Posted on 01/06/2003 8:36:25 AM PST by dead
You only CLAIM to care for children...in reality, you just get off on being able to stab at people you'll never meet in person, and have a "righteous" excuse built in!
News flash, people: According to THE LAW, you know, the law you HAVE to follow to stay out of jail, not that you follow by choice(religious), abortion is not murder. You are far away from stating an "obvious" fact by saying it is, AND by engaging in the gory, hate-crazed language you relish so.
The defense, on the laughable grounds of "defense of babies", of the murderers of doctors was expected from you. Once again, you rationalize evil acts with self-righteous rhetoric.
Further discussion with such as you is pointless. You'd rather keep marking out to some preacher or priest whom, after teaching you the slogans and perforce cashing your checks, will again turn his interest to his secretary or altar boy.
Enjoy your hate. You've worked quite hard to justify it.
I am a registered Republican, and have been since I could register. I have been a conservative as long as I can remember, and also an American patriot, though my stance on this issue causes quite a few to question all of the above.
Click my homepage, and you'll see why, at times, this pains me.
The fact is, the rhetoric coming from the prolife side consistently crosses all lines of decency and goodwill, and swerves, sometimes violently, into outright hate. The tactics and language used can hardly, at times, be distinguished from that of our sworn enemies, or from the Left.
There are some genuinely concerned and decent people who are prolife, and who genuinely care about children. Bless' em, they'd never THINK of using the stinking and blasphemous language used here, and the tactics used and supported by the fanatics (Shootings, bombings, arsons, oh, and let us not forget the ever-popular gore photos they love to show people and their children) would cause them to recoil.
By the same token, I've yet to meet ANYONE on the prochoice side outside of China who fits their "serial killer"/"butcher"/"hitman" labels. There are actual humans on both sides of this, not that any of the extremists that have hijacked the discussion at the command of their pulpit-pounding con men will ever acknowledge this.
I've met many women who have had abortions. Without exception, they counted it as the most heart-wrenching and saddest time of their lives. They were not evil, by any judgement of mine. They were human beings who had faced a difficult choice, and had done what they could with what they had. I am INCENSED when someone ascribes to them charecteristics best reserved for Serial Killers or Al Qeda members. It is simply not true, and the spirit which drives such vitriol is the same that drove witch-burners, inquisitors, the gestapo, the KGB, and the Terrs of today...a self-righteous, all-consuming absolute CERTAINTY that they are/were so RIGHT, so HOLY, that evil conducted by themselves was GOOD. Being blessed by a god OR by a government makes enjoying a good slaughter or hate-party a whole lot easier.
No matter, it must be opposed, lest it once again fly on bat-wings to the destruction of all.
Watch, now, as the myrmidons emerge and renew their "Holy War".
I'm really on the outskirts of this debate and wish it would have stayed on topic,...the question... does abortion increase the risk of breast cancer? The NYT seems to think not, pro-lifers and some in the medical commnity say yes.
I think it is very unfourtunate that you have decided to resort to name calling of pro-lifers, that is a tactic of the liberals, it is used to shut conservitives up, not conservitives to end discussion with other conservitives. I'm not saying that there isn't name calling on the opposing viewpoint, but you are taking it to the extreme with the mullah omar crap.
While I'm pro-life, I do not go around threatning women who have had abortions with hell fire. I view the abortion providers as an industry (taxpayer subsidized) that is driven by profit and nothing else. Once you come to terms with the fact that abortion is an industry and it's main focus making money and not helping desprate women out of a bad situation, then you can begin to see the movement in it's proper prespective. My feeling is that someday it will be completly outlawed and people will wonder why it was allowed in the first place.But like slavery, it took 350 years, a huge war, and an amendment to the blasted constitution to end.
My opinion, like yours and everyone elses, is a nice thing to have, but if an opinion is based on false information or a lie, it is a bad opinion. The truth is the truth, no matter what opinion we have. I have second hand experience with abortion, I can tell you that it dramatically changes a womens ability to have the normal relationship (in marrage) that would otherwise be expected. This is the truth, and nobodys opinion is going to change that. If you get nothing else out of my little message, please get this, the issue about the increase risk of breast cancer is one of many negatives that the abortion industry sweeps under the rug and does not want to tell women before they have the procedure. It would be bad for buisness if they were honest and would open the industry up to legal liability if they did. The cigarette companies are being sued because they are said to know the risks of smoking and cover it up, in same fashon, the abortion industry know the risks (physical, medical, and emotional) and are pretending not to know, but the day will come when the trial lawyers will get on this gravey train and that will be the end of this experiment in convenience. Of course, if I'm correct, then the irony of my prediction would be that the abortion industries downfall will not come from the pro-life movement, but from within the court room.
If you were to take a little time and study the abolitionist movement in the 19th century, you will, over time, see the parallels between the modern pro-life movement and the abolitionist movement. Further study will reveal to you the political and economic heritage of both slavery and modern day abortion. Before you go crazy, think about this, slavery then, like abortion now was legal when it was practiced and had the protection of the law. There were many people in this country on the eve of the civil war that did not think fighting a war to end slavery was was a good thing to do.
You may find it interesting to read Abraham Lincon's famous speach to the NY coopers union. Read it with an open mind, substitute abortion with slavery and then re-evaluate your desire to be a conservitive and or a republican.My opinion, for what is worth (maybe nothing) is that conservitives are consistent in there views and liberals views are dependent on the convenience of the moment. That is how liberals claim constitutional protection of the right to choose (when there is no such constitutional guarantee)and for the most part embrace gun control in spite of the second amendment guarantee to keep and bear arms. I think you will find that pro choice people are that way for emotional reasons and there is little chance that facts such as medical negatives are going to change their views at this time in history.
Tom
As sad as it is to say as a Broken Glass Republican, I don't trust most "Pro-Lifers" anymore than I do the New York Times (Which is OBVIOUSLY biased in their "Reporting" here).
And I don't trust the pro-lifers on this thread at all. They've put on a display here that qualifies them as "Fringe". And I'm being kind with calling them that.
Of course. If abortion is murder (which obviously it is) then as an act of heroism it is morally justified to, at minimum, try to stop a "butcher" from slaughtering an unborn.
I'm going to report this comment of yours to the proper authorities. I'll let them try to decide what you mean and if it requires them contacting you personally to find-out.
My assumption is that it's OK to support the killing of a doctor who perform abortions as long as you don't act on that "Support" in any way, but I'm not really sure. I guess you'll find out.
South Park republican (sounds like an oxyMORON to me)
Oh no, please don't do that! If you do, then I'll have to employ the services of the fascists over at the ACLU to defend my 1st Amendment rights.
Give me a break, knee-JERK, just because I think it's morally justified to use deadly force to defend the merciless slaughter of another human being, doesn't mean I'm out there killing anybody or whipping up an abortionist killing militia. Sheesh!
The beauty of this country is our freedom to say what I said (and I meant it!)and my freedom to also say that I didn't shed a tear when Kopp shot Slepian.
Just because it's legal to kill unborn humans, in this country doesn't mean it's right and should be passively accepted.
I'll be marching for Life on Jan 22nd in D.C., where will you be?
Like I said, I'll let the proper officials (Who've already been notified of your post) decide if what you've done here is legal or not. One thing is for sure...Your admission that's it's justified to murder doctors who perform abortions makes you something close to a Nazi.
Get out of my party. You and freaks like you aren't welcome here.
I respect your right to your opinion, however, could you explain to me why someone as informed as you would take sides on such an important issue as this based on the behavior of persons on an internet forum instead of careful consideration of the facts and moral issues? You must know that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Just as taxpayers pay for the welfare recipients monthly support, personal decisions we make in life have a cost that may not be apparent at first. If a women is having problems getting pregnant and goes to a fertility Dr., the first or second thing the Dr. will ask is if she has had an abortion. If the male sees a urologist because he cannot get his mate pregnant, the first or second thing he is going to ask is if his mate has had an abortion. I know this because I have been there. You need to discover for yourself why the Drs. are asking that question if legal abortions are so safe. My quick answer to this is there is no free lunch, break a law of nature, and nature will extract it's punishment, but find out for yourself what women are not being told before they have the procedure and why.
We are supposed to be discussing the link between breast cancer and abortion. Why are you wasting your time grandstanding about your liberated view of abortion in general and your open mindedness about all things and then on the other hand talking about dropping a dime on some one with whom you disagree with? Don't you have any other excitement in your life? The thing that separates republicans from democrats in my opinion is that they stand for something, not just everything. Based on my limmited knowledge of your position, I think you might be happier if you switched political parties. It kind of reminds me of dissatisfied Catholics who instead of simply changing religions, they attack the church in the name of "reform".It makes me question the motive of their reform cause. The reality of the situation is that the republican party in the US will (100% certain) cease to exist if they toss off thier pro-life plank. The same with the second amendment. If the democrats want to eliminate the republicans as a political force, all they would have to do is change their stance on abortion and gun control, then the republicans will fade faster than a speeding bullet.
As I have been saying, there is a taxpayer supported abortion industry out there that pretends to be the friend of women. There is no other medical procedure that I know of that can be performed without the Drs. first disclosing the potential risks no matter how small, even if the evidence that the risk exists is not fully known or only suspected. Abortion is the an exception in that regard. Someday, the trial lawyers are going to get on this for the profit potential and for their greed and assuming that the greed of the lawyers is more powerful than that of the abortion industry, the abortion indusrty will fade into oblivion- with not much help from the pro-life movement.
Tom
Cute. What's next? You're going to scream "RINO"?
One-issue screaming windbags have lost a lot of credibility in my mind.
I'm a Broken Glass Republican. I support whomever interests me the most in the primaries and then it's straight-ticket Republican in the general...No exceptions EVER! I've always been "Agnostic" on the subject of abortion. Meaning, I trust those who I vote for to make the right decisions...Whatever those decisions might be.
But...
One-Issue freaks like those on this thread have done something to me that I thought could NEVER happen...Consider calling myself "Pro-Choice". Which I am not. The main reason being I can't stand the thought of aligning myslef with ANYTHING "Liberal". It literally disgusts me. But the people on this thread have proven themselves to be as shrill as ANY "Liberal" I've ever seen.
That's a sad commentary, in my opinion. Personally, I prefer the tactic of changing hearts and minds. Not killing "Abortionists" and calling women who have had abortions "Murderers".
OK...Now call me a "Liberal" here ----->
Response: Do I have a history here of screaming anything? Please advise.
Then you said: One-issue screaming windbags have lost a lot of credibility in my mind.
Response: Like it or not, political parties, especally republicans are full of one issue "screaming windbags" as you put it. Eliminate the "screaming windbags", then how would the republicans ever hold office?
Then say you: I'm a Broken Glass Republican. I support whomever interests me the most in the primaries and then it's straight-ticket Republican in the general...No exceptions EVER! I've always been "Agnostic" on the subject of abortion. Meaning, I trust those who I vote for to make the right decisions...Whatever those decisions might be.
Response: Great, thats nice, I think there is room in the republican party for all types, hopefully, deep down you agree.
Next, you opine But... One-Issue freaks like those on this thread have done something to me that I thought could NEVER happen...Consider calling myself "Pro-Choice". Which I am not. The main reason being I can't stand the thought of aligning myslef with ANYTHING "Liberal". It literally disgusts me. But the people on this thread have proven themselves to be as shrill as ANY "Liberal" I've ever seen.
Question: how come you are not accusing yourself of screaming?
Finally, you end: That's a sad commentary, in my opinion. Personally, I prefer the tactic of changing hearts and minds. Not killing "Abortionists" and calling women who have had abortions "Murderers".
Right on brother,we agree!
Your parting note: OK...Now call me a "Liberal" here ----->
Another question for you, Did I call you a liberal? What names have I call you? Is it OK for you to call people names? In all honesty, I've been trying to steer this thread back to the orig. topic, no one seems to be willing to help me . Could you help me do this? I promise not to call you names.
My parting note: One thing I find irritating about your posts is that you seem to think you own the republican party. I base this on your invitation to another poster to "leave my party" as you said. Maybe you do own the party, if so, could you please allow me to remain a member for now?
Tom
Sorry for the mis-quote
Tom
No, that's not "Calling names" but I don't believe in splitting hairs. In my opinion, both have the same effect.
I don't believe in splitting hairs either, so rest assured, if I wanted to call you names, I would have done so plainly. I did in fact suggest you may be happier in another party, but I didn't make any recommendations as to which one, and I would not advise you to change parties, that is an individual decision. So my friend, I disagree with your opinion that they have the "same effect". Just like you, I believe in changing the hearts and minds of people and do not think calling them names is an effective method of getting my point made. However, the bigger issue is "is there any connection between abortion and breast cancer"? I would like to talk about that issue.
As for "My Party". Yep...I do think I own it. I support it 100% without fail. Because of that, I am part owner. That being said, I would never say the same thing to a passionate advocate like you. I only say that type of thing to those like the poster I said it to...For obvious reasons.
By the way, thank you for the kind words you sent my way. I know I'm asking some hard questions for you to respond to, but I must continue. I am confused about your part ownership option, how can you say you support the republican party 100% when the pro-life plank is the official position of the party and I understand you to be leaning towards "pro-choice"? Please do not accuse me of putting words in you mouth on this. My opinion is that you are both unhappy with the methods of the pro-life crowd and since you have indicated that you leave the issue up to the republican canidate, it could be ASSUMED that you are in fact pro-choice. Don't forget, your parties leader, G. Bush ( you know, the guy who once said "you are either with us, or you are against us") is pro-life last I heard. I wonder if you are really 100% agreement with your leader on this and all other issues for that matter. If not, you better rein in your party now or it may become disorganized and fragmented. And also, how do you know that some of the "one issue windbag freaks" (as you call them but you are not really name calling) that you take issue with don't also support it (the republican party) with the same 100% as you do, thus giving them the same rights and privledges of ownership as you?
How do we get this discussion back to the link between abortion and breast cancer?
Tom
To be honest, I don't think that's possible. Look at the post that started all this (The guy saying "God willing, abortion does cause breat cancer). It was post number 3 or 4?
But I wish you luck. Personally I usually stay out of these threads for one basic reason... Abortion will never be outlawed.
I really want you to get the last word with me on this, so I will not reply to your answer.
You said: To be honest, I don't think that's possible. Look at the post that started all this (The guy saying "God willing, abortion does cause breat cancer). It was post number 3 or 4?
Why, if you are "agnostic about abortion" as you told me, would you be affected, outraiged, or whatever you are, by this statement? If you don't believe that something is possible, then why waste your time, energy and emotion on something you don't believe could be a factor? Only God, (whatever you preceve God to be), could make that statement true. If you don't believe God is pro-life, then why worry, and if you think God may be pro-life and may make that statement true (the statement you quote above about the cause of the cancer)then one would be totally crazy to be anything other than pro-life. Do you agree or disagree with me here?
For example, if I thought that some religion was "made up" and I didn't believe in it, and that religion taught that it's founder was going to cause my head to explode if I didn't believe in their ways, why would I even worry about my head exploding? It's only if I thought that there was some chance that the religion was true would I care about it and I certainly wouldn't get myself all twisted in a knot if the information I was getting from this religion was comming to me over an internet chat room.
One last thing, at the risk of being a name caller, you may want to reconsider your statement about abortion never being outlawed. The general rule of thumb for ayone who loves or studies human history or science and technology is... never ever say never- ever.
Tom
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.