The Anti-rights Movement's 'Paper Martyrs'

Strategy Watch: The anti-choice movement is manufacturing paper-thin narratives of “persecution” to chip away at legal protections for healthcare facilities.

S. Rogers

Mar 19, 2025

pro·test (prə-tĕst′, prō-, prō′tĕst′)

v. pro·test·ed, pro·test·ing, pro·tests

v.tr.

a. To express a strong objection to (something)

b. To participate in a public demonstration in opposition to (something)1

A woman holds a protest sign inside of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital’s exclusion zone, an area wherein protesting is prohibited by law in order to insure the protection, privacy, safety, and autonomy of the Scotland hospital’s patients and staff.2

Years earlier, this protester had been recruited by an American anti-rights group 40 Days for Life,3 and she is now one of the group's leaders inside Scotland.4

Hoping to be arrested, her accomplice with the Scottish Family Party - a far-right political party in Scotland - hovers nearby, ready to film her arrest.5 Authorities repeatedly encourage her to move her protest outside of the exclusion zone.

She refuses.

A senior communications officer with ADF International – the UK offshoot of the American hate group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) - posts the video of the protester’s arrest on social media.

Anti-rights media organizations pounce: “Scotland Police Stop Pro-Life Woman From Silently Praying Outside Abortion Clinic”6; “Grandmother arrested for holding sign offering conversation outside Scottish hospital performing abortions”7; “Scottish police crack down on silent prayer, point to ‘Safe Access Zones’ law.”8

She becomes a living martyr.

A few days earlier, at a speech in Munich, the Vice President of the United States made the false9 and inflammatory claim that “this last October, just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called ‘safe access zones,’ warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law. Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thoughtcrime.”10 The Vice President added, “In Britain, and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat.”11

This protester’s arrest “proves[] [the Vice President’s] speech [] to be correct, when he warned that free speech across Europe ‘is in retreat,’” claims the US-backed UK anti-rights group Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC).12 “Free speech and the right to religious expression are under constant attack across the UK, and the targeting of pro-life Christians by the state is also on the rise. Thankfully, people on both sides of the Atlantic are beginning to wake up to the illiberalism and censorious instincts of politicians,” the group adds.13

The protester is uplifted and framed as an archetypal persecuted Christian incurring the unjust wrath of an unbelieving world; a brave hero standing for the freedom of religion and free speech. In her newfound martyrdom she is glorified.

Matthew 6:5

“When you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners… where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get.”14

A man lurks behind a tree outside of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service in the English town of Bournemouth. A month earlier, local authorities had issued a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) around the facility following disturbing anti-abortion activities there.1516

The protester is the leader of Choose Life Southampton,17 an organization that, based on its Facebook page, appears to be a UK chapter of or otherwise affiliated with the US-based group 40 Days for Life.18

Hoping to be ticketed or arrested, the protester contacts the local authorities the day before his stunt, informing them that he will be traveling to their town the following day for the express purposes of intentionally violating the PSPO that the local governing Council had put into place to insure the protection, privacy, safety, and autonomy of patients and staff.1920

His conduct, posture, and body language is an ostentatious act of cheapened, politicized, performative prayer. He lurks behind a tree near the entrance to the facility. Authorities repeatedly encourage him to simply move on, or to resume his protest after 7 pm.

He refuses.

Anti-rights media organizations pounce: “U.K. convicts pro-life veteran of thought crime for praying outside abortion clinic”21; “British Army Veteran Convicted of Praying Silently Near Abortion Facility”22; “Army Veteran Found Guilty for Praying Outside UK Abortion Facility.”23

He becomes living martyr.

ADF International – the UK offshoot of the American hate group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) - provides him with free legal representation. When the protester is convicted in a court of law for breaking the law, ADF International calls the conviction an incidence of punishing a person for thought-crime.24

At a speech in Munich, the Vice President of the United States names this protester, uplifting him as an example of Christian persecution indicative of a hostile attacks upon conscience rights and religious freedom.25 The Vice President makes a false26 and inflammatory claim that this protester had been targeting by police for “silently praying for three minutes.”27

“British politicians responsible for buffer zones deserve[] to be shamed for their illiberal and anti-religious persecution of pro-life Christians. The imposition of thoughtcrime (sic) in Britain should not be taken lightly. This is exactly what George Orwell warned about,” claims the US-backed UK anti-rights group Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), invoking Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984.28

The protester is uplifted and framed as an archetypal persecuted Christian incurring the unjust wrath of an unbelieving world; a brave hero standing for the freedom of religion and free thought. In his newfound martyrdom he is glorified.

per·se·cute (pûr′sĭ-kyo͞ot′)

tr.v. per·se·cut·ed, per·se·cut·ing, per·se·cutes

To oppress or harass with ill-treatment, especially because of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or beliefs.29

per·se·cu·tion (pûr′sĭ-kyo͞o′shən)

n.

The act or practice of persecuting on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or beliefs that differ from those of the persecutor.30

You can’t look at the two sets of events described above in isolation. Rather, upon examination, the events prove to be “part of a wider effort by anti-abortion campaigners to test” the limits of legal protections for facilities and patients – and to “shift the focus away from the true reason for buffer zones to a debate about freedom of speech” and freedom of religion.31

Rather than being organic occurrences, the two above incidents have several telling commonalities: premeditation, coordination, co-optation, and lionization.

PREMEDITATION: In each instance, the protesters planned for and took deliberate steps to ensure a confrontation with local law enforcement. One protester enlisted a political party accomplice to film the confrontation. The other protester informed local authorities when and where to find him breaking the law. Furthermore, the protesters’ actions were strategic: each protester chose a method of protest that is the least offensive and the most palatable to the broader public, thus villainizing and capitalizing on law enforcement’s responses. The goal? To make legal protections for healthcare facilities, staff, and patients appear extreme, while painting government authorities as over-aggressive and tyrannical.
COORDINATION: Each protester is an anti-rights leader and is either with or connected to US-backed anti-rights groups. Professor George Letsas, from the faculty of law at UCL, says that efforts by such groups to influence the legal processes in the UK is “very problematic.”32 “Because where the money spent is very substantial, and there are deep pockets, you worry about the outcomes and being one-sided. What’s better is if these cases come to the courts more organically as opposed to in an orchestrated way where they’re trying to test the limits of the law. The problem is these appear to be orchestrated, deliberate efforts.”33 Like a military operation, the protesters and groups coordinated to probe the perimeter of enemy territory, each incident designed to test the limits of legal protections for healthcare facilities, staff, and patients.
CO-OPTATION: The anti-rights movement and its organs employed the two above incidents as a means of co-opting the narrative around no-protest zones. As legal experts have observed, these “buffer zones” are “being targeted in an orchestrated campaign by conservative Christian groups that are fueling the spread of misinformation and seeking to shift the terms of the debate.”34 As one physician observed, “The thing [anti-abortion campaigners] try to push is that it’s just ‘silently praying’: you might be walking down the road minding your business and a police officer leaps out. But that’s not how it works. These campaigners seek out abortion clinics and they stand directly outside.”35 Pam Lowe, a researcher and lecturer at Aston University, has “seen people climb over walls, put their hood up or try to run past these [protesters], because they don’t know and have no idea what their intentions are.”36 Lowe points out that attempts to hijack the narrative in order to shift the focus upon “silent prayer” and freedom of speech and religion is a “deliberate strategy.”37 People who hang around healthcare facilities protesting and screaming in patients’ faces are not particularly popular with the broader public. Shifting attention away from the reason that buffer zones are needed to a conversation about free speech and freedom of religion is a way of navigating around protesters’ ill behavior and law-breaking. It also takes attention away from the fact that the movement and its activists are trying to take away the rights of others.
LIONIZATION: Key to the anti-rights movement's response to the above incidents is the manufacturing of flimsy, paper-thin narratives of “persecution” which lionize paper martyrs— Christians incurring the unjust wrath of an unbelieving world; a brave heroes standing for the freedom of religion and free speech. Those who oppose or criticize the protesters’ deliberate law-breaking are thus framed as authoritarian persecutors, bullies of old ladies and grieving fathers, enemies of Christ, liberty, human rights. This strategy is an extension of the strategy employed of right-wing “War on Christians” activists, which “mobilizes the language of religious persecution to shut down political debate and critique by characterizing any position not in alignment with this politicized version of Christianity as an example of anti-religious bigotry and persecution. Moreover, it routinely deploys the archetypal figure of the martyr as a source of unquestioned religious and political authority.”38 While those who seek abortion are often framed by the anti-rights movement as sluts trying to get out of taking “responsibility,” narratives of “persecution” allow the anti-rights movement to avoid taking responsibility for its members’ crimes. This strategy of performative persecution creates a spectacle through which the movement can launder its own radicalism and bad behavior by parasitically latching onto the liberal ideals of freedom of speech and religion.

While the two instances described above may appear to be unrelated, isolated incidents, both are a part of a coordinated anti-rights strategy: the manufacturing of flimsy, paper-thin narratives of “persecution.” When you encounter such hagiographic narratives, call them out for what they are: spectacles through which the anti-rights movement can launder its own law-breaking; and open attacks on legal protections for healthcare facilities, staff, and patients through premeditation, coordination, co-optation, and lionization. Every day is a battle for the truth.

rePro-Truth

Discussion about this post