Replies

Dear Trinity_Tx,

"It is your 'strategy' of dogmatism and rudely offending everyone who you even think veers even slightly away from your position that hasn't even been able to get rid of partial birth abortion."

That looks like a taunt to me. Operative words: "hasn't even been able" to get rid of such an outrage. You are pointing out the extreme impotence of these folks, blaming the folks with whom you disagree. That's taunting in my book.

You interpret my words as insults, I interpret this as a taunt.

"'Trinity_Tx's egregious insults offered to the whole of the pro-life movement'"

"They do not, and I have made that repeatedly clear."

No - you've insulted the pro-life movement by saying that it, or some component of the movement is responsible for the failure to ban partial birth abortion.

When it isn't true.

You've insulted the pro-life movement, pretty much in general, as a whole, when you said this:

"If pro-lifers worked to elect politicians who respected the constitution, rather than blowing them off because they didn't toe the whole moment of conception, no compromise line, that wouldn't be a problem."

At least in your previous quote, one could interpret the "you" of the sentence as referring only to your correspondent, and not the entire movement.

With this quote, there doesn't appear to be any qualifiers. You state, "If pro-lifers" without qualification. That's a pretty general insult.

No one who demands a candidate favor overturning Roe is failing to elect politicians who respect the Constitution.

"It's no wonder you don't see the problem - you are part of it."

Well, you're entitled to your opinion.

I think the problems lay elsewhere among some who call themselves pro-life.

sitetest

You quibble:
"At least in your previous quote, one could interpret the "you" of the sentence as referring only to your correspondent, and not the entire movement.

With this quote, there doesn't appear to be any qualifiers. You state, "If pro-lifers" without qualification. That's a pretty general insult."

My entire post was:

If pro-lifers worked to elect politicians who respected the constitution, rather than blowing them off because they didn't toe the whole moment of conception, no compromise line, that wouldn't be a problem.

We have seen many posters here say that Hillary would be no better than Condi, and they'll stay home, because "you are either pro-life or pro-death".

Their narrowly focused "strategy" only gets us more Black-robed maggots.

You again neglected to include the second two paragraphs, which showed to whom I was referring.

And if that weren't clear enough, you still refuse to acknowledge that just 4 posts prior, before you even came on thread, I had written:

I'm not going after pro-lifers. I am pro-life.

I'm going after those among us who are holding back progress in this fight by their absolutist, thus losing, strategies.

Again, those words are no different than those I hear often from my friends who are activists in the movement.

I'm sorry I didn't say "not the entire pro-life movement", or whatever else you want to cavil about, in every post. I didn't think anyone would come along looking for ways to make me an enemy of people I keep telling you I respect.

That you continue to do so just proves my point. But, I think it's way past time for you to back off.