[SeattleBruce]

So your definition of whether terrorism ‘works’ is based on another person’s opinion?
+++++++++

Not that you and your ad hominem attacks and inane characterizations deserve any response, but for the sake of the discussion, whether terrorism ‘works’ or is ‘effective’ or is deemed a ‘success’ is absolutely based on their goals. If an Islamic terrorist, for instance, prefers death and the next life to this one, and thinks that wreaking havoc and death will bring him advantage in the next life, then killing everyone, or as many as possible means that terrorism is an extremely successful strategy.

My point in this string is that we pro-lifers shouldn’t be imitating that strategy in any way, shape or form.

[GourmetDan]

"Not that you and your ad hominem attacks and inane characterizations deserve any response, but for the sake of the discussion, whether terrorism ‘works’ or is ‘effective’ or is deemed a ‘success’ is absolutely based on their goals. If an Islamic terrorist, for instance, prefers death and the next life to this one, and thinks that wreaking havoc and death will bring him advantage in the next life, then killing everyone, or as many as possible means that terrorism is an extremely successful strategy."

So your definition of whether terrorism 'works' is based on another person's opinion. And apparently, anyone who prefers the next life to this one and acts accordingly would be a terrorist in your book.

"My point in this string is that we pro-lifers shouldn’t be imitating that strategy in any way, shape or form."

You just defined terrorism as 'working' and defined anyone who acts for the next life as a 'terrorist'. IOW, pro-lifers should do nothing or you would define them as terrorists.

Nice.