This is the actual case, we get information from sources, some we deem essential, some we see useful and some we seem as nice to have. That is the case when you look at it, but it is not always true, sometimes the source is less relevant than the information they bring. They were on the ball, they were in the area and they were connected are three options that come to mind, but in some cases the events just blow you away. As it was with me, I tend to follow a Canadian comedian called Brittlestar. He is funny, he is on point and he comes with local issues that might never have caught my eye.
So here I was reading the tweets and there he has alerting me to a BBC article called ‘Abortion UK: Women ‘manipulated’ in crisis pregnancy advice centres’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64751800). I tend to look at BBC events, but this one I missed and it was a Canadian comedian, waving their red and white flag proudly on top of a humongous Maple leaf tree alerting me to an event in the UK. Now, it makes sense. From the top of a Maple leaf you can see the UK (on the other side of the Atlantic river), I standing on top of the Centurion (tallest tree in Australia) couldn’t see the UK because India and Africa are hindering my viewpoint. These things happen.
But it is about the article and it filled me with dread, It starts with “The centres operate outside the NHS and tend to be registered charities. Most say they don’t refer women for abortions, but offer support and counselling for unplanned pregnancies”, which is followed with “Some 21 centres gave misleading medical information and/or unethical advice about abortion” and I wondered, could this be any worse? And then I see “Jo Holmes, of the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, said: “From a professional-standards point of view… they are not there to advise, they are not there to guide, and they are… not there to give their opinion. This language is designed to make the client feel guilty.”” With added mentions of “We visited the Crossroads Crisis Pregnancy Centre in Harrow, north-west London, which opened in 2005 and is based in a Baptist church. The centre’s website says its trained counsellors provide free and accurate information. An undercover reporter told a counsellor she was three weeks pregnant, and asked what an abortion would involve at that stage. The counsellor replied: “The baby is waiting for the pill to kill it and to get rid of it.”” And it is not the weirdest thought that a church is part of deception, they have done so for almost 1,000 years. And there is a much larger stage from this, it will speed up the stage where they are trivialised as christianity is thrown into a corner and ignored after spouting 2,000 years of lies and deceptive conduct, oh and lets not forget about the paedophile priests (which is on the catholics and not the baptists as far as I know).
Is it so hard to give one group (women) true and unbiased information? Is it that much of an issue with people? These deceptive priests, have no issues handing forgiveness to raping fathers of their children, adulterers and all kind of sex crazed daddies. Is it too much to ask for a true neutral response to women? It is not a hard question, most of these people ignore homelessness, war, famine, big company exploitation, as such can we just give the women the neutral advice so that they can decide on what to do next? The article is a lot more important, there is no need to lace it with comedy and other matters, but the stage is a lot larger that anyone ever imagined. As such, great applause to the BBC Panorama article by Eleanor Layhe & Divya Talwar, they uncovered something sinister and unacceptable and it is time to set those charity people in the limelight and ask them public questions, especially when they hide behind the faceplate of ‘Charity’.