Home - List All Discussions

on the subject of violence...

was this justified attack or not

by: galen

did this help or hurt the cause?
link: http://www.kmiz.com/news/story.php?id=11443&author=Jacqueline%20Lapine&category=Crime&franchise=&county=Boone&city=Columbia&partner=

in my opinion this type of publicity falls short of PH, but did it really serve any purpose or just give prolife another black eye?

reply from: joe

You should start caring more about the unborn child instead of our "image". She made this fight real, we are dealing with real human life.
She did more good in that moment than all your words combined. She made people think.

reply from: joe

Your conclusion is wrong. Who thinks we are lunatics? You mean the cold hearted killers and their supporters. Your arrogance is unbelievable.

reply from: cracrat

Your conclusion is wrong. Who thinks we are lunatics? You mean the cold hearted killers and their supporters. Your arrogance is unbelievable.
Which is the majority of America right? If you're trying to get people to align to your thinking, convincing them they're joining the lunatic side isn't the first thing I'd suggest putting on a winning strategy.

reply from: joe

Lets consider cracrats solution. "keep it legal, yeah that will work."

reply from: jujujellybean

yah, I agree. Though I don't think the majority of americans are for abortion on demand....will have to look that one up.....

reply from: cracrat

No, for you Americans, since coming here and learning, I've concluded that the best way to solve the abortion problem is to get the unborn recognised as persons before the constitution.

reply from: carolemarie

what he said
agree with that!

reply from: KaylieBee

Violence will rarely do any good.

reply from: yoda

Neither, IMO. The woman was possibly emotionally unstable, and only attacked furniture and abortion equipment. Not much there to help or hurt the prolife cause, IMO.
Where's all the usual sympathy for someone who may have mental problems? Are prolifers not entitled to such sympathy?

reply from: churchmouse

joe...........AND WHAT WAS IT THAT YOU DO FOR THE CAUSE? lol
Did I miss the post where you listed the things you do? Hmmmmmm
You advocate violence but don't do anything yourself. Oh thats passion for the unborn alright.
And what if your daughter, wife, son, signifacant other or someone you loved was caught in the crossfire of a violent act at one of these places? It would be ok with you?
She is a whacko that should be locked up and probably will be real soon. There are a lot of ways to show opposition to something rather than violence. But you condone violence. I'm sorry but you probably think that it would have been better had she killed someone. That would have gotten even better headlines right?
If you think what she did was right and positive for the cause......then why dont more people try it? How about you? I am not trying to incite violence here just asking a legitamate question. Or are you to comfortable sittin on your sofa and posting on the computer? LOL Let her pay the price, it isnt worth that much to you, is that it?

She should be locked up and so should anyone that takes matters into their own hands. Abortion is murder for those that are pro-life, but our country says its moral and legal. You think what Hill did and what she did was acceptable, that is whats sad.
What have you done for the cause Joe?
concerned parent is right when he said this......."You're not concerned about image, but you say she did good because she "made people think?" She made people think we're a bunch of lunatics....Joe, you never cease to amaze me... "
She served time in a mental home.......oh thats positive alright. LOL
You simply amaze me.
Our Constitution does recognize them. Our liberal courts and judges do not AND THEY RAPE THIS DOCUMENT BY ALLOWING ABORTION.

reply from: Faramir

The report said that she has some mental health issues.
I don't see why this needs to be a black eye for the prolife movement.

reply from: nancyu

Neither, IMO. The woman was possibly emotionally unstable, and only attacked furniture and abortion equipment. Not much there to help or hurt the prolife cause, IMO.
Where's all the usual sympathy for someone who may have mental problems? Are prolifers not entitled to such sympathy?
You won't believe this Yoda, but I've been trying to log in to say just this.
This neither helped nor hurt. This woman didn't know how to deal with her frustration, and to me that is understandable. People who are pro life, or who would convert won't be affected by this.
It might give choicers another thing to laugh at and ridicule; but that reflects on them, not on us. IMO
And your question is a good one. Where is all the sympathy for this woman, folks?

reply from: nancyu

joe...........AND WHAT WAS IT THAT YOU DO FOR THE CAUSE? lol
Did I miss the post where you listed the things you do? Hmmmmmm
You advocate violence but don't do anything yourself. Oh thats passion for the unborn alright.
And what if your daughter, wife, son, signifacant other or someone you loved was caught in the crossfire of a violent act at one of these places? It would be ok with you?
She is a whacko that should be locked up and probably will be real soon. There are a lot of ways to show opposition to something rather than violence. But you condone violence. I'm sorry but you probably think that it would have been better had she killed someone. That would have gotten even better headlines right?
If you think what she did was right and positive for the cause......then why dont more people try it? How about you? I am not trying to incite violence here just asking a legitamate question. Or are you to comfortable sittin on your sofa and posting on the computer? LOL Let her pay the price, it isnt worth that much to you, is that it?
She should be locked up and so should anyone that takes matters into their own hands. Abortion is murder for those that are pro-life, but our country says its moral and legal. You think what Hill did and what she did was acceptable, that is whats sad.
What have you done for the cause Joe?
concerned parent is right when he said this......."You're not concerned about image, but you say she did good because she "made people think?" She made people think we're a bunch of lunatics....Joe, you never cease to amaze me... "
She served time in a mental home.......oh thats positive alright. LOL
You simply amaze me.
Our Constitution does recognize them. Our liberal courts and judges do not AND THEY RAPE THIS DOCUMENT BY ALLOWING ABORTION.
deep breaths, churchmouse.

reply from: sander

It doesn't hurt the pro-life movement. And I dare say, comparing her to what proaborts try to do to protesters, i.e., running them over with their cars, throwing punches, throwing ice cold drinks, (right, Yoda) and such, it's no big deal.

reply from: cracrat

Our Constitution does recognize them. Our liberal courts and judges do not AND THEY RAPE THIS DOCUMENT BY ALLOWING ABORTION.
OK. But since the courts are there to uphold the constitution and they're not interpretting it correctly, perhaps a little more work remains to be done.

reply from: galen

Neither, IMO. The woman was possibly emotionally unstable, and only attacked furniture and abortion equipment. Not much there to help or hurt the prolife cause, IMO.
Where's all the usual sympathy for someone who may have mental problems? Are prolifers not entitled to such sympathy?
------------------------------------
i have sympathy for her if she truely does have these problems... however i am not sure she does... there are a couple of disrepancies in this story.
1. can she be charged with assault if she was not physically harming another person.
2. does she truely have a mental defect or is this something that has been made up by a.the prochoice crowd to make a prolife stance look like a bunch of nutters going around or b. being used by the prolife woman as a way to 'explain' her behaviour and not be jailed for long.
this whole mess seems suspicious to me especially sense HPPA precludes the release of any mental health info without consent from the patient.

reply from: joe

I'm actually "pro-guns" because of the value I attach to human life...but that's another topic, isn't it? If you think it's inconsistent, address it in a new topic.
Is that born human life you are talking about? Curious.

reply from: joe

Whatever force is legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child.
Wow Churchmouse, I did not know you judge? Maybe you should give her chocolate and tea....hypocrite.

reply from: joe

At least she has an excuse. What is your excuse for using deadly force against a innocent human being.

reply from: galen

Whatever force is legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child.
Wow Churchmouse, I did not know you judge? Maybe you should give her chocolate and tea....hypocrite.
Is that what this lady did? "Defend unborn children?" How many lives did she save, Joe? You simply condone acts of aggression against those you deem the "enemy" whether they were actually "defensive" or not, don't you?
---------------
this is what makes me suspicious... it can be spun either way.

reply from: galen

i had that... they swear to me its dead...

reply from: joe

The fact that the pro-life movement cannot understand itself, cannot believe that actual murder is committed by the abortionist and yet preaches to the world that the unborn are indeed human beings....that needs serious intervention.
It is human life no way around it, no "subjective truth".

reply from: joe

Did I say "born human life?" "Human life" is all inclusive. You can cease and desist with the dishonest implications at your discretion.
Do you not see the question mark? Here is another one: ?
Hmmm, so you believe in weapons to defend innocent human life but only those that qualify the criteria set forth by the all-mighty self-proclaimed messiah of "subjective truth".

reply from: sheri

I feel sorry for her, she sounds like a head case. I dont think the media could hate us any more then they already do.

reply from: joe

To respect and love a post abortive woman walking out of a clinic that just killed a human being and turn around and attack a mentally unstable woman who tried to defend human life is flat out hypocrisy.
If I was neutral on this subject, I would conclude by logic alone that the pro-life movement is lying through its teeth. Why are we sending a mixed message, for someone who claims to care about our image...you should be able to logically understand this.

reply from: joe

Where did you come up with that one? Collateral damage must be considered. Killing innocent human life is not defending it, two separate issues.
I understand where you stand. I believe you are confused on your moral principles, by combining political motives with human defense you created two separate answers. Logically, the defense of innocent human life is absolute and for you to continue to rebuke it shows logical inconsistency. Either way we should end it here.

reply from: joe

It was Churchmouse that I gave this reference to, since that is her ministry. I believe that she should answer this, since you and I are not part of this compassionate ministry. (I hope you are involved with post abortive ministries, that would explain your logical shortcomings).

reply from: galen

lol most of the time i completely understand CP... i may not agree w/ him but i do understand... you Joe... i can not say the same about.

reply from: joe

I do not expect you to understand.

reply from: joe

You use political excuses and/or motivations to justify the sacrifice of human life. Flawed.
Simple enough?

reply from: joe

Let me say it "slowly". 50 million innocent human beings already died. When is it enough before it becomes justifiable, politically?
Did I lose you? How much more human beings must die before you can calculate the answer according to "subjective truth".

reply from: joe

I must understand to keep it simple with you.
What do you think would happen to the abortion industry if 1000 doctors were "stopped" within 30 days? Pure speculation, no condoning of violence...just a honest response.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I must understand to keep it simple with you.
What do you think would happen to the abortion industry if 1000 doctors were "stopped" within 30 days? Pure speculation, no condoning of violence...just a honest response.
I assume 1000 jobs would open up. Of course, that would depend on how long they were "stopped" for, and whether it would actually be possible to "stop" them...
What do you suppose would happen to the abortion industry if "God" answered prayers, or if a genie gave you 3 wishes?
If doctors were stopped, more would come in there place and others would pick up the slack until that happened. I don't think a single abortion would be prevented.

reply from: joe

Surely you know the answer (at least I hope, so I do not judge you as mentally incapable of reasoning).
It is this fear to face the truth that limits most people. I will leave it at that.

reply from: galen

I must understand to keep it simple with you.
What do you think would happen to the abortion industry if 1000 doctors were "stopped" within 30 days? Pure speculation, no condoning of violence...just a honest response.
I assume 1000 jobs would open up. Of course, that would depend on how long they were "stopped" for, and whether it would actually be possible to "stop" them...
What do you suppose would happen to the abortion industry if "God" answered prayers, or if a genie gave you 3 wishes?
If doctors were stopped, more would come in there place and others would pick up the slack until that happened. I don't think a single abortion would be prevented.
-------------------
tell that to arizona lolita....

reply from: galen

the prevailing climate is stopping them... most doctors do not want to have anything to do with the subject and most insurance companies will not write malpractice policies for those who do. Most of the states that have large #'s of clinics end up insuring them for malpractice thru state run malp insurance... not the best place to be insured... just to keep them in the state... once that becomes too expensive then by by MD's hello nurse practitioners... untill they too run away.
Even the greed of the insurance industry can sometimes have a bit of silver in it.

reply from: yoda

Exactly. The frustration of not being able to do anything legally to stop the slaughter is just too much sometimes, for some people.
Sure. Talk about some woman who has drowned five kids in a bathtub, or two in her car, and many people are just full of sympathy and understanding, saying stuff like "she must be insane, so we should urge them to give her therapy and other treatment, not persecute her". But let a prolifer step outside the boundaries of accepted behavior, and it's "lynch her from the nearest tree".

reply from: yoda

Exactly. When furniture bleeds, I'll fret over it.

reply from: yoda

I wouldn't know about that, but several posters have already pronounced her as looney as a bed bug.... and all I said was that she MIGHT have emotional problems..... right?
No.

reply from: yoda

You got that last part right...... and of course, they'll play it as if her actions are "typical" of all 100 million prolifers in this country.... no doubt.

reply from: galen

Neither, IMO. The woman was possibly emotionally unstable, and only attacked furniture and abortion equipment. Not much there to help or hurt the prolife cause, IMO.
Where's all the usual sympathy for someone who may have mental problems? Are prolifers not entitled to such sympathy?
----------------------------------
so she actually did assault someone...i thought maybe you had some diffrent info than what was reported in the story...

reply from: galen

You got that last part right...... and of course, they'll play it as if her actions are "typical" of all 100 million prolifers in this country.... no doubt.
------------------------------------------------
no they can't hate us any more... but this can and i think probably will just re-issue the edict against us.. ie all prolifers are religious nutters.

reply from: yoda

Yeah I see I missed those two words "injuring staff".... not very specific as to how, how badly, or anything like that.... it could be that the staff person got hit by flying furniture, who knows? When it's a prolifer, if a proabort has one hair knocked out of place, it's "assault".
But I still wonder why very few here are cutting her any slack on the possibility that she may be emotionally unstable...... some are saying she is insane, and you seem to be saying she isn't and needs to be locked up... how do these posters here get all this inside information? Do some of you guys have crystal balls that you use to get additional reliable information?
Pity the prolifer who is a few cards short of a full deck....... they are convicted before they are even arrested.

reply from: joe

She should be honored.
Since you are a traitor to the human race, I do not expect you to understand.

reply from: galen

Yeah I see I missed those two words "injuring staff".... not very specific as to how, how badly, or anything like that.... it could be that the staff person got hit by flying furniture, who knows? When it's a prolifer, if a proabort has one hair knocked out of place, it's "assault".
But I still wonder why very few here are cutting her any slack on the possibility that she may be emotionally unstable...... some are saying she is insane, and you seem to be saying she isn't and needs to be locked up... how do these posters here get all this inside information? Do some of you guys have crystal balls that you use to get additional reliable information?
Pity the prolifer who is a few cards short of a full deck....... they are convicted before they are even arrested.
-----------------------------------------------
no i'm saying I DON"T KNOW but bringing up anyones mental stability right out the gate is a bit suspect.
If she is mentally ill... this is a bad turn for prolife... and if she is not but playing that card it is still a bad turn.
violence never makes a good statement.
If she is mentally ill than her family and doctor need to have more controll of the situation so she can not do things like this again... if she is mentally ill then there is no statement that she has made and she is not in the hero catagory Joe, because she is not responsible for her actions...

reply from: Faramir

Yeah I see I missed those two words "injuring staff".... not very specific as to how, how badly, or anything like that.... it could be that the staff person got hit by flying furniture, who knows? When it's a prolifer, if a proabort has one hair knocked out of place, it's "assault".
But I still wonder why very few here are cutting her any slack on the possibility that she may be emotionally unstable...... some are saying she is insane, and you seem to be saying she isn't and needs to be locked up... how do these posters here get all this inside information? Do some of you guys have crystal balls that you use to get additional reliable information?
Pity the prolifer who is a few cards short of a full deck....... they are convicted before they are even arrested.
YO!
I cut her some slack! I said she was a mental case and didn't hurt our cause.
Somebody tell him I cut her some slack.
I think he's been hitting the iggy bottle too much lately.
Seriously, dude, how can you know what's going on or what people are saying or not saying if you ignore so many of them?
(Of course I know he can't read this since I'm on ignore, but there's a chance it will be quoted by someone he's not ignoring or that he peeks sometimes).

reply from: galen

Yeah I see I missed those two words "injuring staff".... not very specific as to how, how badly, or anything like that.... it could be that the staff person got hit by flying furniture, who knows? When it's a prolifer, if a proabort has one hair knocked out of place, it's "assault".
But I still wonder why very few here are cutting her any slack on the possibility that she may be emotionally unstable...... some are saying she is insane, and you seem to be saying she isn't and needs to be locked up... how do these posters here get all this inside information? Do some of you guys have crystal balls that you use to get additional reliable information?
Pity the prolifer who is a few cards short of a full deck....... they are convicted before they are even arrested.
YO!
I cut her some slack! I said she was a mental case and didn't hurt our cause.
Somebody tell him I cut her some slack.
I think he's been hitting the iggy bottle too much lately.
Seriously, dude, how can you know what's going on or what people are saying or not saying if you ignore so many of them?
(Of course I know he can't read this since I'm on ignore, but there's a chance it will be quoted by someone he's not ignoring or that he peeks sometimes).
----------------------
i know i know i just couldn't help myself....

reply from: yoda

Say what? How do you control someone 24/7 when they are not locked up?
More to the point, how does her family and her doctor relate to the "damage to the prolife image"?

reply from: yoda

Seems to me he ought to realize that I was referring to those posts I actually HAD read....... or does EVERYTHING have to relate to HIM?

reply from: cracrat

Sedatives, lots and lots of sedatives

reply from: faithman

No black eye at all. Either the pre-born is a person, or they are not. If the preborn are persons, then her deffensive action was totally right. Also, it is a fact that insurance is harder for abortionist to afford, and goes up even further when such action is taken. It is also a fact that there are fewer abortionist everytime deffensive action is taken. If this were a righteous nation, evbery abortion clinic in the land would burn to the ground this very day. But idiots have populatede so called pro-life, and would rather protect the abortionist, than those they are paid to kill. It is this double standard, more than anything else, wehich has kept abortion legal for over 3 decades.

reply from: faithman

No black eye at all. Either the pre-born is a person, or they are not. If the preborn are persons, then her deffensive action was totally right. Also, it is a fact that insurance is harder for abortionist to afford, and goes up even further when such action is taken. It is also a fact that there are fewer abortionist everytime deffensive action is taken. If this were a righteous nation, evbery abortion clinic in the land would burn to the ground this very day. But idiots have populatede so called pro-life, and would rather protect the abortionist, than those they are paid to kill. It is this double standard, more than anything else, wehich has kept abortion legal for over 3 decades.
Right. If we weren't "idiots," we could just take this country over by force and eventually become a proper terrorist theocracy. Before the war is over, we could possibly have killed everyone everyone who might object...
Arte you SSSSSOOOOOO ignorant of our history? This country was founded thru blood shed. Our founding documents not only condone, but call it a duty to take up arms against government when it becomes despotic. If abortion is not a totally act of despostism, what is it? We popped several red coats over the price of a tea bag. Are you going to try and say that a womb child is less valuable than a tea bag? And don't include others when it comes to being an idiot. You stand alone as a shining example.

reply from: faithman

No black eye at all. Either the pre-born is a person, or they are not. If the preborn are persons, then her deffensive action was totally right. Also, it is a fact that insurance is harder for abortionist to afford, and goes up even further when such action is taken. It is also a fact that there are fewer abortionist everytime deffensive action is taken. If this were a righteous nation, evbery abortion clinic in the land would burn to the ground this very day. But idiots have populatede so called pro-life, and would rather protect the abortionist, than those they are paid to kill. It is this double standard, more than anything else, wehich has kept abortion legal for over 3 decades.
Right. If we weren't "idiots," we could just take this country over by force and eventually become a proper terrorist theocracy. Before the war is over, we could possibly have killed everyone everyone who might object...
Arte you SSSSSOOOOOO ignorant of our history? This country was founded thru blood shed. Our founding documents not only condone, but call it a duty to take up arms against government when it becomes despotic. If abortion is not a totally act of despostism, what is it? We popped several red coats over the price of a tea bag. Are you going to try and say that a womb child is less valuable than a tea bag? And don't include others when it comes to being an idiot. You stand alone as a shining example.
Well go ahead and do what you think is right instead of whining about it like a little girl with gum in her hair.
Much better than being a monkey boy convict phony.

reply from: galen

Say what? How do you control someone 24/7 when they are not locked up?
More to the point, how does her family and her doctor relate to the "damage to the prolife image"?
--------------------------
if she is this ill to go around assaulting people places or things... then she can do so anywhere, not just AB clinics... there for she is in need of a Baker act.

reply from: faithman

Say what? How do you control someone 24/7 when they are not locked up?
More to the point, how does her family and her doctor relate to the "damage to the prolife image"?
--------------------------
if she is this ill to go around assaulting people places or things... then she can do so anywhere, not just AB clinics... there for she is in need of a Baker act.
Either the pre-born is a person, or they are not. If the preborn are persons, then her deffensive action was totally right. Also, it is a fact that insurance is harder for abortionist to afford, and goes up even further when such action is taken. It is also a fact that there are fewer abortionist everytime deffensive action is taken. If this were a righteous nation, every abortion clinic in the land would burn to the ground this very day. But idiots have populated so called pro-life, and would rather protect the abortionist, than those they are paid to kill. It is this double standard, more than anything else, which has kept abortion legal for over 3 decades.

reply from: galen

insurance comapies will not rais his premiums if he is attacked by a random nutter... wich if this lady is ill she will qualify as. The act does not mean anything to anyone if she is mentally ill... do you not see that... its even worse than picketing because it will be completely ineffective. The majority of people will go... 'oh lady is nuts... coincidence it was a clinic' and forget about it....she makes no statement if she is insane and a bad one if she is sane.

reply from: faithman

You are just simply wrong. Insurance is a numbers racket. They could care less about the mental state of those who trash abortion clinics. All they care about is the frequency of the action, and how much they have to pay out on claims. If more abortion clinics filed damage claims, no matter how that damage occurred, then the risk of insureing goes up. That means the cost goes up. The insurance industry cares about nothing else besides making money. And your post does not show a real picture of the history of this issue. Everytime an abortionist goes down, many others quit. Everytime a clinic goes up, insurance rates do the same. That is hard cold fact. There is a case in Florida where an abortion clinic owner wants government to provide insurance for an abortion clinic because the rtates had sky rocketed after a clinic was burned. But of course you are of that ilk that would rather protect the abortionist and thier killing field, rather than truely standing for those they slaughter.

reply from: galen

You are just simply wrong. Insurance is a numbers racket. They could care less about the mental state of those who trash abortion clinics. All they care about is the frequency of the action, and how much they have to pay out on claims. If more abortion clinics filed damage claims, no matter how that damage occurred, then the risk of insureing goes up. That means the cost goes up. The insurance industry cares about nothing else besides making money. And your post does not show a real picture of the history of this issue. Everytime an abortionist goes down, many others quit. Everytime a clinic goes up, insurance rates do the same. That is hard cold fact. There is a case in Florida where an abortion clinic owner wants government to provide insurance for an abortion clinic because the rtates had sky rocketed after a clinic was burned. But of course you are of that ilk that would rather protect the abortionist and thier killing field, rather than truely standing for those they slaughter.
------------------------------------------------------
shut your GOB.... you think I want abortion clinics open... did you fall on your head while i wasn't looking? *watches FM weave* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yPIC-o1O3k

RFLMAO!!!!!!!
You do not understand the diffrence between malpractice insurance and building/ buisness insurance... and BTW florida DID insure that guy... he owns several more clinics today... including one whose provider is on trial for killing a baby born alive.

reply from: faithman

You are just simply wrong. Insurance is a numbers racket. They could care less about the mental state of those who trash abortion clinics. All they care about is the frequency of the action, and how much they have to pay out on claims. If more abortion clinics filed damage claims, no matter how that damage occurred, then the risk of insureing goes up. That means the cost goes up. The insurance industry cares about nothing else besides making money. And your post does not show a real picture of the history of this issue. Everytime an abortionist goes down, many others quit. Everytime a clinic goes up, insurance rates do the same. That is hard cold fact. There is a case in Florida where an abortion clinic owner wants government to provide insurance for an abortion clinic because the rtates had sky rocketed after a clinic was burned. But of course you are of that ilk that would rather protect the abortionist and thier killing field, rather than truely standing for those they slaughter.
------------------------------------------------------
shut your GOB.... you think I want abortion clinics open... did you fall on your head while i wasn't looking?
RFLMAO!!!!!!!
You do not understand the diffrence between malpractice insurance and building/ buisness insurance... and BTW florida DID insure that guy... he owns several more clinics today... including one whose provider is on trial for killing a baby born alive.
This shows you do not know what you are talking about. It wasn't a guy, but a women. If you don't want clinics open, then why do you condemn those who truely shut them down? You most assuredly do protect the abortionist and their clinics more than the womb children they destroy.

reply from: galen

why does the pronoun i use matter..... the information i have is that the owner of the clinic is a male....
the same info male or female would not matter.

reply from: galen

violence is never the answer...

reply from: faithman

Once again you are simply wrong. If what you say is true, then you should be advocating that all military and police forces be desolved. The only answere to an evil aggressor hell bent on destroying innocent life, is lethal force, or the threat there of. Are you saying that a dad killing an evil agressor threatening violence against his family is not answere? Are you saying that anyone who uses lethal force to stop a rape is no answere? Are you aying that all african americans should go back into chains because their freedom was won by those who answere the call to shed blood on their behalf? What about the answere of scripture on the cure for the shedding of innocent blood? Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. Gosh, sure don't line up with the false christianity presented on this forum now does it?

reply from: galen

we have already had this discussion ... with you in fact.. I have NEVER had to use violence to protect myself or the women in my charge... niether has anyone else.
We do not allow guns in the shelter... and i don't eat meat. I do not advocate the war. I do not think that forcing our will around does anything good... i do believe in attraction rather than promotion of a non violent way of life.
If the face of violent christianity is the one that you promoted to me then i would not want to be called a christian under those terms.
I'm pretty sure i'll get to find out the answer to these questions and more much sooner than you will... so i'll be sure to come back and let you know the answer.. OK?

reply from: faithman

In the mean time, don't speak SSSSSSOOOOO authoritative when you are out of touch with the truth that governs these issues.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

More expressed, collective outrage would indeed, help our cause.
http://bloodtoiltearsandsweat.blogspot.com/

reply from: yoda

What do you mean "go around assaulting people places or things"? Are you implying that she makes a habit of such attacks? Where did you get that information?
And hypothetically, just how do you predict when someone will have a severe episode, if they are normal most of the time? Hypothetically, how do you know when they may stop taking their meds?

reply from: galen

What do you mean "go around assaulting people places or things"? Are you implying that she makes a habit of such attacks? Where did you get that information?
And hypothetically, just how do you predict when someone will have a severe episode, if they are normal most of the time? Hypothetically, how do you know when they may stop taking their meds?
----------------------------------------------------------------
what i mean is just that....you will notice the IF at the beginning of the sentence...
and that's the point ...you can not know what a person may or may not do... but you can make an educated guess based on past behaviour.
For example... my son has schizophrenia... i must watch him take his meds every night before bed... no matter what. because i know that it is reasonable to think he may stop taking his meds... and possibly assault someone. i am his mom and my duty is to protect society from what he might do....If i could not or would not do so then i would know that it is within the public's relm to have him Baker acted if he shows himself to be of a violent nature...
So i guess what i am trying to say is that once you have a severe episode ( like this woman) the only prudent thing is for her to be treated like she may do so again...unfortunately for her ( if she does indeed have an illness) this is the way things are for her. Can she try to change them... yes she can... will they change... i do not know.
Either way if she is associated with th prolife movement in that town... her actions have not had a good impact on public perception.

reply from: yoda

The mere mention of that possibility is an implication...... is it not? Why did you even suggest the possibility if you had no reason to suspect it?
And what past behavior of hers are you aware of? Or is that simply another implication?
What evidence do you have that she's done this before? Unless she has, how can you blame her family or doctor for her actions?
Probably not.... but then again I don't think her actions affect the general public's perception of the prolife movement much one way or the other. She's an individual, acting on individual motives.
Women who love babies very much sometimes get very emotional about the idea of someone slaughtering thousands of them every day, and I don't think that in itself is a bad thing at all. I'm glad there are women like that... they balance out the cold hearted ones who do the slaughtering of babies. I wish she could find a more effective way of channeling her anger, but that's another matter altogether.

reply from: galen

IF means yes i suspect but i don't know....
past behaviour.... mentioned in the article.... same as the fact that she has done this before... hence the restraining order
*****************
42-year-old Alexis Keiser violated a restraining order against the business for the second time Wednesday, causing considerable damage and injuring staff.
Keiser is a frequent protestor and has continued to cause problems over the past year. ABC 17 has learned she spent time as a patient at Mid-Missouri Mental Health earlier this year.
**************************
i see you did not take issue with my example... so i ask you if she is sick enough to mention... why are her physicians and relatives NOT restraining her in a psychiatric unit somehow....?

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Originally posted by: galen
[
For example... my son has schizophrenia... [q/]
The apple don't fall far from the tree does it?

reply from: cracrat

That's a vile thing to say, you should be ashamed.

reply from: yoda

IF also means you are implying that the possibility exists.
The fact of a restraining order does not establish that she has "done this before". Unless you know the basis of the order, you don't know why it was issued. Such orders have been issued on very thin grounds.
The key phrase here is "ABC 17". How unbiased and reliable are they? Do you know anything about them?
I am assuming that this person is an adult, not subject to the authority of her parents and/or family, is that not correct? Likewise, she is not subject to the authority of her physician unless she is under his control by legal edict. And the story gives no indication that such a legal edict exists.
What bothers me is that you seem to be jumping on this woman's case simply because she is prolife. Whatever other problems she may or may not have, being prolife is not sufficient reason to hold someone to a higher standard than every other citizen. Being prolife does not restrict you to posting on online forums only.

reply from: galen

her being prolife is not the basis of this standard... i hold everyone to this standard.. ( you know the one that says you should not break into other peoples property to destroy it)
If she is mentally incomkpetant then she should be Baker Acted...that would be the legal edict you spoke of.
i think fox news in general is about as reliable as any other news agency... they all have good and bad.
i have not jumped on this woman... be sure that when/if i do you will not miss it.

reply from: yoda

Maybe...... but in advance? Her family and doctor should have anticipated this and had her locked up in advance?
Which is about as reliable as an internet rumor, right?

Coulda fooled me......

reply from: galen

just slightly higher than internet rumour...in fact i would not have even heard about it if the prolifeamerica website had not had it on the front page...
lol! i fool many people * bwoohahahahaha*

reply from: joe

Would you say the same thing to the Jews during the Holocaust?
It certainly was the answer.

reply from: galen

-----------------------------------
why were you his father... ? if so i have a lawsuit waiting for you.. even though the stat on the gang rape was expired the civil suit is still open... and compounding daily.

reply from: galen

Would you say the same thing to the Jews during the Holocaust?
It certainly was the answer.
------------------------------------------
yes if violence had not been used against them... if wwI had not happened... there are a dozen ifs..
once again.. did God slay Cain for the murder of Abel?

reply from: joe

Would you say the same thing to the Jews during the Holocaust?
It certainly was the answer.
------------------------------------------
yes if violence had not been used against them... if wwI had not happened... there are a dozen ifs..
once again.. did God slay Cain for the murder of Abel?
This is not speculation. We know the outcome of the Holocaust, it was stopped with violence. Point being, it was necessary to save lives.
Is the truth so hard to handle? I cannot understand what you people fear? To speak the truth does not mean you have to advocate violence.

reply from: galen

ok... the war was stopped with violence... it also began with violence... which was my point... none of it needed to happen.
now can YOU answer the cain and able question?

reply from: joe

That is the point, sadly. That violence was necessary. We cannot control the evil of some men and must use force to stop them. It is not our choice on who gets to die, unlike abortion.
I am not aware of the cain and able question. I do not have enough knowledge about the story to answer it truthfully.

reply from: galen

what did God do to cain after he slew Able?
and if God did not kill the first person who murdered someone ( his brother no less) than what right do we have to condemn someone else?

reply from: galen

sorry i thought it was a quite simple question...

reply from: joe

It might be necessary and yes I believe it can be stopped with violence. Whether that is the best move at this time is unknown and my hope this can be won politically.
I will not compromise my principles with my words, just because politically it might be best. I believe truth is the only way to end this.

reply from: joe

Again, you are using your political excuse. It is necessary to save the 4000 lives today. It will be necessary to save the 4000 lives tomorrow.
The question remains, how much more must die before it is politically acceptable or justified politically, according to you? That is the answer we are looking for, that is the answer we do not know.
10 years? 50 years? Never?

reply from: galen

so joe... when do you propose to start blowing up buildings... or shooting people?
put your heart where your mouth is.. or get off the train already.

reply from: joe

Again it boils down to collateral damage. How many lives would be lost if it spirals into a civil war? It will come to a point, when it will be necessary if political means fail. The question remains, how many more must die before it becomes justified? I do not know the answer to this but the message must be proclaimed first. The truth must be preached to every household in America...first.

reply from: galen

great... so you would start a civil war and kill how many more people than the ones already dying now?
what planet of hell do you live on that this is justifiable?

reply from: joe

If it is not necessary? You fail to take into account the number of lives lost.
I agree, we should take the peaceful route. I do not agree we should sacrifice an unlimited amount of human beings.
In either case, the truth must be preached that this is human life and should be treated as such...first by words then by action (hopefully not necessary.)

reply from: joe

We already lost roughly 20% of our current population due to this violence (abortion). We are living in hell for the unborn, but not for you, so why should you care...right?

reply from: galen

you don't pay much attention if you don't think i care... i care so much that the thought of starting a civil war to fight this... ( and for sure you do not know the outcome) and killing yet more people... all while abortions are still going on and legal... apalls me.
what crystal ball gives you the prophesy that you would win?
do you think it justified to risk innocent lives that you MIGHT be victorious?

reply from: joe

If you don't know the answer, why are you arguing that it is justifiable now, arguing that past violent acts were justifiable?
Because they do no violate the absolute truth and there is no reason to believe that they hinder our progress politically.
Also some might even make the case that enough human life was lost, that it is time now.
I believe truth should be preached first, we have not done that and to condemn violent acts of the past is counterproductive to that objective.

reply from: joe

We will lose unless the truth is preached and shown to every individual in the United States. I will not hinder that objective by condemning those that violated no morality by defending innocent human life.

reply from: galen

We will lose unless the truth is preached and shown to every individual in the United States. I will not hinder that objective by condemning those that violated no morality by defending innocent human life.
-------------------
that so did not answer the questions i asked.

reply from: joe

Prove to me that violence will not be necessary.

reply from: galen

before you involve an entire country in a war proove you can be victorious...
1 of the better rules of war ... you should know your outcome.

reply from: joe

We will lose unless the truth is preached and shown to every individual in the United States. I will not hinder that objective by condemning those that violated no morality by defending innocent human life.
-------------------
that so did not answer the questions i asked.
"It is better to die for something than live for nothing." (from the latest Rambo movie)
Point being that we must try. Of course politically first but when is it going to be enough and why do you value born life so much more than unborn life. We already lost 50 million.

reply from: galen

yes and we all know how many wars rambo has fought...
BTW joe... why not ask these questions to the people fighting the most recent war... don't you think they would have liked to have known the answer to thier outcome before the present President committed them all to that particular sandy hell..?

reply from: galen

this is too....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7GeZ3YmONw

reply from: leftistdestroyer

It all boils down to defending and fighting for what is right. To date, peaceful means have failed. We are now faced with a bill, that will end the Pro Life Movement. Our backs will be up against the wall, we will lose, and unlimited abortions will continue unchecked.
We can sit back and lose, like we are now, or we can dictate the future of abortion.
Pacisfism is a stupid, Utopian idea that is to not even be entertained, because the opposite side does not belive in it and they will never buckle. And neither should we. We are defending life, our cause is greater and more noble than their could ever be. Right is on our side, we cannot fail

reply from: galen

have you ev en bothered to READ FOCA?

reply from: leftistdestroyer

What a stupid comment.

reply from: joe

Proves your point irrelevant, idiot.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

I]Originally posted by: concernedparent
40 million dead. When does it become neccessary?

reply from: galen

What a stupid comment.
-------------------------------
the people who died over there from our nation do not think its stupid...

reply from: galen

Yep.
--------------------------
you could have fooled me....

reply from: joe

It is a simple "yes" or "no" question, concernedparent. Is violence not necessary?

reply from: galen

can i wear my corset too? the one with all the pretty dragon studs...

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Originally posted by: galen

It is stupid for a few reasons, but primarily because it has nothing to do with anything relevant. NO outcome is EVER known prior to war.

reply from: galen

OH really coulda fooled Bush... but wait he's your hero if i remember correctly.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Yep.
--------------------------
you could have fooled me....
I asked you in the other thread: What does FOCA say?

reply from: joe

That is your proof??? When will abortion end since you are given this knowledge. Which god gave you this information. LOL.

reply from: galen

didache were written or spoken by some of the apostles.. not direct quotes from christ...ie the interpretations of christs teachings as applicable to Jewish law at the time... remember they were still considered Jews and therefor subject to Jewish Law at the time these were said/ written.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

40 million dead. When does it become neccessary?
You tell me. Is it? Is violence necessary to end abortion? Do you think violence can end abortion?
Well, different tactics are needed that much I do know. If those fail, then at least it will put the issue on the front burner where we can meet in the middle. But right now, it is all out pro abortion and our side, nothing. We are losing and will continue to lose. But, if FOCA gets passed, then I would support it, yes.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

So what are you waiting for? Somebody to go first? I'll have Mary wear a skirt so you can hide behind it when we get started, K?
This is a new development for me. I am testing the waters on pro life sites to see if their is support for it. And it would not be a one man army. It would take one united group to have any impact. Sadly, people like you divide the movement and render it pretty much useless. So, I will gather who I can, and go from their. You may feel better about yourself when you make futile attempts to end abortion, but I am all about actual results. 40 million dead is nothing to sneeze at, yet you seem to not view it as really all that bad. That is a shame.

reply from: galen

you obviously have no real understanding what the bill means...
some of the projections you are making are not even a supposition..the others are pure conjecture..
and no one can sign a bill into law untill it passes BOTh houses... do you really think that will happen when most of the people who are in office right now were the ones that past the PBA ban and the born alive bill...
you give OBAMA too much credit... one of the reasons i think you secretly support him.

reply from: galen

So what are you waiting for? Somebody to go first? I'll have Mary wear a skirt so you can hide behind it when we get started, K?
This is a new development for me. I am testing the waters on pro life sites to see if their is support for it. And it would not be a one man army. It would take one united group to have any impact. Sadly, people like you divide the movement and render it pretty much useless. So, I will gather who I can, and go from their. You may feel better about yourself when you make futile attempts to end abortion, but I am all about actual results. 40 million dead is nothing to sneeze at, yet you seem to not view it as really all that bad. That is a shame.
___________________________________________________
fine then... how many children have you personally saved... i can count over 300 in the last 5 years...

reply from: leftistdestroyer

I asked you waht the bill says.

reply from: galen

i posted it... its all there in black and white.. exaactly what was in the bill verbatim...

reply from: leftistdestroyer

So what are you waiting for? Somebody to go first? I'll have Mary wear a skirt so you can hide behind it when we get started, K?
This is a new development for me. I am testing the waters on pro life sites to see if their is support for it. And it would not be a one man army. It would take one united group to have any impact. Sadly, people like you divide the movement and render it pretty much useless. So, I will gather who I can, and go from their. You may feel better about yourself when you make futile attempts to end abortion, but I am all about actual results. 40 million dead is nothing to sneeze at, yet you seem to not view it as really all that bad. That is a shame.
___________________________________________________
fine then... how many children have you personally saved... i can count over 300 in the last 5 years...
Noble attempt, if it is true, but you have a million to go. Not good enough.

reply from: galen

thell that to the ones you didn't save.. i'm working on it... i give $$ time and rescources to thosee kids and moms and sometimes dads... what do you do...? Blow chunks at a computer.?
When was the last time you picketed a clinic? changed a diaper at a shelter. taught a sex ed class for married couples? what makes you so noble?
talk of revolution?
talk is cheap dude..

reply from: joe

That is your proof??? When will abortion end since you are given this knowledge. Which god gave you this information. LOL.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

You did not. Now what does the bill say?
The patial birth abortion ban was prior to the 2006 election, where republicans were voted out. It is now a Democrat controlled Congress.
Now what does the bill say?

reply from: leftistdestroyer

I protest every Saturday and when different protests come up. Diaper shelters? Sex ed class? Who cares? There are no abortions there. But it makes you feel good dont it?
Talk is the first step, dude.

reply from: galen

interesting that this is the first time you have ever mentioned protesting....
and yeah.. women desprate to abort come to our shelter every day... its one of the things we do.. talk em out of it.. make them see why its wrong, help them w/ food , clothing, legal, education etc. when they leave us they are fully self supporting, not on welfare, educated and capable of raising the child if they so choose. Or if they choose adoption all the legal things are taken care of and they are able to start fresh. We have the added bonus that most of them won't return and all of them are fully informed about the sactity of life in ALL forms.
and no this talk is not cheap.. it costs several million to run each year.

reply from: galen

are you unable to see other threads?
i'll bump it for you.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Originally posted by: concernedparent
abortion cannot be 100% ended with violence. Or any other means. I mean, rape happens and it still happens. But yes, real change can happen through violence. Is it neccessary? Not right yet. Their are other means to be tried first, but after those, the next step is civil disobedience. It has worked in the past.
I would support it not solely on "assumptions". I would support it because it limits the freedom of the States to ban abortion.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Originally posted by: galen
This is a pro life site. I shouldn't have to prove anything to the people who share the same goal as if I were on a pro abortion site. I was a member of protestwarrior as well, as if you really care. I have the spit, the key marks on my car, the tore off bumper stickers, and the cracked window to prove it, smartass! If you are calling me a liar, then go to hell.

reply from: joe

You gave a dishonest answer. You prove yourself to be lacking credibility. Sad, concernedparent...no real brains, just a bunch of twisted words.

reply from: galen

This is a pro life site. I shouldn't have to prove anything to the people who share the same goal as if I were on a pro abortion site. I was a member of protestwarrior as well, as if you really care. I have the spit, the key marks on my car, the tore off bumper stickers, and the cracked window to prove it, smartass! If you are calling me a liar, then go to hell.
_________________________
listen dead monkey brains..... if you had done the time you would know that we are all suspicious by nature... a lesson learned in the trenches...if yu had been doing what you say you have then you would know that PP and others often send in people... with the same attitude as you.. to advertise.. thier 'side of the story' or whatever... just to be able to post junk on other websites. people who are trusted come in quietly introduce themselves... learn the lay of the land and then participate... you 2 came in like someone who as you so eloquently put it 'keyed' your car and spat on you.
don't expect us to praise you like a 4 course meal when you present yourself in a trash bin.

reply from: galen

he must think he's in mossadd

reply from: leftistdestroyer

This is a pro life site. I shouldn't have to prove anything to the people who share the same goal as if I were on a pro abortion site. I was a member of protestwarrior as well, as if you really care. I have the spit, the key marks on my car, the tore off bumper stickers, and the cracked window to prove it, smartass! If you are calling me a liar, then go to hell.
_________________________
listen dead monkey brains..... if you had done the time you would know that we are all suspicious by nature... a lesson learned in the trenches...if yu had been doing what you say you have then you would know that PP and others often send in people... with the same attitude as you.. to advertise.. thier 'side of the story' or whatever... just to be able to post junk on other websites. people who are trusted come in quietly introduce themselves... learn the lay of the land and then participate... you 2 came in like someone who as you so eloquently put it 'keyed' your car and spat on you.
don't expect us to praise you like a 4 course meal when you present yourself in a trash bin.
Watch the name calling.

reply from: galen

you started it...
but i can do better...

reply from: leftistdestroyer

abortion cannot be 100% ended with violence. Or any other means. I mean, rape happens and it still happens. But yes, real change can happen through violence. Is it neccessary? Not right yet. Their are other means to be tried first, but after those, the next step is civil disobedience. It has worked in the past.
I would support it not solely on "assumptions". I would support it because it limits the freedom of the States to ban abortion.
Don't downgrade on me. We're talking about violence, not just "civil disobedience..." Do you understand exactly what this would entail, even to have a chance at victory? Do you think any group of armed subversives can defeat the U.S. military?
Do you really think I want to go to jail before I have a chance to do anything. Read between the lines. What do you think I support?
We may may not, but who knows what it can accomplish. It could put the issue on the front burner. The methods that I prefer, are the ones that caught the attention of the politicians in the 60/70's. The methods that the feminists used. that the gays used. that the civil rights used.

reply from: cracrat

It is stupid for a few reasons, but primarily because it has nothing to do with anything relevant. NO outcome is EVER known prior to war.
"The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory."
-Sun Tzu
The Art of War

reply from: cracrat

The Viet Cong managed it, the Iraqi militias aren't doing too bad a job of it. All you need to do is make a point of not going toe-to-toe with them.

reply from: yoda

Well, you guys could start a private thread........

reply from: faithman

The Viet Cong managed it, the Iraqi militias aren't doing too bad a job of it. All you need to do is make a point of not going toe-to-toe with them.
Here is the stupidity of CP's post. [for someone who blows his own horn of how smart he is, he is really quite stupid] This country was formed by a bunch of rabble taking on the most powerful impire on the planet. What it would entail is people smart enough to make a plan that gives them a chance to walk away clean to fight another day. The clinics should burn first. If the abortionist didn't get the message, Then the womb child should be protected from them by inducing severe led poisioning. I do not advocate the torture of baby killers, like they torture the womb child to death. Just quick simple and humane. All you would have to do is buggy whip a few clinic workers, and the rest would quit in droves. The most vunerable in the borthead camp, are the workers. Just picketing their homes has caused many to quit, and clinics to close because they lack labor. Clinic workers homes and cars generally don't have the security cameras like a clinic. If it becomes a bigger liability to work there, I assure you they will take another carrer path. And all these folk who say Violence does no good are simple wrong. I have personally heard an OBGYN at an ACOG convention state that he retired from the abortion trade because he didn't want to have to wear a flack jacket to work. abortion clinics are closeing because they can't get doctors to do the deed. And one of the major reasons is because they fear being shot. And here is another dirty little secret for ya, these so called leaders in "pro-life" will secretly tell you that they do agree that the violence is justified. They only publicly speak against it because they know it will cut into their donations. And let me correct the revissionist historians here. The civil rights movement was not totally passifist. If one lived through those times, they know that it was also a fact that the cities in america were on fire, and in riot. It was this fact, just as much as the marches that made the powers that were to pass laws to open doors of equality before the nation became a smoking pile of ash. The only thing an evil aggressor understands is brute force. I hope and pray for a peaceful end. But should we be content to stand by another 35 years of womb child slaughter? Should we continue to be fleest by passifist leaders who care more about their pocket book, than they do the lives of womb children? The sickest thing I find on this forum, is you little girl passifist aplauding that a man got shotto death [and rightly so] for beating a 2 year old to death, but will turn right around and condemn those who believe that a womb child deserves the same protection from evil aggression. If you want to open your mouth against those who believe that a womb child deserves equal consideration, and protection, that we afford born children, Then just go join Planned Parenthood. You agree more with them, and are not an advocate for womb life.

reply from: carolemarie

Women have abortions for many reasons, most of them having to do with no help, money or support. If you want to help them choose life, you have to be willing to help.
Talk is just talk, it doesn't pay the light bill or help buy diapers. It is totally worthless unless backed up by actions. Love not in word, but in deed as well! James 1

reply from: galen

Women have abortions for many reasons, most of them having to do with no help, money or support. If you want to help them choose life, you have to be willing to help.
Talk is just talk, it doesn't pay the light bill or help buy diapers. It is totally worthless unless backed up by actions. Love not in word, but in deed as well! James 1
i completely agree with this carol... and its what we do at the centre every day... give a man a fish... he will eat for a day, tech him to fish.. he will never be hungry.

reply from: faithman

My point exactly. If you take lethal force off of the table, then all the abortion camp is going to do is laugh in your face as they kill babies. I would prefer that it ends peaceful. But that will never happen if we are not at least willing to fight for it. It was the riots in the 60s that brought about change just as much as the peaceful marches. If the parasitic passifist want to live in peace bought by the blood of the patriot, so be it. But the passifist cuts their own throat when they kick the feet out from under those who are willing to fight for liberty. The passifist will be the first to die if there is noone to stop evil aggression.

reply from: galen

My point exactly. If you take lethal force off of the table, then all the abortion camp is going to do is laugh in your face as they kill babies. I would prefer that it ends peaceful. But that will never happen if we are not at least willing to fight for it. It was the riots in the 60s that brought about change just as much as the peaceful marches. If the parasitic passifist want to live in peace bought by the blood of the patriot, so be it. But the passifist cuts their own throat when they kick the feet out from under those who are willing to fight for liberty. The passifist will be the first to die if there is noone to stop evil aggression.
__________________________________________
you are also forgetting that riots in the 60's and 70's brought us something we did not want.... abortion.
How do you think sexual freedom came to the forefront? TV?

reply from: faithman

My point exactly. If you take lethal force off of the table, then all the abortion camp is going to do is laugh in your face as they kill babies. I would prefer that it ends peaceful. But that will never happen if we are not at least willing to fight for it. It was the riots in the 60s that brought about change just as much as the peaceful marches. If the parasitic passifist want to live in peace bought by the blood of the patriot, so be it. But the passifist cuts their own throat when they kick the feet out from under those who are willing to fight for liberty. The passifist will be the first to die if there is noone to stop evil aggression.
__________________________________________
you are also forgetting that riots in the 60's and 70's brought us something we did not want.... abortion.
How do you think sexual freedom came to the forefront? TV?
That simple isn't true. They tagged along behind, but people did not riot for abortion rights. That is simply a lie. The riots finished what the civil war started. The equality of a group of human beings that had been denied full personhood and citizenship. Abortion betrays that concept, and was not birthed from it.

reply from: galen

you and i learned 2 VERY diffrent forms of history sir... i'm not sure yours is the correct one either.
wern't you fighting a war or something then?

reply from: galen

i remember that time period being one of war protests and stuff like free love...
the free love part is what i am referring to. bra burning and equal rights etc... sexual freedom meant a need for better BC and better BC brought the abortion question into the forefront.. ie you can not5 truely be sexually free idf you have to worry about all these illegitamate kids running around. sexual freedom for women did not catch up to the social freedom before abortion was enacted as a right.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Originally posted by: galen
__________________________________________
I didn't forget it. I want to use the exact same tactics. We are not beneath that. It works. Revolution works. Every generation needs a new revolution.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Originally posted by: carolemarie
I am not about that. I want the killing stopped. Many who do not have abortions but cannot afford babies or do not have support, still have their babies. I am not about proping up the weak ones. My mother was one who was single, with no money and no support. Grandma kicked her and her new baby(me) out of their house. It can be done and it is done every single day.
I am not out to pamper the weak ones who feel they can rely on Roe to bail them out. I am about not giving them Roe to rely on. How many never ever go to the places where Galen works? How may go straight to the mills? 1.5 million go right to the mills.
Their is way to much emotion to try to change the heart and mind. They must have nowhere to go for an abortion. And if they feel compelled enough to go to some quack on the side, then so be it. Tough love will save more than half of the current days abortions. Then we can try to change the hearts and minds of the remaining half.
The quality of life(money, support) is not worth more than life. Feel free to do what you like, obviously, but I want to collect people who want to do something more direct. (PM me if you are interested in escalating the war of abortion [in a non violent way])

reply from: galen

believe me... if i could get all 1.5 million i would sell everything we have to help them through thier 9 mo and find a job. my husband agrees.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

But lets not forget that tough times are not a bad thing for society either. My mother learend a lot from her "poor" choices, yet she and I lived through it all. Many today put the quality of life before life. Roe enables that more. If a generation needs to be forced into accepting personal responsibillity, then so be it. Like conceal carry laws, people will think twice. Remove Roe, people will think twice. As you know, Roe is the engine of 100% sexual freedom. Forcing Roe out, will limit that freedom back down to a more responsible level. No?
I know you know all of this, I am trying to prove my point of intensifying the battle.

reply from: galen

Lets not forget the 3 or 4 year old that was recently killed because her grandmother had a concealed carry permit.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Or the tens of thousands who did not have that permit.

reply from: galen

tens of thousands which way... the ones who did not kill their grandkids... or the ones who did?

reply from: leftistdestroyer

The ones who were killed, raped, robbed, assaulted by gunpoint who could not defend themselves equally.

reply from: carolemarie

I am not about that. I want the killing stopped. Many who do not have abortions but cannot afford babies or do not have support, still have their babies. I am not about proping up the weak ones. My mother was one who was single, with no money and no support. Grandma kicked her and her new baby(me) out of their house. It can be done and it is done every single day.
I am not out to pamper the weak ones who feel they can rely on Roe to bail them out. I am about not giving them Roe to rely on. How many never ever go to the places where Galen works? How may go straight to the mills? 1.5 million go right to the mills.
Their is way to much emotion to try to change the heart and mind. They must have nowhere to go for an abortion. And if they feel compelled enough to go to some quack on the side, then so be it. Tough love will save more than half of the current days abortions. Then we can try to change the hearts and minds of the remaining half.
The quality of life(money, support) is not worth more than life. Feel free to do what you like, obviously, but I want to collect people who want to do something more direct. (PM me if you are interested in escalating the war of abortion [in a non violent way])
Your not about helping people choose life?
So you just want to dictate to everyone else how they should live and do nothing to help them?

reply from: faithman

Or the tens of thousands who did not have that permit.
The concealed permit did not kill. The misuse of a weapon did. We should never take away the right to defend ourselves simply because some may misuse it. That is a totally dishonist aurgument. That is like saying the freedom of speach should be taken away because someone says things we don't like.

reply from: leftistdestroyer

Originally posted by: carolemarie
"Your not about helping people choose life?
So you just want to dictate to everyone else how they should live and do nothing to help them?"
Life and helping people are two different things. And first thing is first. Stop the killing, then help the living. As far as "I" am concerned. You help the living, I want to stop the killing. To me, that is more important.

reply from: faithman

I am not about that. I want the killing stopped. Many who do not have abortions but cannot afford babies or do not have support, still have their babies. I am not about proping up the weak ones. My mother was one who was single, with no money and no support. Grandma kicked her and her new baby(me) out of their house. It can be done and it is done every single day.
I am not out to pamper the weak ones who feel they can rely on Roe to bail them out. I am about not giving them Roe to rely on. How many never ever go to the places where Galen works? How may go straight to the mills? 1.5 million go right to the mills.
Their is way to much emotion to try to change the heart and mind. They must have nowhere to go for an abortion. And if they feel compelled enough to go to some quack on the side, then so be it. Tough love will save more than half of the current days abortions. Then we can try to change the hearts and minds of the remaining half.
The quality of life(money, support) is not worth more than life. Feel free to do what you like, obviously, but I want to collect people who want to do something more direct. (PM me if you are interested in escalating the war of abortion [in a non violent way])
Your not about helping people choose life?
So you just want to dictate to everyone else how they should live and do nothing to help them?
It is called the rule of law. Something you trample under your baby killing feet with almost every post.

reply from: galen

The ones who were killed, raped, robbed, assaulted by gunpoint who could not defend themselves equally.
____________________________________
you know i've had knives at my throat and guns at the heads of a woman and her baby... never once have i had to use another weapon to difuse the situation... in fact they are not even allowed in the shelter.

reply from: galen

Or the tens of thousands who did not have that permit.
The concealed permit did not kill. The misuse of a weapon did. We should never take away the right to defend ourselves simply because some may misuse it. That is a totally dishonist aurgument. That is like saying the freedom of speach should be taken away because someone says things we don't like.
_______________________________________-
If you conceal a weapon yu are more likely to forget where the weapon is ( in a purse for instance) than if you did not have the weapon in your possesion to begin with.
a 4 year old can not shoot herself with a weapon that is not there.

reply from: faithman

Or the tens of thousands who did not have that permit.
The concealed permit did not kill. The misuse of a weapon did. We should never take away the right to defend ourselves simply because some may misuse it. That is a totally dishonist aurgument. That is like saying the freedom of speach should be taken away because someone says things we don't like.
_______________________________________-
If you conceal a weapon yu are more likely to forget where the weapon is ( in a purse for instance) than if you did not have the weapon in your possesion to begin with.
a 4 year old can not shoot herself with a weapon that is not there.
We had guns in our house growing up, but never touched them becaused dad would have taken the hide off our backside.

reply from: galen

now i know where you got your violent side... your parents taught you, i am sorry for that.

reply from: faithman

I am not. Those who do not spank their children hate them. That is the scripture. When you do not teach children that severe consiquences come with some actions is when you get kids misusing weapons. Even at 4 years old, I knew what a gun was, what it could do, and not to touch it. It could sit on the kitchen table all day long and never be messed with.

reply from: galen

I am not. Those who do not spank their children hate them. That is the scripture. When you do not teach children that severe consiquences come with some actions is when you get kids misusing weapons. Even at 4 years old, I knew what a gun was, what it could do, and not to touch it. It could sit on the kitchen table all day long and never be messed with.
_________________________________________
sorry i disagree... you say you respected, but more likely it was fear. people who are ruled by fear are destined to overthrow their aggressors.....violence begets violence as evil begets evil.

reply from: faithman

I am not. Those who do not spank their children hate them. That is the scripture. When you do not teach children that severe consiquences come with some actions is when you get kids misusing weapons. Even at 4 years old, I knew what a gun was, what it could do, and not to touch it. It could sit on the kitchen table all day long and never be messed with.
_________________________________________
sorry i disagree... you say you respected, but more likely it was fear. people who are ruled by fear are destined to overthrow their aggressors.....violence begets violence as evil begets evil.
Fear and respect are very close cousins. My dad was not an aggressor. He loved us enough to train us. then you disagree with the scripture.

reply from: galen

i've never had to train my children with that method of threat...

reply from: faithman

Good for you. But you are the exception not the rule, and it still does not wipe away the scripture that point blank states that one who does not spank hates their child.

reply from: galen

OT not NT and Christ died so we did not have so many laws to uphold... so i'll stick with my method.

reply from: carolemarie

One effect of hitting a small child is that you teach them the bigger and the strongest get to call the shots and make the rules. I don't think that is true and I don't want to teach my son violence is acceptable way of dealing with a problem.

reply from: faithman

My point exactly. If you take lethal force off of the table, then all the abortion camp is going to do is laugh in your face as they kill babies. I would prefer that it ends peaceful. But that will never happen if we are not at least willing to fight for it. It was the riots in the 60s that brought about change just as much as the peaceful marches. If the parasitic passifist want to live in peace bought by the blood of the patriot, so be it. But the passifist cuts their own throat when they kick the feet out from under those who are willing to fight for liberty. The passifist will be the first to die if there is noone to stop evil aggression.
Your point exactly? You must be out of your mind! None of what you just said reflected anything I posted!
And "being willing to fight for it" is not the same as being willing to pay any cost, even more than necessary or prudent...Killing every human being on the planet would end abortion forever, but I certainly couldn't justify doing so. The end does not justify the means...
It does when it has already been justified by 4000 years of western culture, 2000 years of christian faith, and justifiable homoside laws in all 50 states. If the womb child is equal to the born child, then we should put every abortionist on notice to quit, or face the consiquence. The final of which is lethal force. Now post another lie for me to swat down.

reply from: faithman

Thank you!! But this one is way to easy. I am niether dumb, nor an ass. My DNA has no hint of equine.

reply from: galen

yes but you have 99% the same DNA as those chimps you so love...

reply from: faithman

That would be CP. Mine is 100% human. They may be simular, but are totally different.

reply from: galen

go back to genetics class... you and the chimp have exactly the same genes ecept for the 1% difference...that is what makes you human.
did you also know you have some of the same genes as a planaria worm?

reply from: cracrat

I am not. Those who do not spank their children hate them. That is the scripture. When you do not teach children that severe consiquences come with some actions is when you get kids misusing weapons. Even at 4 years old, I knew what a gun was, what it could do, and not to touch it. It could sit on the kitchen table all day long and never be messed with.
What a curious imaginary world you live in. Born children are protected by the law from being killed, good thing. Unborn children are not, bad thing that must be changed. If I slap you around, I can be done for assault or battery or something. If I slap my child, it's an expression of love. You are a very strange person faithman.

reply from: nancyu

I am not. Those who do not spank their children hate them. That is the scripture. When you do not teach children that severe consiquences come with some actions is when you get kids misusing weapons. Even at 4 years old, I knew what a gun was, what it could do, and not to touch it. It could sit on the kitchen table all day long and never be messed with.
_________________________________________
sorry i disagree... you say you respected, but more likely it was fear. people who are ruled by fear are destined to overthrow their aggressors.....violence begets violence as evil begets evil.
There is a huge difference between spanking a child and abusing a child. Spanking is not violence or abuse. I never would tan my children's hide, (unless they did something horrendous like play with a a gun) but a spank to set them straight is not abuse. I have spanked my kids once or twice, I was spanked as a child once or twice. I never felt afraid of my parents because of it, I learned right from wrong, and so did my kids.

reply from: nancyu

I am not about that. I want the killing stopped. Many who do not have abortions but cannot afford babies or do not have support, still have their babies. I am not about proping up the weak ones. My mother was one who was single, with no money and no support. Grandma kicked her and her new baby(me) out of their house. It can be done and it is done every single day.
I am not out to pamper the weak ones who feel they can rely on Roe to bail them out. I am about not giving them Roe to rely on. How many never ever go to the places where Galen works? How may go straight to the mills? 1.5 million go right to the mills.
Their is way to much emotion to try to change the heart and mind. They must have nowhere to go for an abortion. And if they feel compelled enough to go to some quack on the side, then so be it. Tough love will save more than half of the current days abortions. Then we can try to change the hearts and minds of the remaining half.
The quality of life(money, support) is not worth more than life. Feel free to do what you like, obviously, but I want to collect people who want to do something more direct. (PM me if you are interested in escalating the war of abortion [in a non violent way])
I agree with leftist on this. My children weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth. We all went through tough times. But we went through them. The bad times pass as quickly as the good times. When you teach kids that money will solve all of their problems they're likely to grow up to think that they can't solve any problems without money.
I didn't have any crisis shelter to help me, and I made it anyway. And I'm a better and stronger person because of it. So are my children. Offering too much help is the kind of thing that creates dependency. Offering help to someone having a tough time is nice, but the absence of help is not an excuse for them to murder their child.

reply from: nancyu

I am not about that. I want the killing stopped. Many who do not have abortions but cannot afford babies or do not have support, still have their babies. I am not about proping up the weak ones. My mother was one who was single, with no money and no support. Grandma kicked her and her new baby(me) out of their house. It can be done and it is done every single day.
I am not out to pamper the weak ones who feel they can rely on Roe to bail them out. I am about not giving them Roe to rely on. How many never ever go to the places where Galen works? How may go straight to the mills? 1.5 million go right to the mills.
Their is way to much emotion to try to change the heart and mind. They must have nowhere to go for an abortion. And if they feel compelled enough to go to some quack on the side, then so be it. Tough love will save more than half of the current days abortions. Then we can try to change the hearts and minds of the remaining half.
The quality of life(money, support) is not worth more than life. Feel free to do what you like, obviously, but I want to collect people who want to do something more direct. (PM me if you are interested in escalating the war of abortion [in a non violent way])
Your not about helping people choose life?
So you just want to dictate to everyone else how they should live and do nothing to help them?
We already know that you are pro choice CM. NO we don't want people to "choose" life, we want there to be no other choice BUT life.

reply from: yoda

I think that's unavoidable with many children. Some kids will push you and push you, as far as you will let them push. Others are more easily controlled by giving or withholding approval, but for some you simply have to set boundaries and enforce them with physical force when they are challenged.
And kids should know right from the start who is in charge, even when it takes physical force to make that point. There are many, many things that they should not be allowed to do for the sake of safety and morality, even though they are too young to understand that. And sometimes, even if you explain it to them, they will reject your explanation out of a desire to be their own boss. You can't go down that road and still raise a respectful, well mannered child. Parents have to set boundaries and enforce them.

reply from: yoda

Shouldn't you have said "we" and "us"?

reply from: yoda

All that is true, IMO. Morally, there is no financial excuse for killing a baby. On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with urging various government agencies to provide more help for indigent pregnant women who are barely surviving. I think that is a common sense attitude whether we are prolife or not.

reply from: faithman

Less we forget, it was the bortheads that fought government help for prenatal care because it came to close to establishing the womb child as a person. Even the pro-deathers realize that if personhood is established, the jig is up. To bad our pro-life "leaders" are SSSSSOOOOO willingly ignorant of that fact.

reply from: faithman

http://www.calltodecision.com/aafp.htm

reply from: cracrat

Except that as you have told us time and again, you live in a constitutional republic, not a theocracy. The laws of God are all well and good, but they are not the laws of the United States of America (much as you might like them to be). What Paul Hill did was wrong because it did not give John Britton or James Barrett a chance to atone for what they had done or been involved in. This is my principle objection to the use of the death penalty as 'justice', it does not give the convicted an opportunity to make good on their crimes. Unless of course you consider dying to be making good, which I don't.

reply from: faithman

Except that as you have told us time and again, you live in a constitutional republic, not a theocracy. The laws of God are all well and good, but they are not the laws of the United States of America (much as you might like them to be). What Paul Hill did was wrong because it did not give John Britton or James Barrett a chance to atone for what they had done or been involved in. This is my principle objection to the use of the death penalty as 'justice', it does not give the convicted an opportunity to make good on their crimes. Unless of course you consider dying to be making good, which I don't.
Once again you are placing more value on the life of the killer than the ones they kill. What about the innocent? And the way the death penalty is carried out here, they have years to get right before they get "stuck" for their crime. Hill gave them several warnings, and pleaded with them to stop killing. Britton refused, and Hill stopped him. I guess you are against anyone using force to defend the weak huh? Gotta give them evil aggressors a chance no matter how many innocent people they kill.

reply from: cracrat

Except that as you have told us time and again, you live in a constitutional republic, not a theocracy. The laws of God are all well and good, but they are not the laws of the United States of America (much as you might like them to be). What Paul Hill did was wrong because it did not give John Britton or James Barrett a chance to atone for what they had done or been involved in. This is my principle objection to the use of the death penalty as 'justice', it does not give the convicted an opportunity to make good on their crimes. Unless of course you consider dying to be making good, which I don't.
Once again you are placing more value on the life of the killer than the ones they kill. What about the innocent? And the way the death penalty is carried out here, they have years to get right before they get "stuck" for their crime. Hill gave them several warnings, and pleaded with them to stop killing. Britton refused, and Hill stopped him. I guess you are against anyone using force to defend the weak huh? Gotta give them evil aggressors a chance no matter how many innocent people the kill.
No, I place equal value on their lives. Neither myself nor anyone else has, IMO, the authority to decide who lives and who dies. This extends to the unborn because I know it is wrong to kill them, but it also extends to those who would do them harm, the abortionists. I accept that are occassions when it is necessary in the moment to hurt or even kill another person to defend yourself or those about you. However this is not right, but the least worst option available. In taking those lives, Paul Hill was no better than the people he killed. There is no way of knowing if Britton weren't going to pack it all in the following week, month or year. Some of the most powerful testimony against abortion I have read comes from former doctors who have seen the error of their ways. If you and your band of fellow bloodthirsty "Kill 'em all" muppets were to get your way, where would such testimony come from?

reply from: joe

What is wrong with you? Would you say the same about your life....all you hypocrites and puppets of Planned Parenthood.
The hundreds of innocent lives are worth more than one man. I would not sacrifice them waiting for his "change of heart". You are lying to yourself and the world...pathetic.

reply from: faithman

The problem is these folks think in hypotheticals, and what ifs. They refuse to live in real time, and address the fact these monters kill children everyday. They ignore the innocent in favor of evil aggression.

reply from: cracrat

What is wrong with you? Would you say the same about your life....all you hypocrites and puppets of Planned Parenthood.
The hundreds of innocent lives are worth more than one man. I would not sacrifice them waiting for his "change of heart". You are lying to yourself and the world...pathetic.
Nothing wrong here. I might ask you the same question. You claim to be a Christian yet have no qualms in deciding who is deserving of God's gift of life and who is not. Tell me, oh arbiter, where do you draw the line past which a person is worthy of death (though obviously not by your hand)? After one abortion performed? Ten? Twenty? How about someone who kills a little boy with their car because the kid ran out in front of them? The boy is innocent, his life has been taken, does the driver deserve to die? How about if the driver has been drinking? Or someone gets caught up in a police raid, wrong place, wrong time, does the officer who fired the fatal shot deserved to die? How about all the civilian deaths/collateral damage inflicted in Iraq, those people are innocent, should the soldiers die?

reply from: faithman

The problem is these folks think in hypotheticals, and what ifs. They refuse to live in real time, and address the fact these monters kill children everyday. They ignore the innocent in favor of evil aggression.
What is wrong with you? Would you say the same about your life....all you hypocrites and puppets of Planned Parenthood.
The hundreds of innocent lives are worth more than one man. I would not sacrifice them waiting for his "change of heart". You are lying to yourself and the world...pathetic.
Nothing wrong here. I might ask you the same question. You claim to be a Christian yet have no qualms in deciding who is deserving of God's gift of life and who is not. Tell me, oh arbiter, where do you draw the line past which a person is worthy of death (though obviously not by your hand)? After one abortion performed? Ten? Twenty? How about someone who kills a little boy with their car because the kid ran out in front of them? The boy is innocent, his life has been taken, does the driver deserve to die? How about if the driver has been drinking? Or someone gets caught up in a police raid, wrong place, wrong time, does the officer who fired the fatal shot deserved to die? How about all the civilian deaths/collateral damage inflicted in Iraq, those people are innocent, should the soldiers die?
The problem is these folks think in hypotheticals, and what ifs. They refuse to live in real time, and address the fact these monters kill children everyday. They ignore the innocent in favor of evil aggression.

reply from: galen

Shouldn't you have said "we" and "us"?
______________________________________________
probably but i was appealing to FM's narcissism.....

reply from: galen

What is wrong with you? Would you say the same about your life....all you hypocrites and puppets of Planned Parenthood.
The hundreds of innocent lives are worth more than one man. I would not sacrifice them waiting for his "change of heart". You are lying to yourself and the world...pathetic.
Nothing wrong here. I might ask you the same question. You claim to be a Christian yet have no qualms in deciding who is deserving of God's gift of life and who is not. Tell me, oh arbiter, where do you draw the line past which a person is worthy of death (though obviously not by your hand)? After one abortion performed? Ten? Twenty? How about someone who kills a little boy with their car because the kid ran out in front of them? The boy is innocent, his life has been taken, does the driver deserve to die? How about if the driver has been drinking? Or someone gets caught up in a police raid, wrong place, wrong time, does the officer who fired the fatal shot deserved to die? How about all the civilian deaths/collateral damage inflicted in Iraq, those people are innocent, should the soldiers die?
____________________________________________
this reminds me of the song.. black boys on mopeds...


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics