let me get this straight, hospital cuts up live children and throws them in the dumpster and that's all well and good and legal... but sending them pictures of their handywork to remind them of it is ILLEGAL???
Posted on 05/09/2006 4:59:12 PM PDT by wagglebee
NORFOLK, England, May 9, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A man who sent graphic pictures of mutilated and aborted babies to staff and officials at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in King’s Lynn was jailed for a month, given a five-year anti-social behaviour order, and threatened with five years incarceration if he disobeys the order. Atkinson was charged with “sending malicious communications” to the hospital.
74-year-old Edward Atkinson told the judge, “Then you may as well lock me up and throw away the key,” reported the Eastern Daily Press. During the hearing, he said, “Since 1968, seven million unborn babies have been brutally and callously murdered with the full connivance of the state.”
The feisty Mr. Atkinson sent the photos and a video of a child being aborted to hospital chief executive Ruth May who described them as “offensive, horrendous and absolutely disgusting.”
Ms. May said she received an envelope of “very upsetting and offensive literature” and became tearful when she told the Press, “It is upsetting for everyone. I believe people who work for the NHS, and particularly at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, are passionate about providing excellent care for their patients.”
Since the court case, Mr. Atkinson has been removed from the hospital’s wait list for an evaluation for hip surgery and has been banned from anything other than life-saving treatment as a punishment for his activism. A hospital spokesman said he had broken its “zero tolerance” policy by ignoring its warnings to stop. Hospital staff said they were upset and “quite disturbed’ by the images.
The hospital said, “We exercised our right to decline treatment for anything other than life-threatening conditions.”
The pro-life advocates at the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform (CCBR) – an organization that pioneered in Canada the public display of graphic images of abortion to make the case for life – were “appalled” at the conviction and the hospital’s denial of care.
“This is one of the most disturbing cases of intolerance for the pro-life perspective I have ever heard,” said CCBR executive director Stephanie Gray. “To disagree with or be horrified by the pro-life perspective is one thing, but to put an elderly man in jail and to deny him health care is outrageous.”
Gray added, “In a society that kills the most weak and vulnerable lf human beings, I guess we shouldn’t be surprised.”
Gray said the pictures show the horrors of abortion to a culture that does not want to know. “People hold a double standard about abortion. They’re fine with graphic images of the Ethiopian famine or Abu Ghraib prison, but if it’s closer to home then they respond with hostility.”
James Dowson, the national co-ordinator of the UK Life League, told The Scotsman, “It is ridiculous. I think it is completely unfair. They are refusing to treat him. Would they refuse a murderer or a paedophile? He has paid his taxes, he is entitled to that treatment, who are they to withhold it from him?”
Atkinson, who refused to give the oath at the hearing until a Roman Catholic Bible was obtained, said the purpose of sending the images had been “to educate.”
“I accept that the documentation was highly distressing. It’s horrendous, monstrous and sickening but it represents the truth of what is going on in our world. Everyone in this courtroom knows that abortion is murder and no one has the guts to say it.”
Atkinson was found guilty on three counts of sending malicious communication to the hospital, and jailed for 28 days concurrently on the charges, with an additional 14 days for failing to pay a £650 fine, received for a similar offence in 2002. He was also told £500 would be deducted from his pension to cover court costs.
See Centre for Bioethical Reform website:
http://ccbrinfo.ca/index.html
The NHS in the UK has been a nightmare. We see stories such as the one today claiming that the US has a higher infant mortality rate or the one yesterday claiming that Europeans are healthier than Americans, and I believe those studies (even if they are accurate) ignore basic facts in order to advance an agenda of a national healthcare system.
But seldom do we see articles about the true horrors taking place under the NHS.
let me get this straight, hospital cuts up live children and throws them in the dumpster and that's all well and good and legal... but sending them pictures of their handywork to remind them of it is ILLEGAL???
I believe the studies are plainly deceptive. The thing that's driving up the infant mortality rates in the U.S. are the illegals pouring across our border and squeezing out pups after nine months of prenatal neglect in Mexico. Since we can't demand their proof of citizenship, the hospitals have to put them into the statistics pool as "U.S. Citizen." And then the liberals screech that our nation needs socialized medicine to "make it all better."
It's a liberal's dream: they've made an immoral action legal and a moral action illegal. Unless drastic measures are taken now, the U.S. will be in an identical state of moral degradation in 40 years...probably less.
Why am I not suprised at that type of thinking?
definitely through the looking glass my friend... and through a glass darkly at that.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
WOW!
Just when you think you have seen everything liberals can dish out, here comes a new twist.
Telling the truth is a crime because it hurt peoples' feelings.
What's next?
Since the court case, Mr. Atkinson has been removed from the hospital’s wait list for an evaluation for hip surgery and has been banned from anything other than life-saving treatment as a punishment for his activism. A hospital spokesman said he had broken its “zero tolerance” policy by ignoring its warnings to stop. Hospital staff said they were upset and “quite disturbed’ by the images.
I don't know about you all, but I think that's creepy as hell. People just don't realize how much power the govenrment gets with socialized health care.
Did you upset the powers that be? Oh, you're in horrible pain and need back surgery? Aw, you have cancer? Too bad!
To you people running down W, I want you all to remember this when you vote for Hitlery in 2008.
*grumble*
Sorry for a thread hijacking, I've just had it up to here with that nonsense.
He should go to the US embassy and ask to be shipped to Gitmo, since they'd have to fix his hip if he went there. :)
We ought to make this a full scale, link-on-FR's-front-page FReeping. Hard core.
I hope you don't mind me pinging you, Mr. R. I think this would be a excellent cause for us to throw our combined might at. :)
And the government is now denyng him helthcare because of his thoughtcrime
Rudy Guiliani supported Hillarycare didn't he?
Its not like HillaryCare would ever deny healthcare over a thoughtcrime is it?
Not for the youngest ones.
Do other people go to jail for sending non-threatening unwanted mail?
Are there any British Freepers who can better explain what has happened in this case? Does this man have any other reasonable options for health care, or has he really been denied all but lifesaving treatment? It seems hard to believe.
Hard, but not impossible to believe. Milton Friedman described a scenario like this in one of his books, where free speech could be squelched by state control of the printing industry. When I first read it I just took it as a hypothetical, somewhat farfetched example, but I guess I was quite wrong.
For all the complaints about our medical system, as long as you have the money, you can get treatment. Not everyone has money, but they can get insurance or charity. I wonder what other options you have in a nationalized health system if the government decides you don't deserve treatment.
This thread is over a month old. Just a note...
But, no, I don't think he should be jailed. But I still don't sympathize with him becuase of his rudeness and spamming. So, I disagree with the verdict but don't have much symapthy for him.
BTW- They seem to have only taken him off the one hospital. Not sure though. I don't think they were trying to censor him. It was just that he kept ignoring their requests and broke their policy. If a person continually sent pictures of the dead soldiers to members of Parliament and ignoring their requests, he'd probably get similar treatment. I'm not supporting their decision; just think it isn't as unfair as others do.
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.