Britain's thought police have to apologize for arresting woman for silent prayer outside abortion clinic; Britain releasing criminals from jails to make room for protesters

 

Woman arrested for silent prayer outside abortion clinic wins £13k payout

Lord Frost: ‘It is incredible that people have been arrested for thought crime in modern Britain’

Charles Hymas, Home Affairs Editor19 August 2024 • 6:33am

A Christian charity volunteer has received a £13,000 payout and apology from police after she claimed her arrest for praying silently outside an abortion clinic was unjust and breached her human rights.

Campaigners including Lord Frost have hailed it as a major victory against censorship but warned that suggestions the Government may ban silent prayer outside abortion clinics would represent an attack on not only free speech but also free thought.

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce issued a claim against West Midlands Police for two wrongful arrests and false imprisonments, for assault and battery in relation to an intrusive search and for a breach of her human rights.

She was first arrested in November 2022 for silently praying in a “buffer zone” in streets imposed by local authorities around an abortion clinic in the Kings Norton area of Birmingham.

The Public Spaces Protection Order banned all expressions of “approval or disapproval with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means” within a large vicinity of the clinic.

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce at Birmingham Magistrates' Court where she was accused of protesting outside an abortion clinic Credit: JACOB KING/PA ARCHIVE

Campaigners said Ms Vaughan-Spruce was searched by police including through her hair, arrested, charged and prosecuted – even though she had prayed imperceptibly and not expressed any opinion.

In February 2023, Ms Vaughan-Spruce, was acquitted of all charges at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court after the prosecution were unable to offer evidence to support the charge. ADF UK, a faith-based legal advocacy, supported her legal defence.

Weeks later, she was again arrested for silently praying on a public street within the “buffer zone”. Six police officers attended the scene, with one confirming to her: “You’ve said you’re engaging in prayer, which is the offence”.

A six-month long police investigation ended in charges being dropped and an apology being issued from police regarding the lengthy process.

But, apparently, not for the arrest in the first place. They apologized for taking so long to realize they should never have arrested her at all. Are the police so stupid as to not realize they have criminalized thinking?

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce at prayer Credit: ADF INTERNATIONAL

The case was closed shortly after Suella Braverman, the then home secretary, confirmed in an open letter to police that silent prayer is “not unlawful”. Ms Vaughan-Spruce has now received the £13,000 payout after issuing her claim against police.

She said: “Silent prayer is not a crime. Nobody should be arrested merely for the thoughts they have in their heads – yet this happened to me twice at the hands of the West Midlands Police, who explicitly told me that ‘prayer is an offence’.

“There is no place for Orwell’s Thought Police in 21st-century Britain, and thanks to legal support I received from ADF UK, I’m delighted that the settlement that I have received today acknowledges that.

“Yet despite this victory, I am deeply concerned that this violation could be repeated at the hands of other police forces. Our culture is shifting towards a clampdown on viewpoint diversity, with Christian thought and prayer increasingly under threat of censorship.”

As the government, police, and media become more and more godless every day, there is greater fear of offending people than there is of offending God. There will be Hell to pay for this madness!

Police arrest Isabel Vaughan-Spruce

Ministers are expected to review the draft guidance for police which said that “silent prayer” within 150 metres of a clinic or hospital that provides abortion services should not be considered an offence.

However, Lord Frost, a former Conservative Cabinet minister, said: “It is incredible that people have been arrested for thought crime in modern Britain. I am very glad Ms Vaughan-Spruce has received compensation for her unjust arrest for this so-called offence.

“But if a recent report is correct that the Government is considering formally criminalising silent prayer outside abortion centres, then there will be further such cases, and then not just freedom of speech but freedom of thought will be under threat. It is hard to imagine a more absurd and dangerous situation.

“It would be much better to stick to the sensible approach in the previous Home Secretary’s draft guidance, which proposed a much better balance between the various competing rights and interests. If the Government scraps it, then it will be clear to all that its commitment to civil liberties and fundamental freedoms is paper thin.”

Britain to detain suspects in police cells

amid a prison overcrowding crisis after riots

By Paul Godfrey

Aug. 19 (UPI) -- Britain implemented emergency measures on Monday to reduce pressure on prisons overflowing from people being sentenced for taking part in, or inciting, riots across England and Northern Ireland at the beginning of the month.

Under the so-called Operation Early Dawn, defendants in northern England who have been arrested by police but who have yet to appear in court will be detained in police station cells until a prison place becomes free -- but critically means delays as they cannot get their day in court unless space is available.

Defendants will only be summoned to a magistrates' court when a space in prison is ready for them.

This means court cases could be delayed, with people kept in police cells or released on bail while they await trial.

The scheme, which was also activated in May by the outgoing Conservative government of Rishi Sunak, will operate in parts of the midlands and the east as well.

The measures would help "manage the pressure felt in some parts of the country," said Prisons Minister Lord James Timpson.

However, Prison Governors' Association Vice President Mark Icke said because the prison system had been "lurching from crisis to crisis for some time" he was not convinced the measures would do much.

Of the more than 1,000 suspects the National Police Chiefs' Council says have been arrested for alleged involvement in violent unrest that broke out a day after three young girls were killed in a July 29 stabbing spree in Southport, at least 100 have already been sent to prison and another 300 have been remanded in custody.

The number of arrests are likely to increase significantly with authorities promising to pursue those involved for "as long as it takes." Along with the policy of refusing bail to many of those awaiting trial or sentencing, credited with deterring further outbreaks of unrest, the extra burden on the system is not expected to ease anytime soon.

Two weeks ago Justice Minister Heidi Alexander, who oversees the courts and legal services, announced 567 additional prison places due to come on stream at the end of August had been "brought forward."

The government had already put plans in place to temporarily reduce the proportion of a sentence most prisoners will serve announcing last month a cut from 50% to 40%, effective Sept. 10, prompted by prisons being at 99% capacity pretty much continuously since January.

Sex and domestic abuse offenders not included in plan

That scheme is expected to see about 5,500 prisoners released in September and October, earlier than they would have been. Sex and domestic abuse offenders and those serving sentences for terrorism and some violent crimes cannot benefit from the plan.

The Midland Circuit which represents almost 1,000 barristers practicing out of more than 100 chambers spread over a wide swath of the middle of England said the use of police cells was a temporary fix that did not address the underlying over-crowding issue.

"We recognize that the government is taking much-needed action, but this is just a sticking plaster for a long-term problem," said circuit leader Michelle Heeley KC.

"Prison cells are no places for criminals to be held, even in the short term, and the wider impact on the system as other cases are potentially pushed back will only add to greater pressure on an overloaded system."

Magistrates and prison guard representatives both expressed concerns about potential delays in the administration of justice in a timely fashion.

Prison Officers' Association National Chair Mark Fairhurtst told the BBC that the policy would lead to "justice delayed" for less serious offenders with the most serious cases being given priority.

Magistrates' Association Chief Executive Tom Franklin warned avoidable delays had negative impacts for all concerned and meant what capacity the legal system did have could not be deployed effectively.

"Every case that is delayed has real-life consequences for victims, witnesses and defendants -- and leads to magistrates and court staff sitting around waiting, rather than administering justice.

"That is a waste of resources, at a time when there are already large backlogs."

Mind-Bending Paradox - Russian Orthodox Church More Open to Abortion Than Russian Government - Correction

..

Correction: see comments below

Russian Orthodox Church has ‘soft & flexible’ stance on abortion & does not demand practice be made illegal, spokesman reveals

26 Dec 2020 12:33

By Jonny Tickle, RT

FILE PHOTO Vladimir Legoyda © Sputnik / Nina Zotina

The Russian Orthodox Church is not proposing a blanket ban on abortion and its official position is actually “more flexible” than a complete prohibition. That’s according to Vladimir Legoyda, the institution's main spokesperson.

Speaking on Saturday to RTVI, a New York-based Russian-language channel aimed at expats, Legoyda revealed that the Church is not entirely against the termination of pregnancy being legal.

“We are taking a softer and more flexible position in this case: we demand [abortion] be withdrawn from the compulsory health insurance fund,” he said. The Compulsory Medical Insurance Fund is a taxpayer-funded state program that guarantees the provision of free medical care for a wide range of illnesses.

Russia's religious debate around abortion hit the headlines in November, after Oleg Apolikhin, the chief fertility specialist at the Ministry of Health, suggested creating ‘abortion centers,’ that would be used exclusively for pregnancy terminations. Apolikhin expressed the opinion that terminating a pregnancy had become fashionable and instead wanted to change it into a “socially negative phenomenon.” The specialist also suggested removing abortion from the schedule of state-provided care.

His suggestion was knocked back by the ministry itself, which disagreed with both proposals. However, this idea has complete support from the Russian Orthodox Church, which also agrees with Apolikhin’s view that doctors should be able to refuse to perform an abortion.

“The Church has repeatedly said that doctors who, per their religious beliefs or internal convictions, do not want to perform abortion surgeries, should be able to not perform them,” Legoyda wrote on Telegram in November.

The leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, has previously called abortion a sinful practice, believing that terminating a pregnancy because of a discovered abnormality is “even criminal.”

In his opinion, abortion should not be an option just because an embryo “might not make a good football player, or a good lawyer, or a very strong and healthy person.”

'Cancel Culture' When it Comes to Inconvenient Truth in the Media

Fans rage at Hallmark after ‘Unplanned’ actress claims

film was cut from awards show

FILE PHOTO: Actress Ashley Bratcher and "Unplanned" co-stars accept a film award onstage during the 7th Annual K-LOVE Fan Awards at The Grand Ole Opry House in Nashville, Tennessee. ©  AFP / Getty Images North America / Terry Wyatt

Fans of the Abby Johnson biopic ‘Unplanned’ were aggravated when star Ashley Bratcher, who plays the main character in the movie, alleged that the Hallmark Drama Channel cut all references to the film out of the broadcast.

‘Unplanned’ is a Pure Flix feature that tells the true story of former Planned Parenthood staffer Abby Johnson, who became a pro-life advocate after she witnessed an abortion via sonogram, where she says she witnessed the baby struggle against the procedure.

“Outraged,” Bratcher wrote on Twitter. “Movieguide awards recently aired on @hallmarkdrama & @UnplannedMovie & I were nominated. We were the ONLY nominees who were not recognized. Hallmark has ERASED us from the show and refused to acknowledge us as nominees. This is completely UNACCEPTABLE.”

Ashley Bratcher
@_AshleyBratcher
Outraged. Movieguide awards recently aired on @hallmarkdrama & @UnplannedMovie & I were nominated. We were the ONLY nominees who were not recognized. Hallmark has ERASED us from the show and refused to acknowledge us as nominees. This is completely UNACCEPTABLE. @hallmarkchannel

video 0:37

The film was nominated in three categories at the Movieguide Awards, an annual event that awards movies based on Christian and family-friendly entertainment.

One Twitter user asked the actress if she and the film were “nominated and a part of the awards, but when it was aired, you were cut.”

Bratcher replied, “Yes. That’s exactly what happened. If you watch the televised show it’s like we don’t exist despite our 3 nominations and time on stage.”

As her tweet went viral, fans expressed both their support for the movie and outrage over the alleged omission.

“Hallmark you are losing your viewers day by day,” one wrote. “Not to accept nominations that were done, it's a shame and an outrage to all of us who think that Unplanned is a movie on a very important issue of our time. And the main character deserves to be recognized as any other nominee.”

“It's almost like there's a political agenda involved…” one Twitter follower replied.

JSchmalstieg
@texrdnec
Replying to @_AshleyBratcher and 3 others
it's almost like there's a political agenda involved...


Another agreed, “Done with Hallmark!!! You are still winners to us!!!”


Laurie Hoffman
@LaurieJazzysam
Replying to @_AshleyBratcher and 4 others
Done with Hallmark!!! You are still winners to us!!!👍🏻


One fan posted a link to Hallmark Drama's tweet announcing the Movieguide Awards, encouraging fans to “ask why the blackout?”


Woke Bob Butterbur
@ersatzkulak
Replying to @_AshleyBratcher and 3 others
Everyone should ask why the blackout in the replies to this tweethttps://twitter.com/HallmarkDrama/status/1231987704872787968?s=19 …


Hallmark Drama
@HallmarkDrama
Watch the 28th Annual Movieguide Awards tonight at 11pm/10c with host @jen_lilley and for a night filled with Hollywood charm as we celebrate some of your favorite movies on @HallmarkDrama!


Neither Hallmark or Movieguide has issued a comment on Bratcher's accusations.

Hallmark has positioned itself as a channel that promotes films and television shows focused on family-friendly content, garnering a large conservative following. However, the network came under fire after they agreed to run a Zola bridal registry ad featuring a same-sex kiss. At first, Hallmark agreed to pull the ad, but reinstated it, prompting a boycott. They were criticized again for refusing to air ads regarding ‘Unplanned’ during its theatrical run.

It would appear that Hallmark has been infiltrated and taken over by LGBTQ proponents, so they no longer celebrate family-friendly content, nor do they serve their primary audience. They, like much of the media, are now only interested in furthering LGBTQ interests, abolishing Christianity, and indoctrinating people into their #PCMadness culture.

I think there is probable cause for a lawsuit.

Northern Ireland Morality Lurches Hard Left - Whether It Wants To Or Not

Same-sex marriage, abortion now legal in Northern Ireland

By Clyde Hughes

Pro-life demonstrators stand outside the Supreme Court in Central London in 2018. New laws legalizing abortion and same-sex marriage started in Northern Ireland Tuesday. Photo by Will Oliver/EPA-EFE

(UPI) -- A last-ditch effort by the Democratic Unionist Party to block British government reforms on same-sex marriage and abortion failed Monday, allowing both to become legal in Northern Ireland for the first time on Tuesday.

The new laws, which went into effect at midnight, ended the practice of women from Northern Ireland traveling to England to get abortions. Activists said they expect the first same-sex marriage to happen there around Valentine's Day 2020.

"This is a hugely significant moment and the beginning of a new era for Northern Ireland, one in which we're free from oppressive laws that have policed our bodies and healthcare," Grainne Teggart, Amnesty International's Northern Ireland campaign manager, said in a statement.

"No longer will those experiencing crisis pregnancy, who need to access abortion, feel they need to conceal what they're going through. Finally, our human rights are being brought into the 21st century. This will end the suffering of so many people," Teggart continued.

Not to mention the lives of thousands of babies!

DUP leadership, though, vowed to keep fighting the laws. Party leader Arlene Foster said she will examine "every possible legal option" to stop the measures.

"Until this moment, until this day in Northern Ireland, the safest place for an unborn child was in the sanctuary of its mother's womb," Jim Allister of the Traditional Unionist Voice, which also supported blocking the measures. "Sadly (now) the most dangerous place for some unborn will be in the mother's womb because the wanton decision can be taken to kill them."

Sinn Fein Party deputy leader Michelle O'Neill, though, called the last-second effort to block the new laws "pointless."

"Sinn Fein welcomes the end of the denial of the right of our LGBT brothers and sisters to marry the person they love," O'Neill said. "Sinn Fein also welcomes the end of the archaic law criminalizing women."

No wonder the secular violence has settled down in Northern Ireland, very few people believe in God anymore, nor do they fear Him. That might seem like a good thing at first glance, but in the final analysis, it will be disastrous. Turning your back on God is always disastrous eventually.

60 Hospitals in Romania Won’t Do Abortions as More Doctors Refuse to Kill Babies

 Abortion backlash in Romania

And they haven't even seen 'Unplanned' yet

INTERNATIONAL   MICAIAH BILGER  

BUCHAREST, ROMANIA

Romania has one of the highest abortion rates in all of Europe, but a growing number of doctors in the country are refusing to abort unborn babies.

EU Observer reports 60 of the 189 hospitals in the country (about 30 percent) will not abort unborn babies because of their doctors’ moral or religious objections.

“The law does not oblige us to do this, as it is a service on request, and we can accept or not,” said Robert Danca, manager of Cuza Voda hospital.

Abortions are legal in Romania for any reason up to 14 weeks, without even required counseling or waiting periods, according to the report. While public hospitals must provide abortions by law, doctors may refuse under Romanian conscience protection laws.

Reporters with The Black Sea publication recently contacted all the public hospitals in the country to ask if they do abortions. The investigation found that 60 would not.

One doctor, Daniela Chiriac, told the news outlet that she quit doing abortions seven years ago at the Municipal Clinical Emergency Hospital in Timisoara because she now believes they are a sin.

“I thought that if I could avoid a sin, then I should do it,” she said. “There are many patients who ask me to recommend someone else and I refuse, because it is also a sin.”

According to the report:

Individual doctors in Romania have the right to refuse to perform abortions.

The 2016 professional code for medics outlines that any doctor can decline to provide services if it affects their professional independence or moral values, or contravenes their professional principles.

These “conscience-based refusal” laws are common in most European countries – but when every doctor in a hospital invokes them, women find their access to healthcare faces restrictions.

Human rights lawyer Iustina Ionescu argues that any woman refused an abortion by her local hospital could sue, drawing a distinction between individual doctors and the healthcare provided.

“The doctor might not be held responsible,” she says, “but ‘the unit’ is a service provider covered by the healthcare law, and does not have such an explicit provision. I would say it is illegal for the healthcare unit to refuse, but we would need [to bring] a case.”

Abortion activists are pushing to overturn conscience protections for these reasons. Some now argue that doctors should be forced to abort unborn babies, even if it goes against their religious or moral beliefs. Earlier this week in America, Democrats in Congress voted against several measures to strengthen conscience protections for medical workers who oppose the killing of unborn babies.

In Romania, some politicians are working to combat the high abortion rate with pregnancy support programs. According to the report, MP Matei-Adrian Dobrovie proposed providing state funding to pregnancy resource centers that provide support to mothers and babies. He said Romania has the second highest rate of abortions per live birth in the European Union.

“These centers exist in other countries, such as the United States, and in Romanian legislation they are not regulated,” Dobrovie said. “I proposed to the ministry of labour that these centers should be included and the occupation of assistant and counselor in the pregnancy crisis to be included in the social services.”

Bless you MP Debrovie. May the hearts of other legislators be so inclined.

Abortions Banned in Russian City for 1 Day in Memory of Biblical ‘Massacre of Innocents’

© Lesya Polyakova / Sputnik

Abortions have been banned for one day at all public medical institutions in a central Russian city, in symbolic memory of the biblical ‘Massacre of the Innocents’ in Bethlehem by King Herod.

The step was taken at the initiative of the local diocese and regional health authorities.

“On this day all public health institutions of the Yaroslavl Region are prohibited to perform abortions; certain events have been scheduled aimed at combating the murder of babies in the womb and protecting the priceless value of motherhood,” the press service of the Archdiocese of Yaroslavl said on Wednesday. 

The organizers behind the initiative have also urged private clinics to join the abortion ban.

I don't think that's going to happen! It's about money and religion. Abortion clinics are all about money and reject anything to do with religion.

The campaign was launched in symbolic memory of the “Bethlehem babies murdered by King Herod, who wanted to kill the infant Jesus when he was born.” 

Although there is no information about the massacre of the infants on the orders of Roman King Herod in ancient historical sources, it is mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew and later Christian texts. The Bethlehem innocents are revered by Christians as saints, as they were the first to suffer for Christ. 

The Yaroslavl diocese also plans to carry out a ‘Candle of Memory’ campaign both for the infants killed by Herod and those who die as a result of abortion.

37% or 70% - It's Russia; official numbers are always wrong

According to Deputy Prime Minister for Social Affairs Olga Golodets, for every 1.9 million newborn babies in Russia, there are 700,000 abortions.

The head of the Women for Life movement, Natalya Moskvitina, has other figures, however – she claims some 70 percent of pregnancies in Russia are consciously aborted.

"Seventy percent of pregnancies end in abortion. Three-quarters of marriages end in divorce during the first four years of life together. Every three seconds a baby is killed in abortion clinics," Moskvitina said, referring to figures obtained in the fall of 2016, as cited by Interfax news agency. 

Rostov Kremlin, Yaroslavl Region, Russia

According to Moskvitina, “abortions are business" in the first place, and those who are involved in it tell people that it is a "principle of freedom."

"It is legalized, and every woman faces this terrible choice. No one tells her […] the norm is to fight for your child," she said.

The Interreligious Council of Russia has expressed concern over mass abortion. Last summer, the council - consisting of leaders and representatives of Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism - pointed out in a statement that Russia has one of the highest abortion rates in the world, stating that "the number of the violently aborted lives in mothers' womb on various estimations totals to a million or even exceeds a million." 

In September last year, Patriarch Kirill signed a petition calling for a ban on abortions covered by Russian medical insurance. It had been launched by the public movement For Life and was backed by over 300,000 people, including Russia’s Chief Rabbi Berl Lazar, Supreme Mufti of Russia Talgat Tadjuddin, and Russian Ombudsman for Children Rights Anna Kuznetsova. 

Kuznetsova, who is herself a mother of six, noted Russia already has an anti-abortion program in the form of special consultation rooms at medical centers, yet in 2015, only some 266 women consulted specialists in this program, a mere 25 percent of them deciding against having an abortion. 

Although the petition only called for abortions to be excluded from the list of medical services covered by universal healthcare, Christian pro-life activists behind it said it was only the first step towards a full ban on abortion, which they will be pushing for in future. 

However, a nationwide public opinion poll conducted soon after the petition was launched showed that an overwhelming majority of Russians are against the initiative. According to the results of the research conducted by state-owned VTSIOM, 72 percent of Russians are currently against a legislative ban on abortions, while 21 percent said that they would support such move. Only 4 percent of respondents said they considered the procedure unacceptable under any circumstances.

Yaroslavl Region, Russia

Ohio ‘Heartbeat’ Abortion Law Moves to Kasich for Approval

    © Sebastian Kahnert / DPA / Global Look Press

Ohio Governor John Kasich may sign into law a bill that bans abortion once a heartbeat can be detected in a fetus, making the state one of the most restrictive in the US on the issue. Sponsors hope that under the Trump administration the bill will avoid being overturned.

The bill was passed on Tuesday night by the state House hours after the legislation was approved by the Senate. Kasich, an abortion opponent, earlier voiced concerns over the constitutionality of the law, but did not comment on whether he would sign it.

The bill was defeated twice in the past in the state Senate, but was revived and passed the legislature after Donald Trump’s presidential victory, Senate President Keith Faber said.

With a vacant seat in the US Supreme Court to be filled by Trump, proponents of the bill hope the justices may uphold the ban once an ensuing challenge against it reaches the top judiciary body.

"I think it has a better chance than it did before," Faber said.

Abortion was legalized in the US by the Supreme Court over four decades ago, but individual states are allowed to restrict the right to end pregnancy to certain cases. The Ohio bill gives a short window of about six weeks before a fetus heartbeat can be detected. It also makes exceptions for women whose life is under threat due to their pregnancy, but not to victims of rape or incest.

Similarly restrictive abortion laws were earlier defeated by lower courts in North Dakota and Arkansas, with the Supreme Court refusing to hear appeals on those rulings in January, Reuters reported.

The current abortion law in Ohio requires a mandatory waiting period and counseling before the procedure can be performed. Clinics performing it are only available in one out of 10 counties of the state, according to NARAL Pro-Choice America, an organization fighting for the repeal of laws restricting the right of women to terminate pregnancy.

"Banning women from getting a medical procedure is out of touch with Ohio values and is completely unacceptable," the advocacy group’s Ohio branch said in comments on the bill.

"A medical procedure"! That's a new name for it. Stopping a beating heart has many names, but 'a medical procedure' isn't one of them.

Queensland Bill Would Legalize Abortion Up To 9 Months

Queensland abortion bill: MP says procedure

'should not be a crime'

By Josh Bavas and Louisa Rebgetz

A private member's bill to legalise abortion for women up to nine months' pregnant in Queensland will be tabled in State Parliament today by independent MP Rob Pyne.

This story is particularly close to my heart as one of my granddaughters just gave birth to two babies at only 32 weeks - that's 7 months. They are both health and happy and growing. How can killing a viable baby after 6 or 7 months be anything but first degree murder?

Opposition Leader Tim Nicholls said the LNP partyroom would consider the bill, while Labor MPs would be allowed a conscience vote.

Rob Pyne said he was committed to progressive change.
(Supplied: Queensland Labor)

The bill does not contain provisions to prevent late-term abortions but Mr Pyne said he would be open to amendments.

The Member for Cairns, who resigned from the ALP in March, said he was drawn into politics to make progressive changes in the state.

"It's not 1899, abortion should not be a crime," Mr Pyne said.

"The world is changing very quickly and unfortunately our politicians aren't."

Deputy Premier Jackie Trad has not confirmed whether she would support Mr Pyne's bill was for a conscience vote.

"Every single member of the Australian Labor Party has a conscience vote on this matter," she said.

Opposition Leader Tim Nicholls said the LNP was yet to formulate its position.

"We'll be looking at it and we'll be considering it in the partyroom as we always do with these important issues to Queenslanders," he said.

Mr Pyne said he had the support of fellow crossbench MP Billy Gordon, while Shane Knuth and Rob Katter were yet to make their views clear.

Deputy Premier Jackie Trad, Minister for Women, Shannon Fentiman, and Leader of the House, Stirling Hinchliffe, this morning attended a rally outside Parliament House in support of change.

Open to amendments to prevent late-term abortion

The Queensland Criminal Code has prohibited abortion since 1899, but case law based on a 1986 ruling means abortions are permissible if there is serious danger to the mother's life or her physical or mental health.

Amendments introduced in 2009 also allowed for surgical and medical (or chemical) abortions in Queensland.

In New South Wales, an abortion is only lawful if a woman's doctor believes on reasonable grounds it is necessary to avoid a serious danger to her life or her physical or mental health, taking into account economic, social and medical factors.

The ACT, Victoria and Tasmania have all decriminalised abortion, making it legal up to nine months' gestation.

However, late-term abortions in Tasmania, defined as past four months, and Victoria, where late-term is classed beyond six months, require approval from two medical practitioners.

Mr Pyne said his bill did not include any such provisions.

"It may be that, as part of the committee process and as part of this bill going through, that either of the major parties or anyone may move amendments and I'd be happy to look at those," he said.

The bill will go to a parliamentary committee for consideration before being presented to Parliament for debate.

Pre-teens seek abortions in private hospitals

Emily's List supports progressive female Labor candidates trying to reach Parliament, Ms Trad is a member.

"We certainly have a few members of the State Government and they will be supporting the woman's right to choose," Lisa Carey from the group said.

Queensland counselling service Children by Choice said about two children under 14 were seeking advice about an abortion every month.

Last month a 12-year-old Rockhampton girl was forced to go to the Supreme Court to get permission to have one done.

Counsellor Liz Price said most of the abortions are happening in private hospitals as current laws make it too difficult to use the public system.

"We see access significantly compounded for under 14-year-olds," she said.

"There are only two private clinics in all of Queensland that have a licence that allows them to perform procedures of that nature on an under 14-year-old one in the far north of Queensland and one down here in south east Queensland."

Biggest Abortion Case in Decades Leaves Supreme Court Divided

Police keep watch as protesters demonstrate in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on the morning that the court took up a major abortion case in Washington March 2, 2016 © Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

The US Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday over a Texas law placing tough new restrictions on abortion providers that would potentially shut down all but nine or 10 clinics across the entire state.

The justices appeared to be closely divided on the merits of the case, and with the recent death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the possibility is there that the court will not be able to reach a majority decision. If it remains deadlocked in a 4-4 vote, the Texas law would remain on the books, thanks to a lower court ruling in favor of the legislation. However, the case would not establish a national precedent.

Essentially, the law mandates that any doctor performing abortions also have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic they work in, so that they could deliver patients there in the event of an emergency. The law also requires clinics to upgrade their standards to meet those of an ambulatory surgical center.

The number of abortion clinics in Texas has already shrunk from 40 to 18 as a result of the law. If the restrictions are upheld by the high court, it is expected that another eight or nine will shutter their doors, and that other states would try to implement similar legislation.

Outside the Supreme Court, hundreds of pro-life and pro-choice activists gathered to support abortion rights. Pro-choice advocates held up signs and pushed the justices to strike down the regulations.

One speaker argued that anti-choice supporters were using "under handed schemes to take women's rights away."

Elsewhere, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan made a brief appearance to meet with pro-life protesters. Some women who participated held signs reading, "I am a prolife feminist."

During Wednesday’s hearing, the four liberal justices expressed opposition to the law, Reuters reported. Opponents have argued that the regulations impose an “undue burden” on women, making it more difficult for them to seek out an abortion while doing little to make the procedure safer.

The conservative bloc of the court, meanwhile, questioned whether the rules have actually forced as many clinics to close as pro-choice activists claim. Supporters of the law have argued that the regulations are intended to improve safety standards for women and protect their health.

As is often the case, the fate of the law rests largely in the hands of Justice Anthony Kennedy. Although he is a conservative, he has frequently voted with liberals in the past. On Wednesday, he said Texas would experience a “capacity problem” if more clinics close, USA Today reported. Additionally, he cited the fact that more women have been receiving surgical abortions rather than medication-induced ones as a result of the law.

"This may not be medically wise," he said, as trends around the US are leaning increasingly towards medication.

If Kennedy rules with the liberals to strike down the law, then other abortion restrictions across the US may also come into the crosshairs. Various states have tried to impose mandates such as 24-hour waiting periods.

However, Kennedy also expressed interest in the idea of sending the case back down to the lower courts so that they could study the law’s effects more closely. More research would determine whether abortion clinics are actually closing because of the new regulations, as well as whether the clinics that would remain could realistically attend to the needs of the state’s women.

Close to 2 million women would live more than 50 miles away from the nearest abortion clinic should the law take effect, according to the Guardian. Some 750,000 would be more than 200 miles away.

Since the landmark Roe v. Wade case protected the right to abortion in 1973, the Supreme Court has ruled that any regulations on the procedure cannot create an “undue burden” on women. As pro-life supporters have failed to block abortion in general, they have recently begun placing more limits on clinics and doctors, leaving the courts to decide whether they qualify as burdensome.