Replies

Then why do you support people here who have called his actions heroic and praiseworthy?

My posts have not indicated support for anyone's position but my own. Post #461 does not contain "praise." You just wish it did. It merely raises questions anyone is free to answer.

No, it's a logical conclusion . . .

It is not a logical conclusion to assume someone condones the bombing of abortion clinics when he merely states that beating up a loony professor is not on the same level as dealing with genocidal tyrants or abortionists.

It is a logical conclusion however, to assume someone is both delusional and disingenuous when he continually talks about terrorism in a thread related to pugilism in an attempt to paint other people in a bad light. But hey, since you can't tell the difference between sarcasm and gloating it stands to reason you can't tell the difference between beating up a loony professor and dealing with genocidal tyrants.

"My posts have not indicated support for anyone's position but my own"

Your standing up for a disgusting series of posts. That's support. And when asked to speak against them, you refused.

"Post #461 does not contain "praise." You just wish it did. It merely raises questions anyone is free to answer."

You are deluding yourself. From post 461:

"So often I hear you "knee jerk" moralists demean and condemn others who faced with the holocaust in our country, have the courage to go after abortionists at the sacrifice of their own lives and liberty in an effort to slow down or halt this brutal, cruel, sadistic practice. Tell me something MeanWest, what gives you the right to critize these people? What have you sacrificed for these little ones?"

Then there is a different poster in post 541,

"Though I myself am a coward,I respect those heroes who are portrayed as evil, by the very ones who enable the true evil to continue." (speaking of abortion clinic bombers)

You entered the discussion in post 557, but failed to say one word against the above.

"It is not a logical conclusion to assume someone condones the bombing of abortion clinics when he merely states that beating up a loony professor is not on the same level as dealing with genocidal tyrants or abortionists."

That's not all you said. You refuse to say that post 461 was wrong. You lumped abortion doctors with genocidal tyrants.

"It is a logical conclusion however, to assume someone is both delusional and disingenuous when he continually talks about terrorism in a thread related to pugilism in an attempt to paint other people in a bad light."

I wasn't the one who brought up blowing people up. Should we have just ignored it? What would that say to the lurkers here? It would say that we condone that. Silence speaks as loud as words sometimes.

BTW, beating someone up isn't *pugilism*. It's assault.

"But hey, since you can't tell the difference between sarcasm and gloating it stands to reason you can't tell the difference between beating up a loony professor and dealing with genocidal tyrants."

Are abortion doctors genocidal tyrants who need killing?