… and unfortunately as we’ve seen with the Covid vaccine, leaving people to do the responsible thing doesn’t work nowadays. People in the 21st century apparently need someone to tell them to not be an asshole.

1

u/KnightTemplar777 15d ago

So if people aren’t capable of doing the responsible thing and we have to make them do it. Does that mean anything? Like say having sex when you know your not even suppose to? Kinda confusing to me I can see we think differently.

2

u/KnightTemplar777 15d ago

Whoa the whistle was blown. You said something logical and used critical thinking of possible future events. That’s gonna require a downvote from me.

2

u/Major2Minor 14d ago

A slippery slope argument is only valid if there is sufficient evidence to believe it could happen, otherwise it's fallacious reasoning.

1

u/KnightTemplar777 12d ago

There is plenty of evidence. Every beginning of a tyrannical government had the slippery slope argument just a couple years prior.