AIBU to think it should be illegal for anti abortion groups to spread propaganda under the guise of electioneering?

[BaileysforBreakfast]

Along with 21 other constituencies, we have a candidate standing as an 'Independent'. She is standing on behalf of 'Vote Life'. Vote Life's webpage clearly states it is "not a political party but a collective banner under which independent candidates can stand. We work with them to ensure they maximise the educational opportunities of the electoral system in advocating for pro-life laws and policy." This seems like a very cynical way to spread propaganda. They have no manifesto as yet (surprise!), but seem to be using this as an opportunity to distribute their graphic leaflets to households in 22 constituencies. AIBU to think the electoral system should not be so easily exploited to allow non-political parties to disseminate anti abortion literature and that only genuine political parties with published manifestos should be allowed to stand? Even the Monster Raving Loony Party has a manifesto and policy proposals.
Please be aware if you live in one of the constituencies, as this very graphic leaflet may be landing on your doorsteps soon. Info about where candidates are standing are on their website.

They wouldn't be the first candidates to stand on a single issue. And questions about abortion and assisted dying have been asked at both local hustings events I attended last week so candidates are expected to have an opinion on this.

It's fine for parties to have a view on abortion (or candidates). My issue is that this is NOT a political party and that they are openly exploiting the election system to distribute propaganda.

I think it would be extremely wrong to require candidates to be members of a party. Anyone should be able to stand. It's up to the voters to decide who they want to elect.

This has control witten over it, the world is not perfect and can't just go by 'I don't like this so it needs to banned'

Sorry but you are very unreasonable. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed that's democracy and just because its an uncomfortable thing doesn't mean they aren't allowed there views and while the literature may be graphic doesn't mean the photos are untrue .it is ending the life of a child plain and simple .I am all for pro choice very much so but let's not kid ourselves what it is .

Sorry, just because it's an issue you hold different views on is not a sufficiently good reason to ban them standing.

Are there rules about leafleting, aside from littering laws? We get all sorts, much of it from causes we will never support.

I don't think there are rules about leaflets, which is what made me wonder why they were doing this under the guise of electioneering, rather than spreading their message through more 'normal' means.

They are paying for the privilege. £1000 deposit, refundable only if you get more than a certain number of votes, which they are unlikely to do (I hope). They won't get much sympathy by telling the electorate that unborn people are more important than the NHS, cost of living, housing, environment and all the other important issues facing the UK.

You say you're pro choice, but also say "ending the life of a child" rather than a foetus. You also claim the photos are 'true' but this is not borne out by other sources. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/22/opinion/early-abortion.html for example...

So, there's an independent candidate, with views with which you disagree, who is sending a leaflet out explaining their policy and why you should (in their view) vote for them. They have used the help of an organisation to produce the leaflet.

I'm not sure what part of this you have an issue with. If you disagree, don't vote for them.

They don't have a policy though. It's just anti-choice views.

One of their aims is 'support for women with challenging pregnancies' what support? How will it be delivered and funded?

They probably want to do away with the legal right to abortion, in any circumstances, but don't mention that, instead mentioning late abortions for "disabilities" (their ironic quote marks), which are a miniscule number of abortions.

They should not be campaigning without having a detailed manifesto.

I also think the leaflet photos are going to distress some people who have experienced a loss.

The issue I have is that they clearly state they are not a political party, despite standing 22 candidates. Shouldn't it be a minimal expectation that candidates have policy proposals and manifestos rather than using an election as an opportunity to disseminate inaccurate graphic information?

I think there might be a case to complain about the banner, which imo uses photos of MP's in a misleading way, and links them to a campaign they may not support.

''It’s sometimes difficult to work out if an ad is about a political issue, run by government, or part of an election campaign. If in doubt, the ASA recommends that you contact the political party responsible in the first instance to tell them what you think.''
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/voting-and-elections/campaigning-your-vote/claims-made-campaign-material

HateCleaning - this is exactly my (obviously badly expressed) point. No policies. No manifesto. Standing for election...
I'm glad someone else acknowledges how distressing these leaflets could be.

They also have a fake alleged abortion video on their site. The first one - a cervix outside the woman's body on her thighs FFS

I think I might be in the same constituency as you.

YABU. Aside from the fact that it's their democtratic right, I am absolutely fine with "one issue" candidates, when in their eyes the issue is absolutely pressing and urgent. Many pro-life campaigners sincerely believe that abortion is a genocide of the most vulnerable. Whether or not they are right is irrelevent - they have come to this conclusion and hold to it sincerely, therefore they have a moral imperative and right to make a stand.

To me it's the same as independent environmental candidates. They sincerely believe that the environment is the most urgent issue, and we must address this before anything else. Many of them hold virtually no views on other issues, because they hold the environment to be of first importance.

Who is going to police all this? How will it be enforced?

Anyone can stand for parliament under any platform - as an independent or with a political party - as it should be as that is what democracy looks like. If you think they are breaking the law, contact the Electoral Commission.

Like the overwhelming majority of people in the UK and almost all the political parties (except maybe a couple in NI) I'm pro-choice - in fact, I'm pro-abortion (as soon as possible as late necessary) but people who disagree me with me have a right to make their case.

I don't think 'distressing' is reasonable grounds for opposing their right to stand and campaign. There are a lot of distressing issues in politics - climate, Gaza, Putin, immigration. Politics is a serious and upsetting business that needs adults who can be objective and put their own feelings to the side. You can request 'no leaflets, no canvassers on your own postbox.

TheInebriati (great user name). I was also baffled by the use of pictures of other party leaders, particularly as the group claims not to be a political party.
I'm no fan of the Tories, but it's very disingenuous to say Conservatives "forced" abortion onto Northern Ireland. They also neglect to acknowledge that there is still inadequate provision there.

Do you think that people should be banned from disseminating graphic images and information on other topics? E.g. wars, genocides, slavery.

Not necessarily but I would expect any information, graphic or otherwise, to have some basis in truth.

Can you quote and give some examples of information they're showing which is fabricated?

They look like a bonkers, single issue pressure group. I wonder who's funding them?

We have a similar bunch of numpties in Scotland, I think they are called the Family Party or similar. Saw their party political broadcast, they are anti-abortion, no sex education, against same sex marriage, believe a woman's place is in the home.

They won't get any MPs but are allowed airtime to spread their intolerance.

Where is their funding coming from? Most of these organisations are funded from the US. That would be illegal.