Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.
Torpedo Testing
Posted on 02/05/2009 8:32:44 AM PST by Pyro7480
STRASBOURG, February 4, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the Portuguese government broke the law in preventing the Dutch abortion boat from landing when it attempted to enter Portuguese territory in 2004, when abortion was against the law. Abortionist and foundress of the "Women on Waves" project, Rebecca Gomperts, said she is delighted with the finding. "We shall use the judgment for new campaigns outside Europe," she said.
In 2004, the abortion ship was denied access to Portuguese ports by politicians and the courts. Portuguese officials ordered two naval vessels out to ensure that it would not enter Portugal's sovereign waters. At that time, Portugal had some of the strongest legal protections for unborn children anywhere in Europe.
The Court unanimously decided that there was a breach of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The court ruled that in seeking to prevent disorder and protect public health, the Portuguese authorities could have resorted to other means that were less restrictive of "Women on Waves'' human rights. Article 10 is the section of the Convention dealing with "expression".
The Women on Waves organization boasts that the purpose of the project is to have the ship "circumvent domestic abortion laws" by offering abortion drugs free of charge. In 2007, however, a report published by the Times of Malta said that the boat's license restricts abortion activity to countries where a "cooperation agreement has been reached with a regional hospital in the country of whose shores the facility is operating."
In June 1998 a law that decriminalized abortion during the first ten weeks of pregnancy, proposed by the Portuguese Communist party, was defeated in the country's first national referendum. In 2007, after the election of a socialist government, although a second referendum failed to pass a similar measure, a new law was approved that allows abortion on demand up to the tenth week of pregnancy.
In 2003 the ship was greeted in Poland with a hail of eggs, red paint and shouts condemning the abortionists aboard as "murderers" and "Gestapo". Polish customs officials searched the boat looking for abortion pills which are illegal in Poland.
Some ships need to sink.
Catholic and pro-life ping!
Who needs sovereignty? Doesn’t everyone long to be governed by people faraway who speak a different language? No?
Outside Europe, huh?
I hope that there are knowledegeable people on this thread who can answer a few obvious questions:
Broke what law, specifically?
Whose law is it?
Sovereign countries actually signed away their sovereignty to an administrative body exactly where?
What is the enforcement mechanism of the "court" which issued this decision? Is it a self appointed group of lunatics in Belgium again?
Can the "law" or the applicable agreement be viewed somewhere and, if there are voluntary signatories, are they free to withdraw without cause?
So many questions, so many moonbats celebrating...
I mean beyond the fact that a death ship is circulating the globe in search of children to kill and the abortionist and foundress is delighted with the finding.
Where are the Somali pirates when you need them?
You can't get more oxymoronic than that - we need to recognise the killing of innocent, defenseless humans as a human rights issue.
Some country should fire on this murder ship.
As are most things "international," this subject is a can of worms, subject to claims and assumptions not supported by the facts.
Let's start with the membership of this delusional "world" body. Only members of the 47-member Council of Europe are subject to its jurisdiction. So much for cruising the world for countries to harrass.
Secondly, Members are presumably free to withdraw membership. I have no intention of trying to unravel its rules and contradictions; I have enough trouble (as does Tom Daschle) with the US IRS code...
Anyone masochistic enough to want to understand this group (which does not have an standing army to enforce its findings) can start here:
A nice lawyerly way of saying that the rights of the folks on the death ship to "express" themselves, trump Portugal's right to determine which vessels enter its waters. They've used a kind of "free speech" loophole, here. They're effectively saying that Portugal has stymied the supposed rights to "free speech" of the ladies on the death ship.
Ridiculous, really but we know how the game is played by now, don't we?
Let's say I wanted to sail a ship into Dutch or Belgian territorial waters which broadcast the message that homosexual acts were offensive to God. How far would that ship get, I wonder? If it wasn't sunk on sight, I think I'm safe in saying that it would receive zero help from the European Court of Human Rights. In fact, I'm willing to bet that they'd actually prosecute me for hate speech. You see, rights of ....."expression" only extend so far in today's Europe. They're bestowed upon abortionists but not Christians.
I say let the Moslems have at it. Let them overrun this European cess pit and lynch every liberal, abortion-peddling, homosexuality-promoting secular humanist they can find. Most of the remaining Christians will already have been forced into exile by that stage, anyway.
Now that’s an idea!!
I am not trying to understand them and don’t give a hoot about some international organization.
The fact that such a ship exists is enough to send chills down my spine. I will sleep better if the ship sinks with all aboard by natural forces, unnatural force, mechanical failure or mysterious circumstances.
I would qualify my statement to say I hope that the third county nationals (or others that crew the ship and have no idea what evil purpose they are supporting)could be rescued.
FWIW
My U.S. employer is a fanatic on diversity and rights of gays,etc.But ,I have noticed consistently that Americans holding the traditional views of Christianity do more work and cause less trouble.
Loose lips sink ships!
whatever happened to national soveriegnty?? oh right, national socialism
Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
