Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

To think holding a vigil outside Marie Stopes is wrong? and to wish there was something I could do (may be upsetting)

999 replies

Menolly · 03/04/2014 00:08

The local Catholic church is planning another vigil next week outside Marie Stopes, I am Catholic although attend a different parish (because I disagree with this ones overly judgmental congregation and uncaring priest). I think it is a horrible thing to be doing, I can see the clinic from my flat and at the last one they blocked the pavement meaning that people had to ask them to move to get through, whether they were going to the clinic or up the road (which leads to the high street, train stations, bus stops etc.).

They do move out the way when asked and they are peaceful whilst there, just singing and praying the rosary, however if I was a teenage girl going in for advice or was in some terrible situation where I needed their services I'm not sure I'd be brave enough to push my way through. Ignoring the fact that the clinic also does STD testing, contraceptive advice, smear tests etc, an abortion isn't an easy thing to go through whatever the circumstances and I think adding to that stress is a terrible thing to do, then considering that these people don't know that the woman they are upsetting aren't going there because they've been raped or because of some other horrible circumstance it makes me really angry.

My eldest child was conceived through rape when I was just 15, I kept him and he's beautiful and I have never regretted that decision but I had a lot of family support that other women might not have and there was a time when I did look at my options and having a bunch of judgmental people singing outside whilst I was trying to get advice would have made things much harder for me at a time when I seriously considered suicide, I hated myself for letting that happen to me and felt guilty for all the stress it put on my parents, I felt I was being judged constantly and lost my own faith for a long time because I couldn't stand the thought that God would let that happen or the guilt and judging associated with church and I hate the idea that people would do something so insensitive and could push someone to making the wrong decision or feeling even worse.

I find the vigils upsetting and I could hear them singing from my living room last time, what I went through was nearly 10 years ago now, I can't imagine how much worse it would be for someone who had been through something more recently or had less support.

I just wish there was something I could do to make these people, who I am sure think they are doing a good thing, see how harmful their vigil could be, but so far I can't think of any way of doing that...

So AIBU to think they shouldn't being doing this? Also if anyone can think of a peaceful way of showing my disgust I'd be grateful.

OP posts:
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 22:03

sorry if the word fucking offends but the idea of forcing women back into bloody catholic laundries to work for nothing and have their babies stolen and sold offends me so i guess we're quits in a world where using a swear word or making someone upset at the idea of something is on a par with forcing women to give birth to pregnancies that have no chance of resulting in a viable life.

Oh yes. The Catholic Church had itself a nice little business in the magdelene laundries, didn't it? When it wasn't covering up child-rapists, that is - not so caring about 'God's helpless infants' then, was it?

TheHoneyBadger · 06/04/2014 22:05

it's the fact they hide behind religion that is the most ridiculous thing - their religion endlessly tells them that it is for god to judge, that they should concern themselves with the plank in their own eye, that he is without sin should cast the first stone, that the first rule is love and compassion etc etc etc.

honestly i don't know how they don't end up locked up and injected with antipsychotics strong enough for a horse to cope with the cognitive dissonance. to hold such conflicting/contradictory beliefs and behaviours is surely psyche destroying?

CaptChaos · 06/04/2014 22:05

Anti-women campaigners do tell some egregious lies, don't they?

If a woman is truly raped, she can't become pregnant, because her body won't let her.... Lie!

But what this tells us is that, if a woman says she has been raped, but becomes pregnant as a result.... well, she must have been lying about the rape, like all women do Hmm

Abortion is only ok in the case of either incest or rape.....

What this tells us is that women who are pregnant but it's not their fault are allowed to have abortions, because they have been good. OTOH, women who have had consensual sex should be made to be incubators, as a punishment, for being bad and choosing to have sex.

This is without getting into the lies and propaganda they have on their placards and leaflets.

thebody · 06/04/2014 22:08

honey I shouted oh yes sister at your last post!

sabrina so agree the Catholic church has inflicted so so much pain and suffering to its deep shame I wonder how anyone ever, let alone women, suffer to belong.

Mind you every mainstream religion seems to have a nice line in mysogyny and control. Par for the course really.

TheHoneyBadger · 06/04/2014 22:13

for the lurking christians feeling genuinely conflicted i would beseech to go read your new testament. re-read the pharisees disgust at jesus healing someone on the sabbath day and how jesus responded then apply that to baby's position and ask yourself honestly what you think he would have done or said. ask yourself who are the pharisees today.

i know there are genuine christians out there who must feel torn on this stuff because of what people who call themselves christians and happen to be the noisiest ones claim is christianity.

really - if you're sticking with christianity at least read the text and feel the spirit of it and of the character/person/teacher you aim to follow.

SuburbanRhonda · 06/04/2014 22:20

So that's a "no" to holding the vigil, then? Grin

Seriously, ladies, it makes my heart swell with pride to read so many well-reasoned and compassionate posts supporting our right to do what we want with our own bodies.

In your face, bum!

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed · 06/04/2014 22:31

Completely agree with Honey!

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 22:33

HopAlong, I know someone who had to be induced early for severe pre-eclampsia (after the age of viability). I wouldn't consider that abortion - they were not intending to kill the foetus - they were trying to save them both. (mum and baby both survived and are doing well). but no, I wouldn't support the idea of inducing before the age of viability.

"why you would choose to go on comparing an abortion to shooting someone in the head.."

I did not compare abortion to shooting someone in the head. I compared it to turning off a life support machine and said that they weren't the same thing. I will point out again that this was in response to direct questions that baby (the person you are referring to) asked me. I even explicitly said in one of my responses that I was answering her directly because she asked my opinion just in case someone accused me of being insensitive and yet here you are - doing it anyway. Should I have just ignored baby's questions then? I'm pretty sure I would have been told off for that as well. rock < me > hard place

"i want it to be the woman's choice i do so partly on the basis that i assume no sane woman wants to abort a late pregnancy without damn good reason....i really have never, ever met anyone who would have a late abortion for the sake of it"

This is a terrible argument for supporting abortion to term...I don't know anyone who has abused and/or murdered their child but it happens and no, I don't think they had a 'damned good reason' for it and I'm glad we have laws against it.

the body, you think it's self evident too? Would you like to explain why it is necessary for there to be mechanisms to prevent the foetus being attacked by the mother's immune system because it would be considered 'foreign' if it is actually part of the mother? You may think it is part of the woman - the woman's body certainly does not.

"Can you explain why you feel you have the right to prevent other womem having autonomy over their bodies."

The foetus is not part of their body (see above)

"Can you explain why women are not capable of making an informed decision to terminate a pregnancy for whatever reason up to the birth."

I don't think they have the right to terminate another life.

"Can you explain why you feel that your feelings and yourpro life ha ha friends have any role what so ever in shouting/picketing/bombarding and bullying women accessing medical help."

Not sure what you're actually asking here. I don't shout/picket/bombard or bully women so I don't have a role in that.

"Can you actually explain your attitude to babys situation."

I explained my beliefs upthread about disabled foetuses having an equal right to life. However, as baby said, her baby is not disabled, s/he isn't going to survive birth. In this type of situation I can see an argument for induction with provisions made to support her baby (although I realise that he/she will not survive :( ) That may seem strange to you all given my views but I do not see that as the intentional termination of a pregnancy in the same way as I did not consider the early induction of my friend with pre-eclampsia abortion.

Baby, I'm very sorry if my posts about disabled foetuses caused you any distress. I do not agree with actively terminating a life but I do not see that induction in this type of situation would fall into that category. (just to be clear - I would still not agree with terminating a foetus prior to carrying out induction and I would not agree with induction prior to the age of viability where the aim is clearly to terminate the foetus' life.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 22:46

HoneyBadger, "it actually does not at all support the idea that fetus' rights are bigger than those of their 'hosts'." I have never said that they are - I have said they are equal. I'm simply making the point because some posters are insisting that the foetus is part of the woman's body - the woman's body clearly does not think it is which is why it has to be protected.

"they will not acknowledge that the world can be a rough tough old bastard of a place and people are sometimes put in dreadful situations and are forced to take difficult decisions. "

No, no pro-lifer has ever experienced the rough, tough old world or dreadful situations or had to make difficult decisions Hmm

"exactly capt. it's as if the zillions of years that women have selflessly put themselves second and done everything they can for their children and families doesn't count for anything because ooh if you let them have abortions at their say so they'll show their true colours and be killing those poor fetus' left right and centre for the sake of it"

I guess that means women are never capable of committing crimes against their children...oh wait.

"It always, always boils down to misogyny and deep mistrust of women - or even, as SGB says - deep envy and resentment of our fertility, and the fact that we can now have some control over it."

"it's all about controlling their rights to have abortions. and once you let them come after the abortion rights they're after contraception next and taking benefits away from single mums etc. because they're all about controlling women and fertility and ultra conservatism and that's all they're about really."

Seriously? How ridiculous. Once the MN 'femisnists' come out all hope is lost.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 22:48

"In your face, bum!"

Seriously? That has to be the most infantile comment I have read yet. Grow up.

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 06/04/2014 22:49

So you don't support the idea of inducing labour before viability because it is directly intended to cause the terminating of the fetus' life? how about inducing a pregnancy before viability with the express intention of no longer being pregnant. Not directly wanting to terminate the fetus, but with the sole desire of the woman to not be pregnant. Say, for example, the woman did not care either way what happened to the baby, she simply refused to host it anymore?

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 22:54

Hopalong - I don't agree with induction before viability - at least after viability they can attempt to preserve the foetus' life. I have suggested this on previous threads where people have asked about abortion to save the life of the mother. I have always said that if possible, I think they should wait until the age of viability and then induce.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 22:59

'In your face, bum' is somewhat more intelligent than claiming a foetus is not part of the woman's body while in utero.

If that was the case, I would have put my unborn babies to one side many a time so I could put my feet up in comfort.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:02

Ach 'feminists" - those unholy bunch of women that believe in the right to bodily autonomy. Those caaaaahs - Always a problem for the women-hating forced-birthers.

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 06/04/2014 23:04

If you genuinely believe that all women who are pregnant lose autonomy over their body until the fetus is viable (and can be looked after by the hordes of people queuing down the street to adopt premature babies with any potential health consequences), and that abortion should not be an option, ever, then I have nothing more to discuss with you. I find your views misogynistic and naive, and your disregard of women utterly abhorrent. I suspect you are so entrenched in your tiny worldview that you will never change your mind or attempt to see things from any other perspective. And that isn't really conducive to a debate.

ravenAK · 06/04/2014 23:09

I think 'In your face, bum!' is probably the most sensible & economical response to your online behaviour, bum.

I don't know why no-one thought of it several threads ago; it would have saved an awful lot of undeserved attention being given, not so much to your repellent views as to your dishonest sophistry.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:10

Sabrina, do you not see the difference between 'inside your body' and 'part of your body'?

Some of the 'feminist' opinions expressed there were just ridiculous - envy and resentment of our fertility? Hmm Too many misandrists posing as 'feminists' on MN for my liking.

Hop "I suspect you are so entrenched in your tiny worldview that you will never change your mind or attempt to see things from any other perspective." The feeling is mutual. Have a good evening.

CaptChaos · 06/04/2014 23:10

Honeybadger is quite correct when she says that, if people like you, bum, get your way, it opens the doors to other women hating and women subjugating legislation. This can be seen in the USA right now, where women's bodily autonomy has been curtailed in a fair number of States where the conservative/religious right hold sway. There are large and voiciferous campaigns against birth control being included on healthcare plans, women suggesting they might be are publicly vilified. Rightly or wrongly, this looks like a concerted effort by the men in power to keep women under the thumb.

So no, nothing to do with feminists, MN ones, or any other kind. Just facts.

CaptChaos · 06/04/2014 23:12

Misandrists? No such thing, I'm afraid.

But.....

BINGO!

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:13

capt Misandrists

CaptChaos · 06/04/2014 23:14

Yes, I know what some people class as misandry. It's just that, as a concept, it doesn't exist. Except inside the heads of loons.

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed · 06/04/2014 23:15

"Too many misandrists posing as 'feminists' on MN for my liking."

Bum interesting that you use this term. What are your thoughts about Mens' Rights Activism?

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 06/04/2014 23:16

Because wanting to have control over what happens inside your body = hating men. Gotcha.

confuddledDOTcom · 06/04/2014 23:18

Bum I was talking about Baby and I didn't think you replied to posts that weren't aimed at you. Her baby is not capable of surviving without her body, it is acting as a life support machine. It's (I'm not sure if she's said boy or girl so I do apologise for it) birth will remove the life support her body is providing whether that is now or later.

Plum, I made the same point on both threads. Her cut off is implantation and she doesn't accept others' because it's right.

Honey, you're brilliant.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:18

Sabrina, do you not see the difference between 'inside your body' and 'part of your body'?

No - do enlighten me. I know this is the very epitome of current anti-women philosophy at the moment. But while the foetus is still inside my body, it is part of it - dependent on me. While I have bodily autonomy, I have control over it.

Misandry my arse - doesn't exist. But I so knew you would be a poster that would bandy that word about.