US anti-abortion group planning series of protests outside Scottish hospital
A US anti-abortion group is planning a series of protests outside a hospital in Scotland despite a law banning such demonstrations.
According to its website, 40 Days For Life will hold 'vigils' outside the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow from March 5 until April 13.
A law passed last year by the Scottish Parliament outlawed anti-abortion activists from protesting within 200 metres of abortion clinics.
On Wednesday, a 74-year-old woman became the first person to be arrested under the legislation.
The protests that have taken place in Glasgow today have been utterly shameful.
I am grateful to Police Scotland for acting quickly.
Everybody deserves access to healthcare without harassment.
That is why I introduced my Act, and why these disgraceful protests are now illegal. pic.twitter.com/k2AdgCb2cP
— Gillian Mackay MSP (@GillianMacMSP) February 19, 2025
Hardgate Road, just outside the hospital, had been a frequent target for anti-abortion protesters before the Safe Access Zones Act was passed by MSPs.
Despite Wednesday's arrest, the 40 Days For Life group still has the area marked as part of its global campaign to protest against abortion, which includes hundreds of locations around the world.
The group, which began in Texas, describes itself as 'an internationally co-ordinated 40-day campaign that aims to end abortion locally through prayer and fasting, community outreach, and a peaceful all-day vigil in front of abortion businesses'.
Gillian Mackay MSP, who brought forward the buffer zones legislation, warned the group against further demonstrations.
'I urge 40 Days and anyone else who is planning to protest in a safe access zone to think again, as they will be stopped and there will be consequences,' she said.
'The protests that have taken place outside Queen Elizabeth and other hospitals have been utterly shameful and have no place in a modern or progressive Scotland. That is why I introduced my Act, and why they are now illegal.
'These zones were introduced to stop the intimidation and obstruction of people accessing abortion services, including the shameful scenes of protest groups waving graphic banners and in some cases using megaphones and loudspeakers to abuse service users and staff.
'We know the awful impact that these protests have had. Some of the testimonies from women who have had to endure them have been heartbreaking. Why would anyone want to add to that hurt by spreading even more fear and anxiety?'
The development comes days after US Vice-President JD Vance criticised Scotland's buffer zones.
Speaking at a security conference in Munich, Donald Trump's deputy said: 'Just a few months ago the Scottish Government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called safe access zones, warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law.
'The Government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thought crime. In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat.'
First Minister John Swinney dismissed his comments, saying: 'JD Vance is just wrong and that issue was extensively discussed during the passage of the Bill. On the letter issued to households, his claims were wrong about that letter as well, and no such point was put to residents whatsoever on private prayer.'
Ms Mackay added: 'With JD Vance and his extreme supporters spreading toxic misinformation about Scotland, it is vital that we stand up for reproductive rights and against those who are working to undermine them.
'Abortion rights are human rights, and I know that the people of Scotland stand firmly against the anti-choice protests of US-backed campaign groups like 40 Days.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
UK lawmakers approve assisted-dying law
Advertisement 'I do not underestimate the significance of this day,' Kim Leadbeater, a Labour Party lawmaker and main champion of the bill, said Friday as she opened the debate. 'This is not a choice for living and dying. It is a choice for terminally ill people about how they die.' While assisted dying is illegal in most countries, a growing number of nations and jurisdictions have adopted legislation or are considering it. In England and Wales, assisting a death remains illegal and punishable by up to 14 years in prison. A poll published this week found that 73 percent of Britons backed the assisted-dying bill. While lawmakers voted in favor of the bill in November, at an earlier stage in the legislative process, uncertainty lingered ahead of Friday's vote. Hundreds of demonstrators on both sides gathered outside Parliament. Some carried placards that read, 'Let Us Choose.' Others held signs saying, 'Don't make doctors killers.' Advertisement Many of those who spoke during the debate shared personal stories. Mark Garnier, a Conservative Party politician, spoke about witnessing the dying days of his mother, who had pancreatic cancer and endured a 'huge amount of pain.' Garnier compared her ordeal to that of a constituent who also had pancreatic cancer but went through a state-provided assisted-dying program in Spain that made her 'suffering much less.' Josh Babarinde, a Liberal Democrat, read out a letter from a constituent traumatized by the death of her partner, who struggled to breathe, was incontinent, and repeatedly asked for her help to end his life. He then 'stuffed yards of his top sheet into his mouth' in an attempt to die,' Babarinde said, adding: 'This could have been avoided with an assisted-dying' law. Support for the measure ebbed in recent months, with a handful of politicians saying that they were going to switch their vote due to concerns about inadequate safeguards or insufficient end-of-life care. Steve Darling, a Liberal Democrat, told The Washington Post that while he was 'sympathetic' to the bill, he had changed his view because of 'inadequate' palliative care funding, which in Britain depends heavily on charitable donations. 'People might think, 'I could bite the bullet and get out of this situation because I'm not receiving a service that gives me a decent quality of life toward the end,'' Darling said. Others who said they agreed with the principle of letting people choose to die but could not back the bill included Labour member Vicky Foxcroft, who cited her work with disabled people. 'They want us as parliamentarians to assist them to live, not to die,' Foxcroft told Parliament. Advertisement The issue remains divisive even within parties. Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, whose departments will each be impacted if the change becomes law, both opposed the bill. Prime Minister Keir Starmer made it clear that he supports the measure, citing his experience as the country's former chief prosecutor. Over the past two decades, more than 3,900 Britons have ended their lives with the Switzerland-based organization Dignitas. A few people who helped them were investigated or arrested. The vote Friday was a free vote, meaning that lawmakers could decide based on their own conscience rather than along party lines. It was the second time this week that Parliament held a free vote, which is often allowed on issues of ethics or conscience. Earlier this week, lawmakers voted in favor of decriminalizing abortion in England and Wales. One major revision to the bill in recent months was to eliminate the need for approval from a high court judge. No other country or jurisdiction with legalized assisted dying has that kind of stringent judicial oversight, and it was initially sold to some wavering lawmakers as a reason to back the bill. That requirement was dropped in favor of a three-person expert panel — a lawyer, social worker, and psychiatrist — that will oversee applications. Leadbeater said this would make the bill stronger, as members of the panel would have more relevant expertise and would be better able to spot red flags. Spain uses a similar kind of expert panel. Some professional bodies, such as the Royal College of Psychiatrists, remain neutral on the principle of assisted dying but opposed the legislation as written. Their concerns included the shortage of qualified staff for the expert panels. Advertisement The government's own 'impact assessment' found that the law could lead to 7,500 requests a year within a decade. Some campaigners had hoped for greater eligibility, to include patients experiencing unbearable suffering with no prospect of improvement, or allowing a doctor to administer a lethal cocktail of drugs. This bill allows assisted dying only for terminally ill patients who can administer the medication themselves. Speaking in Parliament, Peter Prinsley, a Labour lawmaker, said that 'as a young doctor, I found the measures that we're debating today completely unconscionable.' However, he added, 'now that I'm an old doctor, I feel sure this is an essential change.' 'We are not dealing with life or death, rather death or death,' Prinsley said. 'And fundamental to that is surely choice. Who are we to deny that to the dying?'
Bloomberg
2 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Government Contractors Recruit Fewer Prospects
Thousands of private government consultants laid off during the Trump administration's cost-cutting crusade are increasingly flooding a shrinking labor market. Bloomberg's Rachel Phua has more on the story. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Two Middle East-related protests to be held in central London on Saturday
Protesters are set to rally at two high-profile demonstrations in central London on Saturday over flaring conflicts in the Middle East, the Metropolitan Police said. A protest organised by groups under the Palestine Coalition banner will gather in Russell Square from 12pm, before marching to Whitehall via Aldwych and the Strand for an assembly outside Downing Street. Former Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf, former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and musician Paloma Faith are among those set to give speeches at the assembly. Meanwhile, a static counter-protest organised by pro-Israeli group Stop The Hate will be held at the same time just north of Waterloo Bridge at the junction with the Strand. The group said it would meet at the location from 12.30pm onwards. Police have set out conditions for the first protest under the Public Order Act which demands that any person taking part in the procession must remain within Russell Square ahead of the protest and must not deviate from its specified route. Demonstrators must then stay in a specified part of Whitehall for the assembly, which must finish by 5.30pm, the force said. The Palestine Coalition is comprised of a number of different groups, including the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) and Stop The War. Stop The War said in an advertisement for the event on its website: 'Israel's attacks on Gaza and the West Bank are intensifying. Their starvation policy continues. And now Israel attacks on Iran seem intended to lead us into a full-scale war in the Middle East. 'The UK Government has at last accepted that Israel's actions in Gaza are unconscionable. Now they must act – words are not enough.' Discussions are ongoing regarding possible conditions for the Stop The Hate protest, the Met said. In a post on X, Stop The Hate said: 'Our families in Israel are under attack: standing bravely in the face of threats and ballistic missiles, whilst the people of Iran are bravely facing down their totalitarian government — now it's our turn to stand proudly in solidarity with them.' The demonstrations come after reports on Friday that the Home Secretary will ban Palestine Action after the group vandalised two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Yvette Cooper has decided to proscribe the group, making it a criminal offence to belong to or support Palestine Action, after footage posted online showed two people inside the RAF base, with one appearing to spray paint into an aircraft's jet engine. PSC described the move on social media as 'outrageous', while the Campaign Against Antisemitism welcomed the news, saying: 'Nobody should be surprised that those who vandalised Jewish premises with impunity have now been emboldened to sabotage RAF jets.'
