UK thought police arrest woman for silent prayer

[ZiprHead]

Apparently prayer has a very short effective range.

 

[TomC]

Not this again. Why did the officer ask if she was praying?

Because if she had a legitimate reason for violating the ordinance things would have been different.

The cop got her on camera explaining that she was there to violate the PSPO. She didn't care about anyone except herself.

Not the clinic staff. Not the clients. Not the neighbors.

She was there to screw with everyone she didn't like. Because she thinks her religion makes her better than the rest of us.

If you have a different explanation for why she was flouting the locals, and the ordinance that they put in place to protect themselves from people like her, please explain it.
I don't think you can.
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

Not this again. Why did the officer ask if she was praying?

Because if she had a legitimate reason for violating the ordinance things would have been different.

Tom, you don't understand the PSPO. You cannot 'legitimately' violate it. You are allowed to be inside the exclusion zone. You are not allowed to protest inside the exclusion zone.

The cop got her on camera explaining that she was there to violate the PSPO. She didn't care about anyone except herself.

Not the clinic staff. Not the clients. Not the neighbors.

She was there to screw with everyone she didn't like. Because she thinks her religion makes her better than the rest of us.

If you have a different explanation for why she was flouting the locals, and the ordinance that they put in place to protect themselves from people like her, please explain it.

You seem to be agreeing that praying in her head violated the conditions of the exclusion zone.

 

[TomC]

Tom, you don't understand the PSPO. You cannot 'legitimately' violate it.

I think that you are the one who doesn't understand the PSPO.

Do you think that a staff member on their way into the facility is violating the PSPO? I don't.

If the staff member were praying "Please don't let this be the day a violent Christian firebombs the clinic", would that be a violation of the PSPO?
I don't.

No. I don't think that you understand the PSPO. You don't understand why it was put in place. Or why Ms V-S violated it, deliberately and on camera.

I don't think you understand that.
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

Tom, you don't understand the PSPO. You cannot 'legitimately' violate it.

I think that you are the one who doesn't understand the PSPO.

Do you think that a staff member on their way into the facility is violating the PSPO? I don't.

If the staff member were praying "Please don't let this be the day a violent Christian firebombs the clinic", would that be a violation of the PSPO?
I don't.

If a cop decided that was evidence of protesting, yes, it would be a violation. It's in the PSPO.

No. I don't think that you understand the PSPO. You don't understand why it was put in place.

I do.

Or why Ms V-S violated it, deliberately and on camera.

I don't know what VS was thinking, so I can't be sure why she violated it.

I don't think you understand that.
Tom

 

[Arctish]

Private message boards can do what they like, but when the State creates a law it better be damn well as clear as possible what it is enabling or what it is forbidding.

Seems to me that is exactly what the PSPO did and the perp admitted to violating it.

It does not seem obviously so to me. I would not have supposed that the 'prayer' included in the PSPO would have meant 'prayer in your head', especially given that
* The behaviours that led to the PSPO were all outwardly-directed, such as spoken prayer, signs, etc; and
* Banning praying in your head is straight-up fascist.

Not this again.

She wasn't arrested for praying in her head.

Not this again. Why did the officer ask if she was praying?

There's a video of their interaction. Go ahead and watch it and then make your own guess as to why. If you think Vaughan-Spruce saying she "might by praying in [her] head" had a greater influence on the outcome than her admission she was standing where she was because "it's an abortion center", or the allegations she had repeatedly violated the PSPO on prior occasions, then make your case using the evidence.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Private message boards can do what they like, but when the State creates a law it better be damn well as clear as possible what it is enabling or what it is forbidding.

Seems to me that is exactly what the PSPO did and the perp admitted to violating it.

It does not seem obviously so to me. I would not have supposed that the 'prayer' included in the PSPO would have meant 'prayer in your head', especially given that
* The behaviours that led to the PSPO were all outwardly-directed, such as spoken prayer, signs, etc; and
* Banning praying in your head is straight-up fascist.

Read the PSPO. It doesn't require the prayer to be out loud.

 

[laughing dog]

There's a video of their interaction. Go ahead and watch it and then make your own guess as to why. If you think Vaughan-Spruce saying she "might by praying in [her] head" had a greater influence on the outcome than her admission she was standing where she was because "it's an abortion center", or the allegations she had repeatedly violated the PSPO on prior occasions, then make your case using the evidence.

The.video clearly shows that the arrest occurs because MS Vaughan-Spruce refuses to go to the station to answer questions.

 

[Metaphor]

Private message boards can do what they like, but when the State creates a law it better be damn well as clear as possible what it is enabling or what it is forbidding.

Seems to me that is exactly what the PSPO did and the perp admitted to violating it.

It does not seem obviously so to me. I would not have supposed that the 'prayer' included in the PSPO would have meant 'prayer in your head', especially given that
* The behaviours that led to the PSPO were all outwardly-directed, such as spoken prayer, signs, etc; and
* Banning praying in your head is straight-up fascist.

Not this again.

She wasn't arrested for praying in her head.

Not this again. Why did the officer ask if she was praying?

There's a video of their interaction. Go ahead and watch it and then make your own guess as to why. If you think Vaughan-Spruce saying she "might by praying in [her] head" had a greater influence on the outcome than her admission she was standing where she was because "it's an abortion center", or the allegations she had repeatedly violated the PSPO on prior occasions, then make your case using the evidence.

I've watched the video. I did not say it had a 'greater influence'. I do know that the PSPO forbids praying in the exclusion zone and that after that answer, she was asked to go with the police. Praying was not necessary to her having been arrested but it seems to have been sufficient.

 

[Metaphor]

Private message boards can do what they like, but when the State creates a law it better be damn well as clear as possible what it is enabling or what it is forbidding.

Seems to me that is exactly what the PSPO did and the perp admitted to violating it.

It does not seem obviously so to me. I would not have supposed that the 'prayer' included in the PSPO would have meant 'prayer in your head', especially given that
* The behaviours that led to the PSPO were all outwardly-directed, such as spoken prayer, signs, etc; and
* Banning praying in your head is straight-up fascist.

Read the PSPO. It doesn't require the prayer to be out loud.

Yeah...I understand that. That's what makes the PSPO straight-up fascist. It doesn't make the PSPO better. It makes it worse.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Private message boards can do what they like, but when the State creates a law it better be damn well as clear as possible what it is enabling or what it is forbidding.

Seems to me that is exactly what the PSPO did and the perp admitted to violating it.

It does not seem obviously so to me. I would not have supposed that the 'prayer' included in the PSPO would have meant 'prayer in your head', especially given that
* The behaviours that led to the PSPO were all outwardly-directed, such as spoken prayer, signs, etc; and
* Banning praying in your head is straight-up fascist.

Read the PSPO. It doesn't require the prayer to be out loud.

Yeah...I understand that. That's what makes the PSPO straight-up fascist. It doesn't make the PSPO better. It makes it worse.

As far as I can tell it worked correctly. She appears to have gone there with the purpose of violating it. She was arrested which is the proper outcome. Just because she engineered her disobedience to be barely dipping her toe over the line is irrelevant. You don't get to say "pay no attention to my toe, I didn't cross the line." The camel's nose should be whacked!

 

[Metaphor]

Private message boards can do what they like, but when the State creates a law it better be damn well as clear as possible what it is enabling or what it is forbidding.

Seems to me that is exactly what the PSPO did and the perp admitted to violating it.

It does not seem obviously so to me. I would not have supposed that the 'prayer' included in the PSPO would have meant 'prayer in your head', especially given that
* The behaviours that led to the PSPO were all outwardly-directed, such as spoken prayer, signs, etc; and
* Banning praying in your head is straight-up fascist.

Read the PSPO. It doesn't require the prayer to be out loud.

Yeah...I understand that. That's what makes the PSPO straight-up fascist. It doesn't make the PSPO better. It makes it worse.

As far as I can tell it worked correctly. She appears to have gone there with the purpose of violating it. She was arrested which is the proper outcome. Just because she engineered her disobedience to be barely dipping her toe over the line is irrelevant. You don't get to say "pay no attention to my toe, I didn't cross the line." The camel's nose should be whacked!

Loren, if you can't see why it's a bad thing for the government to ban silent prayer, I cannot help you. Have a good day.

 

[Rhea]

Loren, if you can't see why it's a bad thing for the government to ban silent prayer, I cannot help you. Have a good day.

LOL.

The government did not ban silent prayer. It banned protesting in this specific zone after years of antisocial disruption
- showing disapproval OR approval, by any means
- including, but not limited to:
- - Praying
- - Holding signs
- - blocking the entrance
- - Harassing the clients or staff
- - Or neighbors



And we get that you don’t see that, and that you bought the lie that she was “arrested for” silently praying in her head, when in actuality she was clearly arrested for harassing people by constantly getting in their faces and spaces with the intent to intimidate as her organizaion clearly states they want to do.

I get that you have bought the outrage porn about “fascism” when she is the one who is bullyingg. And I get that you allow that lie about her arrest to blind you to the fact that you are making excuses for a bully.


But yeah, the government didn’t ban silent prayer. It banned harassment and intimidation in this space after years of people harassing and intimidating while calling it a “protest”.

 

[Bomb#20]

Not this again. Why did the officer ask if she was praying?

Because if she had a legitimate reason for violating the ordinance things would have been different.

The cop got her on camera explaining that she was there to violate the PSPO. She didn't care about anyone except herself.

Not the clinic staff. Not the clients. Not the neighbors.

Is that you stipulating that the fetuses she's trying to prevent from being aborted don't count as "anyone"?

Self-autonomy isn't the right to kill human beings you find inconvenient either

She was there to screw with everyone she didn't like. Because she thinks her religion makes her better than the rest of us.

If you have a different explanation for why she was flouting the locals, and the ordinance that they put in place to protect themselves from people like her, please explain it.
I don't think you can.

She probably figured getting herself arrested for silently praying would mean bad press for the other side and make it more likely that she'd ultimately succeed in saving some fetuses from getting aborted. It looks like she's playing chess while the city council thinks it's playing whack-a-mole.

 

[Metaphor]

Loren, if you can't see why it's a bad thing for the government to ban silent prayer, I cannot help you. Have a good day.

LOL.

The government did not ban silent prayer. It banned protesting in this specific zone after years of antisocial disruption
- showing disapproval OR approval, by any means
- including, but not limited to:
- - Praying
- - Holding signs
- - blocking the entrance
- - Harassing the clients or staff
- - Or neighbors

Yes, I know. I've read the PSPO.

And we get that you don’t see that,

You don't get it, Rhea.

and that you bought the lie that she was “arrested for” silently praying in her head,

She was arrested for protesting in the exclusion zone. Praying in your head is one of the acts that is explicitly defined as protesting.

when in actuality she was clearly arrested for harassing people by constantly getting in their faces and spaces

I didn't see her harass anybody in the video. I can't speak to previous occasions.

with the intent to intimidate as her organizaion clearly states they want to do.

I get that you have bought the outrage porn

You don't get it, Rhea.

about “fascism” when she is the one who is bullyingg. And I get that you allow that lie about her arrest to blind you to the fact that you are making excuses for a bully.

You don't get it, Rhea.

But yeah, the government didn’t ban silent prayer. It banned harassment and intimidation in this space after years of people harassing and intimidating while calling it a “protest”.

The government banned silent prayer in the exclusion zone, among other things that it banned as 'protesting'.

Banning silent prayer anywhere is straight-up fascist. Stop supporting it.

 

[Metaphor]

For those keeping score, I have not defended VS or her actions in this thread, despite Rhea's repeated assertions that I have. I'd ask Rhea to apologise for her repeated false statements but somehow I think it would be futile.

 

[Bomb#20]

A web search shows that all of the FOX news and faux outrage outlets have picked up on the outrage wording that this is “what she was arrested for,” when it is not at all what she was arrested for. They have a purpose and an agenda. They have no compunctions about using false headlines to further their goal of creating outrage.

I was able to find at least one outlet on the frist page of search returns that said “hold up, that is not the reason for the arrest, that is a false statement.” I’m not sure how reliable this source is - their page has the vibe of a tabloid - but I found it a relief that at least one publication was not running with a misleading headline. They refer to some “corrective statement” on twitter (not sure whose, nor who made them run it), which appears to be the police trying to stop the spread of the lie via misleading headlines.

The lies further harm the neighborhood and the staff and patients of the clinic, playing into the hands of the bullies.

The evidence it's a lie is a bunch of people saying it's a lie. The evidence it's true is the text of the PSPO and the video. When you tell us it's a lie again and call what the police say "corrective" again, that will most likely be about as convincing to the readers of a freethinkers' forum as proof by repetition and argument from authority typically are.

Row erupts after claim 'woman arrested for silently praying' – here's what really happened​

In a corrective statement attached to the post, they wrote: “The woman in the video, Isabel Vaughan Spruce, was not arrested for silently praying.

“She was arrested for breaking a temporary Public Space Protection Order...

That argument deserves only ridicule; but I suspect you may not appreciate being ridiculed, so let's put it this way: when a law prohibits murder and someone is observed to be arrested immediately after being discovered murdering, you would not argue "Saying she was arrested for murdering is a lie; she was arrested for breaking the law." But when a law prohibits praying and someone is observed to be arrested immediately after being discovered praying, you do make the parallel argument. That looks like a textbook case of a "Special Pleading Fallacy."

why did he ask her if she was praying?

I'll take a wild guess here. Could be that he was building a case against her (which is similar to what the police do here in America). If she admitted to praying it could be used as evidence that she was breaking the law. The PSPO says prayer (which itself is verbal or non verbal) is a violation . Get it now? GOSH!

on four separate occasions which were used to ban protests outside of an abortion clinic due to safety concerns.”

Ms Spruce was charged with breaching an exclusion zone and “four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO)”, according to West Midlands police.

She was arrested on December 6 and charged on December 15.

If a criminal commits four crimes and is arrested for all four, that means he was arrested for the first, and for the second, and for the third, and for the fourth. It does not mean he was arrested for the first, and for the second, and for the third, but not at all for the fourth.

 

[Arctish]

A web search shows that all of the FOX news and faux outrage outlets have picked up on the outrage wording that this is “what she was arrested for,” when it is not at all what she was arrested for. They have a purpose and an agenda. They have no compunctions about using false headlines to further their goal of creating outrage.

I was able to find at least one outlet on the frist page of search returns that said “hold up, that is not the reason for the arrest, that is a false statement.” I’m not sure how reliable this source is - their page has the vibe of a tabloid - but I found it a relief that at least one publication was not running with a misleading headline. They refer to some “corrective statement” on twitter (not sure whose, nor who made them run it), which appears to be the police trying to stop the spread of the lie via misleading headlines.

The lies further harm the neighborhood and the staff and patients of the clinic, playing into the hands of the bullies.

The evidence it's a lie is a bunch of people saying it's a lie. The evidence it's true is the text of the PSPO and the video. When you tell us it's a lie again and call what the police say "corrective" again, that will most likely be about as convincing to the readers of a freethinkers' forum as proof by repetition and argument from authority typically are.

What is the lie you are talking about?

Are you saying it's true Ms. Vaughan-Spruce was arrested for praying silently in her head? Or are you saying it's true she was arrested on suspicion she was violating the PSPO and had done so in the past? Because only one of those claims is supported by the video.

Row erupts after claim 'woman arrested for silently praying' – here's what really happened​

In a corrective statement attached to the post, they wrote: “The woman in the video, Isabel Vaughan Spruce, was not arrested for silently praying.

“She was arrested for breaking a temporary Public Space Protection Order...

That argument deserves only ridicule; but I suspect you may not appreciate being ridiculed, so let's put it this way: when a law prohibits murder and someone is observed to be arrested immediately after being discovered murdering, you would not argue "Saying she was arrested for murdering is a lie; she was arrested for breaking the law." But when a law prohibits praying and someone is observed to be arrested immediately after being discovered praying, you do make the parallel argument. That looks like a textbook case of a "Special Pleading Fallacy."

Okay, so you are claiming she was arrested for praying.

What is your evidence it was the possible praying in her head that got her arrested, not her being in the area covered by the PSPO because "it's an abortion center", or the allegations she had violated the PSPO on other occasions?

​

why did he ask her if she was praying?

​

I'll take a wild guess here. Could be that he was building a case against her (which is similar to what the police do here in America). If she admitted to praying it could be used as evidence that she was breaking the law. The PSPO says prayer (which itself is verbal or non verbal) is a violation . Get it now? GOSH!​

on four separate occasions which were used to ban protests outside of an abortion clinic due to safety concerns.”

Ms Spruce was charged with breaching an exclusion zone and “four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO)”, according to West Midlands police.

She was arrested on December 6 and charged on December 15.

If a criminal commits four crimes and is arrested for all four, that means he was arrested for the first, and for the second, and for the third, and for the fourth. It does not mean he was arrested for the first, and for the second, and for the third, but not at all for the fourth.

It does not appear that 'silently praying' was cited by the police or the courts as a reason for the arrest, and it's obvious it wasn't needed for the charges to be substantiated.

 

[Metaphor]

It does not appear that 'silently praying' was cited by the police or the courts as a reason for the arrest, and it's obvious it wasn't needed for the charges to be substantiated.

You're kidding, right? Are you trying to play a semantic obfuscation game?

The alleged crime was violating the PSPO, which she appears to have done by i) being in the PSPO exclusion zone and ii) praying in her head. It's like saying Mx. Aldrich was not arrested for shooting and killing Club Q patrons, but for violating the statute that forbids first degree murder.

 

[Metaphor]

What is your evidence it was the possible praying in her head that got her arrested, not her being in the area covered by the PSPO because "it's an abortion center", or the allegations she had violated the PSPO on other occasions?

Bomb has already answered this upthread. She was arrested on multiple charges. That means she was also arrested on the charge that led to her arrest.