|
‘Thought-Crime’ - it's not just a warning from Orwell anymore.
Today, in the UK, so totalitarian now, one can be prosecuted even for silent prayer! Recently-passed laws extend jurisdiction of these ‘thought-crimes’ even to the sanctity of one’s own home!
Thuggish governments attempt to police the privacy of the human mind!
"Adam Smith-Connor (an army veteran who fought in Afghanistan), was convicted by the Bournemouth Magistrates’ Court for silently praying for his deceased son; who had been aborted...
"Adam had been praying silently and on his own, for approximately 3 minutes before he was approached by police..."
|
‘Thought Crime’ Is Now a Reality in the U.K.
By Elyssa Koren
October 25, 2024
Praying silently in front of an abortion facility can now put you at legal risk in the United Kingdom — and even stricter rules are on the way.
The criminal conviction of Adam Smith-Connor, the Englishman found guilty of silent prayer on the public street near an abortion facility, marks a watershed moment for fundamental freedoms in the United Kingdom. With the criminalization of Smith-Connor’s innermost thoughts, the country has unceremoniously ushered in a new era of “thought-crime” prosecution under the guise of protecting access to abortion.
And on October 31, England and Wales are set to roll out “buffer zones” similar to that under which Smith-Connor was prosecuted for all abortion facilities, prompting well-founded fears that countless other prayers and thoughts soon could be the subject of criminal sanction.
Smith-Connor, a military veteran and father of two, was convicted on October 16 for praying silently about abortion, in his mind, for three minutes, on the street near a Bournemouth, England, abortion facility.
Since October 2022, Bournemouth has had in place a “buffer zone” ordinance, creating a zone of censorship in which “expressions of approval or disapproval” about abortion are banned on several streets. The ordinance lists prayer, the recitation of scripture, genuflecting, sprinkling holy water, and crossing oneself as prohibited activities. Smith-Connor’s conviction confirms that prayer in the silence of one’s mind is understood as a violation of the zone insofar as someone entering the abortion facility could have perceived it.
On November 24, 2022, Smith-Connor stood still and silent on the public street by the abortion facility for a few minutes before being approached by “community safety accredited officers.” He had his back to the facility to be mindful of the privacy of those entering or leaving. Video footage shows the council officers asking what he was doing. Smith-Connor informed them that he was “praying for my son, who is deceased.”
Twenty-two years ago, Smith-Connor had driven his ex-girlfriend to a facility and paid for her to have an abortion. Further, he had assisted with abortions as part of his army medical training. It was this background that informed his desire to pray, in silence, near the facility, and he was cautious to in no way breach the zone by way of showing “approval or disapproval” about abortion.
Upon learning that Smith-Connor was praying for his late son, the council officer tasked with patroling the “buffer zone,” responded, “I’m sorry for your loss. But ultimately, I have to go along with the guidelines of the Public Space Protection Order, to say that we are in the belief that therefore you are in breach of clause 4a, which says about prayer, and also acts of disapproval. . . .”
What followed was nearly a two-year legal ordeal, culminating in three full days of trial this September. Smith-Connor’s prayer might have been one of the most expensive three minutes of silence in history. This hardworking family man has now been saddled with a criminal record and ordered to pay £9,000 for the costs of his prosecution. Further, the local council spent over £110,000 of taxpayer money on his prosecution, hiring top lawyers — a vastly disproportionate and unusual spend for a case at a magistrates’ court.
Even though he was engaged only in silent thought, the judge ruled that Smith-Connor’s presence within the “buffer zone” could have had a “detrimental effect” on those attending or working at the clinic. Leaning on the fact that his hands were clasped, and that he said his head might have been “slightly bowed,” she concluded that members of the public may have been able to perceive that he was praying — thus rendering his silent prayer worthy of a guilty verdict.
The case marks the first known thought conviction in modern British history. Freedom of thought is a fundamental human right, enshrined in international law without restriction. The judge may have relied on a perception of Smith-Connor as having his “hands clasped,” but the root of the matter is that this innocent man is now a convicted criminal for the simple act of raising his thoughts to God.
Moreover, if, for example, Smith-Connor had prayed for world peace or for an ill family member while standing in the same zone, he would not have been found guilty. His verdict was based on the content of his thoughts (abortion), which the judge deemed to be unacceptable in the place in which he stood (the “buffer zone”).
Few could have imagined, even a decade ago, that Britain would have come so far with regard to the suppression of basic human rights. The rights to hold religious beliefs in public and in private, and the right to think freely without the interference of the state, belong to every person. Yet these “buffer zones” have been drafted so vaguely so as to allow for the insidious creep into the criminalization of thought.
In August, in a victory against censorship, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, the Christian charitable volunteer who was arrested twice for praying silently in a similar zone in Birmingham, England, received a payout of £13,000 from police in acknowledgement of her unjust treatment. Juxtaposed against Smith-Connor’s conviction, this shows the enormous inconsistency surrounding abortion-facility censorship zones, highly dependent on individual interpretation. Such ambiguity does not bode well for the future of U.K. citizens with the national rollout of these zones.
As the country introduces national censorship zones, it is incumbent on the government to clarify, as a baseline, that the new law does not target silent thought. The preservation of freedom of thought is a prerequisite for a society that holds itself out to be free, without which all other freedoms are imperiled.
Policing Thought Crime Should Have No Place in the U.K.
Published Jan 24, 2023
By Ryan Christopher
Parts of the United Kingdom are now policing thought crimes. This is happening under a series of local ordinances that ban prayer, including silent prayer, in the vicinity of abortion facilities. Don't believe it? Recent cases have confirmed that you can be interrogated, arrested, fined, and even face a prison sentence for the act of praying in the privacy of your own mind.
First came the arrest of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce. On December 15, she was charged with failing to comply with an ordinance that set up a "buffer zone" in an area comprising of several streets around an abortion facility in Birmingham, England. Prayer is listed as a "prohibited activity" under the ordinance. Isabel was free to stand where she was, and free to think about anything else—but for directing her thoughts to God on the issue of abortion, she was arrested, and now could be tried and convicted of a crime.
Video footage of Isabel's arrest went viral on Twitter. When probed by the police, she made clear that she was not there to protest. In response to questioning, she stated that she "might be" praying inside her head. For this, she was searched, including through her hair, and placed under arrest. Isabel heads to court in early February, and could face up to two years in prison.
Now, Adam Smith-Connor similarly has been fined for breaching a Bournemouth, England, "buffer zone" order. Adam stood within the zone, on the public street, praying in silence for the baby—a son—he had lost to abortion years ago. He prayed too for the men and women facing similar difficult decisions today. He stood with his back to the facility, mindful of the privacy of staff and attendees. After a few minutes, he was approached by "community safety accredited officers," tasked with enforcing the censorship zone.
As in Isabel's case, video footage of Adam's interaction with the officers dispels any possibility that this is about something other than prayer. As one officer states, "ultimately, I have to go along with the guidelines of the Public Space Protection Order, to say that we are in the belief that therefore you are in breach of clause 4a, which says about prayer." Adam interjects, "I'm just standing praying," only for her to respond, "I understand that. But the PSPO [ordinance] is in place for a reason and we have to follow through on those regulations."
It must be emphasized that Adam's only transgression was prayer, and he was fined literally for the contents of his mind. If he had been thinking about anything else, he would have faced no penalty. Bizarrely, the order that he is accused of violating also prohibits genuflecting, sprinkling holy water on the ground, or the crossing of oneself, among other activities.
What we are seeing in the U.K. is a rapidly escalating effort to criminalize the basic exercise of fundamental freedoms. Isabel and Adam are but the first in a potentially very long line of similar cases. The U.K. Parliament is now debating legislation that would establish censorship zones around abortion facilities nationwide. These zones are fundamentally incompatible with a free society. They directly violate myriad fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression and religion, and as evidenced by what has already transpired, easily slide into the policing of people's thoughts.
"Buffer zone" proponents cite harassment as justification for this kind of infringement. Let's be unmistakably clear in our response—harassment is a crime. The harassment of any person, including a woman facing a difficult situation, is an abomination already covered under U.K. law. These zones are drastically distinct from any legitimate means to protect women. No democratic state should be in the business of criminalizing thought.
Nobody benefits when a free state voluntarily relinquishes the essential attributes of freedom. And every person, regardless of their stance on abortion, should be horrified by what is happening to fundamental freedoms in the U.K. Even if we disagree, let us not lose sight of the fact that all people have the right to peacefully pray, act, and yes, even think, in accordance with their beliefs.
Ryan Christopher is director of ADF UK, which is supporting the defense of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce and Adam Smith-Connor. Follow him on Twitter: @RyanChrist1984
Praying (even silently) is now a crime in the UK
Oct 17, 2024 | Debbie Mountford
The word Orwellian is generally overused, but it’s difficult to rein in the 1984 references on this one. George Orwell may have been off by 40 years in his prophetic novel, but like Jules Verne before him (think Nautilus from 20 000 Leagues Under the Sea), his imaginings have turned out to be alarmingly - and quite terrifyingly - accurate.
Big Brother isn’t just watching anymore, his Thought Police are marching through the streets of the western world.
This week on Wednesday the 16th of October, Adam Smith-Connor (an army veteran who fought in Afghanistan), was convicted by the Bournemouth Magistrates’ Court for silently praying for his deceased son; who had been aborted.
Now perhaps you may be thinking that there must be more to this? That Adam must have been breaking the law in some other way? Was he being violent towards the police? Intimidating members of the public somehow? Did he insult anyone, block the pavement, or hand out “offensive” material?
Well, prepare yourselves because the facts of this case are so shocking, I’m not sure even Orwell’s Ministry of Truth would have dared to pursue it!
So what happened?
Almost 2 years ago, Adam had been praying silently and on his own, for approximately 3 minutes before he was approached by police. Adam had his back to an abortion clinic and was within an area covered by a Public Spaces Protection Order. This order constitutes a so called “buffer zone” around the abortion clinic covering several streets, and (among other things) it prohibits:
“engaging in an act of approval/disapproval or attempted act of approval/disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means. This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling.”
Adam was approached by two officers who questioned him on his “activities” on that particular street. Bear in mind Adam is standing still and silent. When Adam responded that he was praying, the officer informed him that he was in a “safe zone” where “certain activities are prohibited”. The officer, captured on video, then asked “in terms of that, can I ask what is the nature of your prayer today”?
Adam replied that he was praying for his son. Despite saying that she “didn’t want to probe and didn’t want to ask him to elaborate on that”, the officer went on to explain that the PSPO contained a clause around prayer, and around disapproval of the activities taking place at the clinic which Adam was standing with his back to.
She went on to say again that while she didn’t want to probe as to the reasons Adam was praying for his son, they may be “perhaps pertinent” to the area he was in.
Adam simply replied “I am praying for my son who is deceased”. While initially expressing sympathy, the officer immediately goes on to say that they must abide by the guidelines of the PSPO and that: “we are of the belief that you are in breach of the PSPO which says about prayer and also acts of disapproval around the activities at the clinic”.
Adam at this point had not mentioned abortion, or that his son had been aborted. He had merely said that he was praying for his son who had died. He reiterated this point saying “I’m just standing praying” but the officers simply stated that the PSPO was there for a reason and they had to follow through on the regulations.
Now Adam didn’t have a banner, he wasn’t giving out leaflets, he didn’t speak to anyone, make eye contact with anyone and no member of the public complained as far as we are aware.
He was charged for “attempted disapproval” of abortion because of thoughts he MAY have been thinking silently in his head!
Double standards
Shockingly - as reported by Isabel Vaughan-Spruce (Director of March for Life UK) who has been supporting Adam throughout this ordeal - Adam had actually been approached by the police a week prior to the incident that led to him being charged. He was standing in the same place and doing the same thing, praying for his son.
Apparently on this occasion though, he received assurances from the police that he was “perfectly entitled to silently pray near the abortion centre”.
Isabel is no stranger to persecution (or prosecution) herself of course, having been arrested and charged with the same offence twice in Birmingham. However, while Adam has been ordered to pay £9000 in legal fees, Isabel actually won compensation of £13 000 from West Midlands Police for her unjust treatment and breach of her human rights; after being acquitted of all charges at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court in February of 2023. Isabel was supported by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF UK), who are also representing Adam.
And while Adam has been fined £9000 by the court for his silent prayer for his son. The same court, located in a city council which is near bankruptcy, has spent roughly £90 000 of public money prosecuting this case!
Adam spoke admirably outside court after the verdict on Wednesday, quoting Psalm 22 v 10:
“When my father and mother forsake me, then the Lord will take care of me”.
Adam said he feels like his government has forsaken him, but thanked the Lord and his supporters for not doing so. Let’s continue to pray for him and for our legal system.
One of his lawyers from ADF UK, Jeremiah Igunnubole (who plans to appeal), called this verdict an:
“era defining ruling for British liberties, Adam has been found guilty of a thought crime, the first conviction of it’s kind in modern British history”
Meanwhile, elsewhere…
Tragically it’s not just this case, or that of Isabel, where Christians and pro-lifers are being prosecuted. On the same day that the guilty verdict came down for Adam, a Christian wife and mother to a 2 year old little girl in the United States, Bevelyn Williams; reported to federal prison to begin her 3 year custodial sentence for “unlawful assembly”. What for? For peacefully protesting outside of an abortion clinic in violation of the act which ensures unobstructed access to abortion clinics (the FACE Act).
Her husband (as he drove his wife to surrender herself at a federal prison), spoke of the trauma his little daughter is going to suffer, being separated from her mother for the next 3 years!
Several pensioners have faced similar fates in the US for praying and singing hymns outside of abortion clinics, or peacefully within. With one 89 year old lady facing an 8 year sentence that will likely see her die in jail.
In Scotland (my home country) the Safe access zones Scotland act 2024 came into effect last month. This act not only prohibits any form of protest or even the offer of help and assistance around all abortion providers in Scotland for 200 metres, it extends these buffer zones to include private homes. No, that’s not a joke. The act states:
“Private properties in Safe Access Zones
In general, the offences apply in public places within the Safe Access Zones. However, if someone does something in a private place (such as a private residence) within the boundary of a Safe Access Zone that can be seen or heard in the public places that are part of the Zone, an offence could be committed if it is done with the intention of (or reckless as to the whether it has the effect of):
influencing someone’s decision to access, provide or facilitate the provision of abortion service preventing or impeding someone from accessing, providing, or facilitating the provision of abortion services, or causing harassment, alarm or distress to someone relating to their decision to access, provide or facilitate the provision of abortion services, where in each case the other person is in the safe access zone.”
If we don’t stand up to this kind of tyranny, might simply speaking the name of Christ on the street be enough to see us disappear down a dark corridor, into whatever horrors await us behind the door labelled Room 101? Will you stand with Adam and be counted? Will you stand with us, in defence of the unborn?
This means that if you are talking about abortion in your garden, or praying in your living room with the window open and one of your neighbours hears you - and are alarmed or distressed by what they overhear - they can report you for breaching the terms of the buffer zone, even when you are within the grounds of your own home!
There is even an online reporting forum to enable people to report such offences, which police Scotland have confirmed can carry a fine of up to £10 000.
Will we end up in Room 101?
Adam’s lawyer Jeremiah, notably also had this to say on Wednesday in response to this totalitarian ruling:
“When British lawyers drafted the European Convention on Human Rights in the aftermath of World War 2, they could never have foreseen that their own country, the United Kingdom, which has a long and rich history of protecting civil liberties, would be guilty of interfering with the most sacrosanct of fundamental rights, namely the right to freedom of thought”.
Adam poignantly stated:
“When George Orwell wrote 1984 in the year 1948, he meant it as a warning and not a guidebook”.
How ironic, that the European Convention on Human Rights was signed a mere 2 years after George Orwell wrote his grisly masterpiece 1984. One has to wonder what’s next for Christians and pro-lifers living under Big Brother?