Video Catches Abortion Activist Attempting to Destroy Sign a Pro-Life Advocate is Holding (UK)

lifenews.com ^ | Jul 3, 2015 | Abort67

[Morgana]

Abort67, the project that uses abortion victim photographs to convey the reality of abortion, is prepared to press charges against an individual captured on security cameras at a display in Brighton on the 11th June 2015.

Founder of the project, Andy Stephenson, said he released the video of the attack on YouTube primarily to identify the man, but equally to highlight the need for the group to collect evidence of such attacks for use in court.

The group has been criticised by the abortion industry, in particular the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), which has urged MPs to create buffer zones around abortion clinics under the guise of protecting women from being harassed and filmed.

Abort67 has defended its use of security cameras and is clear there is no intention to stop using them.

Andy Stephenson said:

“BPAS want exclusive access to their customers. They initially tried to stop us by focusing on the photographs exposing what they do to the unborn child. That failed, so they are attacking free speech directly with demands for buffer zones around their clinics.

“Members of the abortion industry have been unaccountable for years, now we are hurting their business, which is based on consumer fraud so they are trying to get rid of us by any means possible.”

The volunteer who was assaulted by the man added, “BPAS focus on our security cameras simply because they know that our filming ourselves on every display gives clearly evidenced refutation to their lies about our conduct and that is a real problem for them.

“They know too that filming ourselves on displays gives clear evidence of the unflattering, and sometimes criminal, behaviour of some of their most ardent pro-abortion supporters. The video is just one example of why we and indeed all peaceful pro-life activists must ensure that all we do is recorded, in order to bring successful prosecutions against those who violently attack us, and to refute the lies ad nauseum of BPAS et al.”

VIDEO ON LINK

[G Larry]

Let’s assume I saw this punk coming and punched him out in self-defense.

[CharlesOConnell]

Pro-Life speech became officially disfavored after the marriage between population control and sexual freedom. The young man who attacked the display probably considers himself progressive and liberal, but is unwilling to uphold the right to his sexual-political opponents to have their point of view, however wrong-headed he might consider them to be. Therefore the young man who tore down the display was engaged in a street level act of censorship. It didn't require orders from social engineers in a foundation boardroom for him to carry out their antidemocratic directives. He is just the partisan of a cohort of those dedicated to tearing down the last vestiges of the late unlamented Western civilization. What replaces it is as yet undefined but we all have a pretty good idea of what's coming.

[mumblypeg]

Years ago there was a guy who stood on the corner of 14th and Broadway every afternoon, holding a huge sign with a very graphic photo of an aborted baby.
Then one day he wasn’t there, and I thought he’d moved to another corner.
About a week later he was back. Black and blue, stitches on his head, arm in a splint, leg in a cast, leaning on one crutch and holding his sign.