Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
passmethewineplease · 06/04/2014 23:20

Bumble my comment about placards and using them to hit the "peaceful" protesters was clearly tongue in cheek.

I have never been violent in my life although your posts make me come close.

what I'd actually like to do is protest in front of them so they can't be seen instead and shout over them. Grin

who on earth are you to try and control what happens to other people's bodies?

you were beyond heartless to assassin too, you believe it's right what is happening to her.

people like you hate women and detest the fact they have rights.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:21

Capt, isn't that because it was being offered as part of Obamacare? The republicans pretty much disagree with Obamacare in general. They just don't want to pay for other people's health care. Bit of a stretch to say it's to do with keeping women 'under the thumb'. Talk about extremist views. Sheesh!

passmethewineplease · 06/04/2014 23:22

"talk about extremist views"

Really?! I mean really?!

Hmm
ChewbaccasSister · 06/04/2014 23:23

Bit of a latecomer to this I know, but I can't help but feel that there are some very extremist views here. On both sides.
Anti-abortionists who would have someone carry a baby to term, which will die upon birth, is absolutely barbaric. The mother should be allowed to decide when and how that baby will be delivered, and whatever is in her best interests should be respected.

On the other hand, for those who think abortion on request until term should be allowed for reasons other than those that currently exist.....all women are NOT the same, and I have worked with a fair few who would have aborted at a very late stage, simply because they were prone to impulsive and extreme acts...the element of shock would have been appealing to them.

Similarly I have known women say "well, I've had four (abortions) already, they were ok so I'm not bothered if I have another one." And be the absolute Daily Fail stereotype of a woman who is using abortion as a contraceptive choice.......which surely is also a bit dodgy? Using abortion as contraception to me feels really immoral and as if the foetus is of no consequence.

I think both standpoints are really sad.

So very sorry for the lady from NI. It's disgraceful what you are being put through Thanks

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 06/04/2014 23:25

I want women to have the right to make choices about fertility and pregnancy that are right for them and their unique circumstances, without judgement or ridicule. You want to ban abortions, they aren't acceptable, ever. And somehow my views are considered 'extremist'?

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:25

Sabrina,

" while the foetus is still inside my body, it is part of it" No. it is not. You may like to think it is but your own body does not. There are mechanisms in place to prevent your body from destroying the foetus because it would consider it 'foreign'. If it was part of your body that would not be the case.

pass,
"you believe it's right what is happening to her." So it was you who said that earlier?

Don't be ridiculous. I don't think any woman should have to find out that her baby won't survive birth.

"who on earth are you to try and control what happens to other people's bodies?"

A woman is trying to control what happens to the foetus' body. You seem happy enough with that.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:26

It's not extremist, and it has nothing to do with Obamacare. It is to do with the far-right conservatives of the US (who are also often evangelical in their religious beliefs) wanting to control women's fertility and stopping at nothing to reverse Roe vs Wade. They even lied and were caught out during the Wendy Davis filibuster. But still they got their laws through - stupid white men in power - passing laws over women's right to bodily autonomy.

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 06/04/2014 23:27

Similarly I have known women say "well, I've had four (abortions) already, they were ok so I'm not bothered if I have another one." And be the absolute Daily Fail stereotype of a woman who is using abortion as a contraceptive choice.......which surely is also a bit dodgy? Using abortion as contraception to me feels really immoral and as if the foetus is of no consequence.

If you support a woman's right to have an abortion, then you support it full stop. Be angry at whatever situation or circumstances have led to her making (what you feel to be) poor choices.

passmethewineplease · 06/04/2014 23:29

yep, completely happy with that. the woman comes first. it is her wish to do as she pleases with her own body.

stop fucking dithering around the questions, I didn't say that you believe that what is happening with her baby is right I mean the forcing her to give birth?

just come out and say it you believe that what is happening to assassin is right otherwise you'd support her right to an abortion wouldn't you?

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:31

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

Nope. Not what i said. Misrepresenting?

con fuddled, I'm not sure what post you are referring to. "Her cut off is implantation and she doesn't accept others' because it's right. " I actually had this discussion with you on the previous thread and said that I understood the fertilisation view point but that I tended to go more towards implantation and even explained to you why - do you remember the identical twin discussion?

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:32

Yes - I am happy for the woman to control what happens to the foetus's body when it is a part of her own, bumbley. I've already said so.

Because it is part of her - in her body, dependent on it, part of it. Ridiculous to argue otherwise.

ChewbaccasSister · 06/04/2014 23:33

Why do I have to support it in all circumstances i.e. when it is being used as contraception by an individual for the fifth time? The law at the moment isn't to have abortion on request. However, I am by and large pro-choice.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:33

Hopalong, "I want women to have the right to make choices about fertility and pregnancy that are right for them and their unique circumstances, without judgement or ridicule. You want to ban abortions, they aren't acceptable, ever. And somehow my views are considered 'extremist'?"

Is that to me? I called captain extremist for thinking that the republicans dislike obamacare because they want to keep women 'under the thumb'.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:37

pass "with her own body"

but not the foetus' body which is not part of the woman's body as far as the woman's body is concerned. Maybe you think the woman's body is wrong?

I also think you need to read back a few pages to see my post to baby. I'm not going to keep answering the same questions over and over just because you don't bother reading my posts.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:38

Anti-abortionists would take everything away from the woman and her right to bodily autonomy. Even so far as saying a foetus isn't part of her body.

She is but a vessel to them - an incubator.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:38

Sabrina, so you think the woman's own body is wrong then? It doesn't identify it as part of the woman.

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 06/04/2014 23:38

The clue is in the name pro CHOICE. I'm pro women getting to make their own choices, even if I would do differently.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:39

It doesn't identify the foetus* as part of the woman.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:41

Bumbley - ridiculous argument. If the foetus couldn't be considered a part of the woman's body, it would be expelled. No more foetus. End of.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:42

HopAlong - so if you think don't think people who place conditions on abortions should be called pro-choice - what do you think they should be called? We had this discussion earlier but I'm not sure if you were around for it. I agree that 'pro-choice' isn't suitable either btw.

passmethewineplease · 06/04/2014 23:42

I saw what you put, doesn't change the fact you believe she should have to go through the hell she is currently going through..as you disagree with her right to a termination.

the foetus is freaking inside the mother, how is that not apart of the woman's body, they aren't seperate, it is INSIDE.

people like you are just itching to see women's rights be removed to fit in with your own moral compass. stop imposing your simplistic views on to others.

to want to hold that much control over another woman's body is frightening.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:45

I cannot believe I'm having this argument.

bumbleymummy · 06/04/2014 23:45

Sabrina, I explained why it isn't expelled. There are mechanisms in place that prevent the woman's body from attacking the foetus. If they weren't there, the foetus would not be able to survive. The body would recognise it at 'foreign tissue'. If it was actually part of the woman (As you are insisting) then those mechanisms would not be required. I'm sorry but that is scientific fact and you can't argue with it. The foetus is not part of the woman's body.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:46

It's like arguing with a flat-earther or a young earth creationist. How in the name of all that is logical can anyone say the foetus isn't part of the woman's body?

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 06/04/2014 23:48

Those 'mechanisms' are just part of evolution of a mammal, bumbley. It doesn't mean the foetus is not part of the body. If it wasn't - it would be rejected. Oh, then there would be no mammals.

How is something in my womb, something that is dependent on me, not part of my body?