I'm sure you have some numbers to back that up. When was the last terrorist attack that you recall from the "thousands and thousands" of Timothy Mcveighs out there?
Its gonna take a lot to catch up with this.
Posted on 11/22/2006 7:34:14 AM PST by presidio9
That's a misconception a lot of people have. If the Supreme Court reversed "Roe" (which it has not shown any inclination to do when offered the opportunity), it would not "make it illegal again". It would revert abortion to the states, to decide individually. In several states, it would certainly not be illegal again.
Your understanding of "terrorism" is woefully short-sighted. Terrorism is the extralegal employment of violence to achieve specified political ends. The target set is utterly irrelevant.
Which particular error would that be?
That killing morally innocent people through abortion is acceptable.
But you could take it one step further and say that the violence is designed to affect terror in one segment of society: i.e., women who have abortions, and those that assist them. As such, it is still terror. While part of me does empathize with those who comitt such crimes, their behavior is still reprehensible.
"That killing morally innocent people through abortion is acceptable."
The best I can determine from the "dueling studies" minuet, a substantial majority of the American people wants at least some restrictions on abortion.
While less than perfect, that is at least a good sign.
And with all the foreshadowing problems in aging programs recently shown on Public Broadcasting recently, euthanasia will rank up there with abortion to the liberals in both parties before too long.
While less than perfect, that is at least a good sign
Agreed. The best long term solution requires winning the hearts of the voters. The mistake that the pro-aborts made was doing an end run around the people and then trying to change peoples minds afterward.
I'm sure you have some numbers to back that up. When was the last terrorist attack that you recall from the "thousands and thousands" of Timothy Mcveighs out there?
Its gonna take a lot to catch up with this.
That post was full of sarcasm. Sorry if it didnt come off that way.
Just because "they think it is" doesn't make it right or the only truth.
I agree with you. Unfortunately, they are reaping what they have sown. Oddly enough, some pro-choicers I am acquainted with, do believe in the law of karma, but this conveniently seems to escape their notice.
My opinion while all of this may or not be true, is that no matter what the reason outside of a true medical problem - even then extra-ordinary attempts should be made to save the child's life, abortion is just plain contrary to instinct, plain and simple. A woman that has an abortion of convenience should be kept from having any further children because she is not capable of raising a normal child....
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Don't people think? IMHO, grown men and women who know they don't want children should do the practical thing and get themselves sterilized.
I agree, but when the reality is presented with the mother/father-to-be, it's up to us to help them realize that they don't have to take the easiest way out. I shudder to think of not having the opportunity to have my grand daughters because of a bad bad choice.
Whew. That is a relief. Sorry I didnt catch it. There once was a time that that sarcasm was a given. But lately I have been seeing more and more loons on these forums. Thank goodness that you are not one of them.
I originally thought it was sarcasm, by the by, but then I recalled my run ins with the loons and ran with the latter thought. I apologize.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.