Within 1 week, 5 organizations dealing with “help” in abortion disappeared from Facebook: Abortion Dream Team, Legal Abortion, Abotak Clinic, Women aid Women and the National Women's Strike. The activists immediately declared a state of siege, began writing petitions to the European Parliament and lamented the "censorship". They seem not to have asked themselves the basic question: is this not the consequence of breaking the law?
It is hard to have a better example of how pro-abortion environments function in a planet parallel to legal reality. The meta blocked their pages – and alternatively of reasoning about why they caused interest in the platform, activists immediately switched to victim mode. For they are always victims – states, systems, churches, conservatives, fundamentalists, etc. It can't be that they're simply breaking the law – because, let's remind you, assisting in abortion in Poland is at hazard of being punished for up to 3 years in prison – and should endure the consequences.
Censorship or law enforcement?
The Abortive Dream squad itself described the case in a typical, dramatic tone. The organization reported that it lost access to the profile together with respective another collectives, after which part of the accounts regained access, but it is not known for how long. In the next entry, ADT argued that without "systemic support" in abortion, which they thought should be in Poland, the only alternate is bottom-up support, that is, their activity. Reducing contact with specified organisations would so straight jeopardise the safety of women.
Sounds noble, doesn't it? The problem is that this "bottom-up assistance" actually means aiding abortion, that is, an act prohibited under Article 152 of the Criminal Code. Abortive Dream Teams and akin organizations have been openly admitting for years to send women miscarriage drugs, giving instructions on how to independently execute a pharmacological abortion, and organising abortion abroad. After all, the activists themselves boasted many times about numbers – thousands of women who were “accompanyed” in abortion. So it is not any abstract, theoretical activity or mystery. These are concrete actions that they boast publically – and behind each of them stands the death of a child.
Stickers on the city and petition in Brussels
When any accounts – including ADT, Abotac and Legal Abortion – returned after a week's blockade, activists did not hide that they did not know how long it would take. Women aid Women and the Toruń Feministic Brigade had a “bad luck” – their blockades continued.
Instead of considering why “help” organizations in abortion are so much curious in Moderators of Meta, abortionists have proposed a solution that is “underground”: hanging a patch around the city with information about “safe abortion”.
There have been words that possibly best reflect the mentality of this environment: since the state and corporations are against them, they must take matters into their own hands. However, it did not happen to them that the State could be ‘against him’ simply due to the fact that what they are doing violates the laws in force in that State. And what we would actually like to say is – it is advanced time, due to the fact that so far the Polish justice strategy has been very effective in turning a blind eye to their activities and facing the wall – as in the case of the trial of 1 of the leading activists of ADT Justyna Wydrzynska – alternatively than trying to prevent another crime.
But in this case, it is not even a problem with the Polish state, but alternatively with the digital giant, who tries to show that it does not let for breaking the law on its platforms – it should besides be considered as appearances, due to the fact that abortionists themselves admit that specified "bans" their profiles get regularly and... nothing truly results from it.
Of course, the classical tool of the Polish left could not miss: the call for rescue to EU institutions. In a petition to the European Parliament, abortionists demand, inter alia, to examine the circumstances of blocking accounts, assessing the compatibility of Meta's activities with EU law and, peculiarly meaningfully, to guarantee that organisations providing "sound reproductive wellness information" are not treated as illegal or harmful actors.
Exactly. The full argument comes down to this 1 sentence. Activists want the European Union to formally warrant them something that no social platform or parliament can guarantee: that abortion aid, which is simply a crime in Poland, will not be considered illegal. It's kind of like demanding Facebook to warrant that promoting drug sales or stealing will not be considered as promoting something illegal just due to the fact that the sellers think they're doing good.
Media that don't ask questions
Of course, the case was welcomed by the pro-abortionist media, describing the full situation as a clash between Meta and "reproduction rights", in which the platform is the attacking party, and organisations – innocent victims fighting for access to reliable knowledge. There is not a single conviction in this communicative that this "sound knowledge" is in practice instructions on how to circumvent Polish law (and thus to a minimum protecting life), nor that the activity of the organizations described for years raises serious legal doubts. Nor did it happen to anyone in the editorial board to ask directly: should the website, which explains step by step how to order a miscarriage tablet and how to usage it without the cognition of a doctor, operate without restrictions on a platform that is required to comply with the laws of the countries in which it operates?
At the same time, it must be admitted that the actions of Meta herself are hard to call coherent politics – the blockades were chaotic, any organizations returned after a fewer days, others waited longer, which is more like the accidental collapse of moderation algorithms than the informed decision of the company. However, this does not change the fact that even specified an imperfect reaction is simply a step in the right direction. Organisations that openly admit to assisting in abortion should not have unlimited space to advance their activities on a platform that itself declares compliance with local regulations.
Victims squared
Symptomatic is how much activists have become accustomed to the function of victims. They regularly prepare yearly reports of their ‘work’, boasting on social media the evidence number of women who have been ‘helped’, and remind us that among the beneficiaries of their ‘support’ were (as they themselves admitted) teenagers who suspected that pregnancy was caused by crimes and women so advanced that they could be resolved by childbirth alternatively than abortion.
Now the same organizations, arrogant of their activities, are outraged that they cannot advertise it freely. It is hard to give a more eloquent example of how much this environment lives in the belief that it is above the law – and that all effort to enforce it is persecution, not the specified consequence of breaking regulations.
It can be expected that further petitions, appeals to the Europarliament and actions with stickers will multiply. However, it is hard to defy the impression that this full conflict for the anticipation of further advertising "sacrifice aid" is in fact a conflict for the right to undisturbed promotion of activities, which, for activists themselves, provides adequate profit to not only live but become abortion celebrities.
Aleksandra Gajek
Center for Life and Family
![Plantacja na strychu w Krakowie. 28-latek zatrzymany [ZDJĘCIA]](https://cowkrakowie.pl/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/plantacja1.jpg)