Protest sign: "Scientology Forces Abortions" (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I read a little article the other day. In summary, a bunch of pro-abortion supporters have planned a protest to protest against a protest in protest against abortions.
Maybe read it a couple of times.
Anyway, this made me think.
Firstly, it doesn’t need me to make up a silly sentence to show that the protest seems a bit daft – they’re literally protesting against a protest. That’s like unions striking in protest against the unions who are striking. Pro-life campaigners protest because they disagree that abortions should happen so easily, whereas these guys seem to be protesting because they disagree with the pro-lifers’ opinion…if that’s a sensible course of action we might as well all spend every day protesting!
Secondly, what they’re protesting against seems silly. At the top of the article there’s a picture, and the caption quotes someone they clearly disagree with; MP Nadine Dorris has proposed that 13-16 year-olds should be taught the:
benefits of abstinence from sexual activity.
Now, please feel free to accuse me of being a prood, but what’s wrong with that? At the age of 13-16 sex is illegal, so teaching the benefits of not breaking the law would seem to me to be a sensible idea! It’s like teaching under-18s that not drinking alcohol has benefits. Yes, drinking alcohol can be an enjoyable activity, as can sex, and neither MP Dorris nor me is suggesting that alcohol or sex should be banned from society, but that doesn’t seem to be that controversial to me.
Well, anyway, if you fancy protesting against a protest, or against teaching people that keeping the law can be a good idea, then be my guest.
I won’t be joining you.