The action comes amid increasing efforts by local governments across Britain to stifle pro-life speech. Earlier this month, the High Court of England and Wales upheld a ban on prayer vigils near an abortion clinic in west London.
Lambeth’s removal of the Life stall followed a tweet by local councilor Ed Davie, alleging that Life “wasn’t officially allowed” to be there, was “not on the approved list of exhibitors,” and that he would “make sure” they were not permitted to remain through Sunday.
In a subsequent tweet, Davie further alleged that Life had used “inaccurate information” in their application to exhibit at the show. Lambeth Council’s official Twitter account repeated that allegation later that day.
Life, which offers information and support to women in crisis pregnancies, providing accommodation for homeless pregnant women, said they explicitly described themselves as “a pro-life charity” in their application. Their submission to Lambeth Council included pictures of similar stalls they had run at past events. Their application was submitted in January 2018, and approved by the council in April.
“Nothing on our stall was offensive,” said Anne Scanlan, Life’s Director of Education. “There were lifelike fetal models and pictures of the unborn baby at different gestational stages which can be seen on any pregnancy website, including the National Health Service.”
Free speech has come under increasing pressure in the United Kingdom. National “hate speech” laws have made the public discussion of issues like gay marriage, the transgender movement, and even tradition religious beliefs a potential criminal offense. Pro-life advocates have voiced concern that opposition to abortion, or even speaking in favor of life, is being treated as outside of acceptable public discourse.
Actions like those taken by local governments in Lambeth and Ealing effectively brand pro-life views as anti-social and their expression harassment, pro-life advocates say. Should courts continue to uphold those decisions, many fear the creeping criminalization of opposition to abortion.
“At a time when there is a clamor for free speech and allowing dissenting voices to be heard, we have a local council aggressively shutting down the voice of pro-lifers trying to reach out to vulnerable women in crisis and educating people about life in the womb,” continued Scanlan.
“It is now routine, and apparently acceptable, for anyone who dares to express any view that is not pro-abortion, to risk coming under vociferous and sustained attack for doing so.”
“Lambeth Council reportedly said we are against their values. We are curious to know what these values are and look forward to hearing a fuller and more detailed explanation, and hopefully an apology from the council for the distress caused to our Life staff and volunteers.”
U.K. Catholic journalist and pro-life advocate Caroline Farrow summed up the cumulative effects of the recent moves by Ealing and Lambeth for CNA.
“Defending the removal of the stall on Twitter, councillor Ed Davie made an explicit reference to the introduction of buffer zones in Ealing, and the supposed harassment of women proving, how this is being leveraged to criminalise any expression of pro-life views.”
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
At Catholic News Agency, our team is committed to reporting the truth with courage, integrity, and fidelity to our faith. We provide news about the Church and the world, as seen through the teachings of the Catholic Church. When you subscribe to the CNA UPDATE, we'll send you a daily email with links to the news you need and, occasionally, breaking news.
As part of this free service you may receive occasional offers from us at EWTN News and EWTN. We won't rent or sell your information, and you can unsubscribe at any time.
“In short, the decision of Ealing Council is being leveraged to accuse any pro-life view of constituting hate-speech and harassment. It has validated the bullying bureaucrats.”
Life has written to Councilor Davie and the Lambeth Council asking for an explanation of their removal from the country show. They are also seeking a public apology for the claim that they misrepresented themselves in the application process and are seeking legal advice on the matter.