Think about it: prayer, an interior orientation of the mind to God; not even any audible speech is necessary to commit a heinous, treasonous act.
The specific case I know you're talking about is the woman who was in an exclusion zone that was in place to stop people harassing women entering an abortion clinic.
If she doesn't want "praying silently in her head" to be interpreted as harassment, maybe she should think about the behaviour she and her cohorts have engaged in that might have lead to this interpretation.
Sure, you can disagree with that as well, but she wasn't arrested for praying. She was arrested for intimidation and harassment. She doesn't get a special pass just because of the method.
It’s like if you had drugs in your pocket while harassing someone. They’re separate offenses.
This video explains the situation and references the original police and court records.
> the council is satisfied on reasonable grounds that there are a number of activities, carried out or are likely to be carried out in a public space namely the area within and surrounding Station Road, Birmingham, B30, shown outlined on the map attached ( the restricted area) that have had, or are likely to have, a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality. The effect or likely effect of these activities is of a persistent or continuing nature such as to make these activities unreasonable, and justifies the restrictions imposed in this order
[...]
> The Activities prohibited by the Order are:
> i Protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means. This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling,
> ii Interfering, or attempting to interfere, whether verbally or physically, with a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff,
> iii Intimidating or harassing, or attempting to intimidate or harass, a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or a member of staff,
> iv Recording or photographing a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff or
> v Displaying any text or images relating directly or indirectly to the termination of pregnancy.
She was protesting. It's a persistent pattern of behaviour. It's harassment.
In that case the woman was arrested for silently praying by herself. Her prayer was to stop the abortion clinic, but it was silent and in her own head.
I understand that the intent of the law is to ban prayer near an abortion clinic to stop harassment, but they have banned prayer.
(I support everything else in that order, I’m pro choice. I just don’t think we should ban prayer)
Edit, these pictures show that "silently praying" is not an unobtrusive as it sounds:
https://i2-prod.birminghammail.co.uk/incoming/article2379330...
https://i2-prod.birminghammail.co.uk/incoming/article2379331...
Has the UK banned some prayer and arrested at least one person for thought crime?
The answer to both of those questions is yes.
It’s not about whether she would have been convicted for something else anyway.
Do you think it is right that silent prayer was banned in this case?
This whole discussion started because people from other countries didn’t believe that the UK would ban silent prayer.
Also pretty sure I could get arrested in that area by kneeling on the pavement and meditating, rather than praying. I don't think "but I was meditating" would cut it as a defence, either, because what's banned is "anything that looks like protest, here are some examples".
I think it's the kneeling she got arrested for, which happens to be coded as "prayer" in our culture. In other words, she was arrested for protesting.
This is true in the same sense that the UK has also banned breathing, because murdering people is illegal and some people happen to be breathing whilst doing their murdering.
The context matters.