Skip to comments.
Ban on the Display of Aborted Fetus Signs (Need help in Wisconsin, please FREEP this poll)
WISCTV3 ^
| January 15, 2002
Posted on 01/15/2002 7:29:08 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-139 last
To: Dog Gone
#4)
I think the use of photos of aborted fetuses is offensive #24) I'm just arguing that common sense tells you that you shouldn't do it, unless your goal is to offend people and be hated.
#105) Your characterization of anyone who doesn't support the wisdom of it as a coward is offensive.
#105) But that's in keeping with your whole approach to the issue, isn't it? Win people to your side by being offensive.
#113) The difference between you and me is that you think offending people is an effective tactic.
So you are offended by my statement about you being afraid of offending people with actual pictures of abortion that you also find offensive. What doesn't offend you?
To: Ronaldus Magnus
Are you expecting an answer to that ridiculous question?
At this point, I don't care what you do. I've explained my position and you are free to reject it, which you have.
Hope that helps.
To: supercat
I would posit that an ad which showed an ultrasound of a fetus followed by the sight of some blood and indistinct ground-up gore running down a drain would be more horrifying You might be right, especially if it was on one of these.
To: Dog Gone
At this point, I don't care what you do. Now I'm offended!!!
;-)
To: Ronaldus Magnus
yes-55%
no-45%
Not bad for Wisconsin.
To: Ronaldus Magnus
FReeped & Bumped
Comment #127 Removed by Moderator
To: Ronaldus Magnus
LOL
To: Salvation
Thank you for your help. It was 23%(68)"Yes" to 77%(223)"No" when we started. I would have thought that the first amendment aspect would have made it more palatable for all the bleeding hearts around Madison. Their priorities, however, clearly place more importance on not permitting dissent against abortion than maintaining free political speech.
Thank goodness for all the good people here!
To: Ronaldus Magnus
Freeped> BTTT!
To: Ronaldus Magnus;Dog Gone
Of coarse the pictures are offensive, the abortion issue is so polarized there is nothing one side can do to change the others minds. The effect of the pics is to wake up the sleepers in your base ones that would turn a blind eye to a less graphic (shocking) presentation. As a bonus they serve as an embarassment to the abortionists and put them on the defensive. I have held these signs up in front of an abortion mill in DC with tears in my eyes. Believe me they have impact.
44,000,000 american babies murdered since 1973. How can we not do SOMETHING?
To: Ronaldus Magnus
FReeped--by another Wisconsinite. At this time, it's 56-to-44 with the GOOD GUYS on TOP!!!
132
posted on
01/17/2002 6:36:32 PM PST
by
ninenot
To: Ronaldus Magnus
You still don't get it. The First Amendment is only enforced for those who hate life, the Judaeo-Christian tradition, and property rights--in about that order.
The First Amendment does NOT apply to others.
133
posted on
01/17/2002 6:42:32 PM PST
by
ninenot
To: Ronaldus Magnus
Done! I guess the liberals don`t feel we "the unwashed masses" should see their handi-work.
134
posted on
01/17/2002 7:02:05 PM PST
by
nomad
To: Gore_ War_ Vet
Of coarse the pictures are offensive, the abortion issue is so polarized there is nothing one side can do to change the others minds. The effect of the pics is to wake up the sleepers in your base ones that would turn a blind eye to a less graphic (shocking) presentation. As a bonus they serve as an embarassment to the abortionists and put them on the defensive. I have held these signs up in front of an abortion mill in DC with tears in my eyes. Believe me they have impact. How much violence was actually shown in the shower scene in Psycho? How does the impression created by that scene compare with far more graphic slasher films that have appeared since?
I would suggest that a far more subdued approach could yield more of a favorable reaction and less backlash than the graphic approach these ads take. Another thread may provide some useful ideas. For example, an abortionist mentioned there supposedly offered would-have-been mothers footprints of the fetuses he destroyed. Combining such footprints and "family photos" [which he also offered] with photos of some of the stacks of containers would IMHO be much more effective than pictures of dismembered corpses.
To: Gore_ War_ Vet
We held them up in Texas. My husband had a woman stop and scream at him,"this is horrible, horrible..." and my husband told her, "yes it is". Of course that wasn't what she was talking about.
136
posted on
01/19/2002 5:55:23 PM PST
by
kassie
To: kassie
Yes, I've heard "That's disgusting" and "That's sick" and I replied yes it is and it's happening right in there.
To: Gore_ War_ Vet
Both of your replies are correct and truthful.
138
posted on
01/20/2002 4:52:43 AM PST
by
kassie
To: Gore_ War_ Vet
Sorry should have said both of THEIR replies are correct and truthful.
139
posted on
01/20/2002 4:53:32 AM PST
by
kassie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-139 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson