Well, I must admit after reading my up-thread posts I'm very confused about where I stand.
Perhaps if you can interpret for me what I said in post #45 things will become clearer.
Perhaps if you can interpret for me what I said in post #45 things will become clearer.
In post #45 you wrote:
They family SHOULD be allowed to just take her home and care for her.
However, in post #65 you wrote:
Many people would prefer to see her starve to death for her actions against the baby alone. Include me in that group.
You sit here and try to act like we are putting words in your mouth or sometimes misinterpreting you, but you fail to realize that your positions are all over the place.
Your position does become a little clearer where you tie your disdain for this woman/situation to the idea that she is some kind of masthead in the making for the Pro-Life cause. I agree with wagglebee that, at least most of us here, are interested in her personal welfare as regards her specifically. The individual is really always the bottom line for any sincere Pro Lifer. The cause is only the means to secure the right to life in the face of governmental failure to do its Constitutional duty.
Unless I'm seated on a jury to determine guilt or innocence in a criminal matter with potential capital punishment then deciding who deserves to die for their actions is beyond my pay grade. Self defense would be another exception to that. I love hyperbole but I try not to use it where the ongoing conversation involves sincere concerns over matters of life and death. If we were talking of jihadis I would relax that standard a lot. But not my true bottomline regarding life. Context is everything.
------------------------
FWIW, wagglebee, IMHO Balding_Eagle kicked your butt, and all those who opposed him, on that other thread you brought up. My take is that you and others simply refused to acknowledge the point he was making. I don't see it helping you here. As I said; just MHO.