Anger at pro-life Olympic leaflet put through Brighton doors (From The Argus)

Anger at pro-life Olympic leaflet put through Brighton doors

11:30am Sunday 5th August 2012 in London 2012 Olympics By Neil Vowles

A campaign by pro-life campaigners linking abortion and the Olympics has been criticised as “tasteless” and “desperate”.

About 500 leaflets have been posted through the doors of homes in Brighton by supporters of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) which uses Olympic imagery as part of its antiabortion message.

Pro-choice campaigners have criticised the campaign and are considering reporting the incident to Sussex Police and Olympic organisers LOCOG.

Members of the society defended the leaflets and likened them to protesting against China’s human rights abuses during the last Olympics.

The campaign pictures a baby staring at an Olympic medal and claims that in the time it took the Olympic torch relay to be completed, 40,000 unwanted pregnancies were terminated in Britain.

The leaflet has been distributed to residents living near to the Wistons clinic in Chatsworth Road, Brighton.

Anti-abortion campaign groups SPUC and Abort 67 hold regular vigils outside the clinic which pro-choice campaigners argue amounts to harassment of visitors.

Carolynne Henshaw, of Brighton Pro Choice, said: “This is particularly tasteless and irrelevant.We know Sussex Police can be robust on protests when they wantto be but they choose not to on this protest.”

SPUC general secretary Paul Tully said the Games were not “immune” to the environment they were operating in.

He added: “We are not criticising the Olympics, we’re just trying to draw people’s attention to a subject that merits public concern. We were very careful when drawing up the leafletthat we didn’t commit any improprieties.”

A Sussex Police spokeswoman said the force supported the right to protest even if the cause was “unpopular with many”.

She added: “There have been occasions when images used either at protests or in the form of leaflets have been disturbing.

“If these are threatening, abusive or insulting and are likely to cause harassment, alarmor distress then offenders will be prosecuted.”