Trump sent US officials to meet UK pro-life activists over concerns their freedom of speech

[retayl]

14 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Yeah. You do. Thats their job. When folks start depriving folks of their rights like in Britain or similar places like Sudan or South Africa, we need to speak up.

 

tell us what these threats are? WE have a written constitution and a system that enforces it.

So an incontinent, illiterate tub of lard sends cult members to question one of the world’s oldest democracies - clearly Yagoda suffers from irony failure.

YOU have a written constitution that your cult leader is busy dismantling. Worry about your own country.

[AgMech Cowboy]

14 hours ago, Yagoda said:

tell us what these threats are?

Just listen to Bernie Sander's interview. He agrees the Democrats are a threat to Democracy.  
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHo8GefXS68

[mrfill]

18 hours ago, hotsun said:

this is only fair. Before the election the UK sent people to campaign for harris

Like Nigel Farage? He was campaigning for trump and even got regular call outs at the rallies.

[Yagoda]

9 hours ago, AgMech Cowboy said:

Just listen to Bernie Sander's interview. He agrees the Democrats are a threat to Democracy.  
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHo8GefXS68

Obviously

[mikeymike100]

16 hours ago, VocalNeal said:

 

You mean it is an arse - meaning when the the rigid application of the letter of the law is seen to be contrary to common sense- or that the law is a donkey and Democrat. Please be concise.🧐

No , you are incorrect, please be more accurate....

In Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist (1838), the character Mr. Bumble says, "the law is a ass—a idiot," in Chapter 51. The original text uses "ass," referring to a donkey, to emphasize the law’s foolishness. "Arse" isn’t used here, as Dickens chose the animal metaphor for its idiomatic bite, not a vulgar term.

[Yagoda]

10 hours ago, retayl said:

So an incontinent, illiterate tub of lard sends cult members

Who are you speaking of?

 

10 hours ago, retayl said:

YOU have a written constitution that your cult leader is busy dismantling. Worry about your own country.

Please set forth how the US Constitution is being dismantled. This should be good.

 

I worry about Britain. It is has developed the principles that we perfected. They need help.

[EVENKEEL]

19 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Abortion  is not killing babies.

 

Abortion, in the UK, is a personal and private health choice and is not the business of anyone other than the woman seeking an abortion and her health providers.

 

The ‘safe access laws’ (Public Order Act) governing protests near clinics providing abortion services are there precisely to protect the right of women to obtain healthcare privately and without interference from anyone else., religious nuts included.

 

 

 

Abortion is the very definition of killing babies. That's all I've got to say about that.

[Hanaguma]

46 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Abortion is the very definition of killing babies. That's all I've got to say about that.

Obviously.

 

And the simple fact that so many people have moral qualms about it who are also in favour of it makes it obvious. It is NOT just another medical procedure, and even the most pro-abortion people know that in their hearts. That is why they try to hide behind euphemisms and political doublespeak- the straight facts are horrifying. 

[johnnybangkok]

3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Obviously.

 

And the simple fact that so many people have moral qualms about it who are also in favour of it makes it obvious. It is NOT just another medical procedure, and even the most pro-abortion people know that in their hearts. That is why they try to hide behind euphemisms and political doublespeak- the straight facts are horrifying. 

I'm not entirely sure why you keep banging this drum. No one is saying it's just another medical procedure - of course it's different - it's different emotionally and psychologically but what it shouldn't be seen as is so different as to be dictated by religion and/or politics. I'm not also sure what you are eluding to when you talk about 'the straight facts are horrifying'. In the UK, you can abort anytime up to 24 weeks and it's very safe. After this it is agreed by medical professionals a fetus is considered 'viable'. The definition of viable is generally considered the point when a fetus has a reasonable chance of survival outside the womb. There are exceptions of course, primarily when the woman's life is at risk or if the child would be born with a severe disability, all of which is pretty sensible, scientific stuff and not particularly 'horrifying'.

 

What most pro-abortion people (myself included) 'know in our hearts' is this is not a religious matter and it's certainly not a political matter. We also know the law allows people to voice their anti-abortion stance (freedom of speech and all that) but this right shouldn't include harassing women that are choosing abortion (also their right). The 200m law is therefore sensible and like all other laws, if you break it, expect to face consequences.

 

And again, it is no business of any other country, especially overly religious America and certainly not Trump trying to pander to his white evangelicals to gain political points.

 

   

 

[Hanaguma]

37 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I'm not entirely sure why you keep banging this drum. No one is saying it's just another medical procedure - of course it's different - it's different emotionally and psychologically but what it shouldn't be seen as is so different as to be dictated by religion and/or politics. I'm not also sure what you are eluding to when you talk about 'the straight facts are horrifying'. In the UK, you can abort anytime up to 24 weeks and it's very safe. After this it is agreed by medical professionals a fetus is considered 'viable'. The definition of viable is generally considered the point when a fetus has a reasonable chance of survival outside the womb. There are exceptions of course, primarily when the woman's life is at risk or if the child would be born with a severe disability, all of which is pretty sensible, scientific stuff and not particularly 'horrifying'.

 

What most pro-abortion people (myself included) 'know in our hearts' is this is not a religious matter and it's certainly not a political matter. We also know the law allows people to voice their anti-abortion stance (freedom of speech and all that) but this right shouldn't include harassing women that are choosing abortion (also their right). The 200m law is therefore sensible and like all other laws, if you break it, expect to face consequences.

 

And again, it is no business of any other country, especially overly religious America and certainly not Trump trying to pander to his white evangelicals to gain political points.

 

   

 

 

37 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I'm not entirely sure why you keep banging this drum. No one is saying it's just another medical procedure - of course it's different - it's different emotionally and psychologically but what it shouldn't be seen as is so different as to be dictated by religion and/or politics. I'm not also sure what you are eluding to when you talk about 'the straight facts are horrifying'. In the UK, you can abort anytime up to 24 weeks and it's very safe. After this it is agreed by medical professionals a fetus is considered 'viable'. The definition of viable is generally considered the point when a fetus has a reasonable chance of survival outside the womb. There are exceptions of course, primarily when the woman's life is at risk or if the child would be born with a severe disability, all of which is pretty sensible, scientific stuff and not particularly 'horrifying'.

 

What most pro-abortion people (myself included) 'know in our hearts' is this is not a religious matter and it's certainly not a political matter. We also know the law allows people to voice their anti-abortion stance (freedom of speech and all that) but this right shouldn't include harassing women that are choosing abortion (also their right). The 200m law is therefore sensible and like all other laws, if you break it, expect to face consequences.

 

And again, it is no business of any other country, especially overly religious America and certainly not Trump trying to pander to his white evangelicals to gain political points.

 

   

 

TBH there are two separate issues at play- freedom and abortion.  We could argue abortion until Mars is colonized and still disagree. It is a moral issue rather than religious or political to me, but the three often mix. Personally, I think it is horrifying bacause it snuffs out a life. A healthy fetus, left alone, will shortly become a healthy baby, and killing it for financial or social reasons disgusts me.  Especially when the option of adoption exists. Then it is merely convenience. 

 

The other issue is freedom. Freedom of conscience and expression.  I agree that blocking the way into any medical facility (abortion or otherwise) is a foul thing to do and should be illegal. But merely speaking, or even standing silently and not blocking access? This should not be an issue.  IMHO when there is a conflict between being offended and freedom, freedom always wins. There is no "harm" involved.

[natway09]

I would have thought that Trump may have been better sorting out the US of  A's human rights problems before poking his nose into the UK or has the UK hater Putin given him a nudge

[Chomper Higgot]

5 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Abortion is the very definition of killing babies. That's all I've got to say about that.

You need say no more.

 

In one short sentence you’ve exposed your ignorance on the matter, in the second you’ve exposed your closed mind.

 

 

[Scott Tracy]

Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, “everyone has the right to freedom of expression” in the UK. The law goes on to say that this freedom “may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society."

These may be “in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.”

There is now and never had been the right 'free speech in the UK, or anywhere for that matter.

In the US, this is what the Constitution says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[6]

Note the word 'Congress'.... But speech is shackled, even in the US. Hence why the President excluded AP reporters from a press conference. He didn't like the questions.

[johnnybangkok]

7 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

 

TBH there are two separate issues at play- freedom and abortion.  We could argue abortion until Mars is colonized and still disagree. It is a moral issue rather than religious or political to me, but the three often mix. Personally, I think it is horrifying bacause it snuffs out a life. A healthy fetus, left alone, will shortly become a healthy baby, and killing it for financial or social reasons disgusts me.  Especially when the option of adoption exists. Then it is merely convenience. 

 

The other issue is freedom. Freedom of conscience and expression.  I agree that blocking the way into any medical facility (abortion or otherwise) is a foul thing to do and should be illegal. But merely speaking, or even standing silently and not blocking access? This should not be an issue.  IMHO when there is a conflict between being offended and freedom, freedom always wins. There is no "harm" involved.

You have the right to hold whatever beliefs you have and if you are anti-abortion, then fine. I obviosly don't agree but I acknowledge it's your belief but unfortunately for you the law isn't on your side and women have the right to abort up to 24 weeks regardless of whether it's 'for financial or social reasons'. 

 

The law is also VERY clear about protesting abortions and doesn't allow ANY protests within 200m of an abortion clinic. It is irrelevant if the protestor is loud, jumping up and down, waving a red flag or in this case silently praying - proximity is the problem and this women clearly broke the law. Saying that, she did get her charges dropped and received a civil claim payment (more I reckon because it was becoming too political for all the hassle) and I'm not sure if you know but this all happened in November 2022! So Trump jumping on this bandwagon under a 'freedom of speach' BS now is typical Trump, playing up to his evangelical buddies and trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Don't worry that it was all settled out of court and both parties understood they perhaps went a little bit too far but most importantly, it happened in Britain and the last time I checked, thankfully he's not British. He does think he's the King of the world of course but he's definately not British. And I think we all know how he would react if Starmer sent officials over to America to meet with pro-abortion groups. He'd go even more banana's than he currently is. 

[MicroB]

Curiously, in the very recent past, the US government has complained about foreign governments interfering in its own internal politics, and has threatened retaliatory action. It must be ok now to do this, for, say, the Russian Government to reach out to various political groups and organisations within the US.

[EVENKEEL]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You need say no more.

 

In one short sentence you’ve exposed your ignorance on the matter, in the second you’ve exposed your closed mind.

 

 

Abortion means killing babies. Simple as that.

[Chomper Higgot]

9 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Abortion means killing babies. Simple as that.

Thank you for demonstrating the accuracy of both my observations.

[VocalNeal]

On 5/27/2025 at 8:04 AM, mikeymike100 said:

No , you are incorrect, please be more accurate....

In Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist (1838), the character Mr. Bumble says, "the law is a ass—a idiot," in Chapter 51. The original text uses "ass," referring to a donkey, to emphasize the law’s foolishness. "Arse" isn’t used here, as Dickens chose the animal metaphor for its idiomatic bite, not a vulgar term.

 

I was attempting a dig at US politics.

 

I stand corrected with the ASS thing. So our colonial friends are being polite when they misspell the vulgar term?