Home - List All Discussions

Rhetoric: what good is it

curious as to what your rational is for this

by: carolemarie

I was just thinking about how labeling and using politically correct terms (and this goes for both sides) is so counterproductive
I mean what good does it accomplish to call abortion providers serial killers?
Or to call an abortion clinic an abortuary?
Or to call a clinic escort a deathscort?
is this necessary or useful at all? i use to do it too, when i first started out, because everyone around me did it and told me that we always say this as to not give in to the lies.....
I fail to see how being rude and caustic makes people shift positions.
The only good i see is that it makes you feel morally superior to the person you are belittling, and keeps everyone perpetutally outraged

reply from: Faramir

Some of these words are counterproductive, I think, but most of the time they seem to be used among fellow prolifers--maybe as some form of therapy or a way to vent frustration.
I think what we see on boards is a lot different than what happens in person. I would like to think most people are more respectful in the real world.
I am not happy about Obama, and I might say something unflattering about him, but in person, I would be respectful and call him "Mr. President."
But what does get to be a little annoying and a little old is when these words are used to feel superior to others or are used to browbeat others. Somtimes it appears to be very self-serving, like saying, "Hey look at me. I care about babies. And look at how much better I am than that low life scum bag who murders babies."
I think there's a lot of that on this board, but this is just a board, and it's not moderated, so I wonder if it's not much more than an online game, and I don't know how seriously anyone should take the rhetoric.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

A person should not avoid stating the truth because it makes someone mad. Abortionists are serial killers. The building is an abortuary. A clinic escort is a deathscort. These things are true. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.

reply from: Faramir

It is also "the truth" to use a word like "clinic" or "escort," is it not?
I think I would have a better chance of having a meaningful dialogue with an "escort" if I referred to her as such than if I said, "Excuse me miss deathscort, I would like to talk to you about abortion."
I think I might have zero chance of reaching her if I used a word that was intentionally insulting.
I think she might think I was just saying that as an ego trip to feel superior to her, and she would write me off as an a--hole.
The truth is that these are not real words. If I'm wrong, show me the dictionary definitions please.
You can say what you mean, you can be forceful, you can make it crystal clear that you think abortion is an injustice and that it kills a person, WITHOUT being a jerk about it.

reply from: Faramir

The word abortion rights activists use that I hate is "anti-choice."
It's intentionally insulting, and it's as misleading as the word "pro-choice."
There are some very nasty prochoicers and sometimes I think some of them deserve the worst words we can come up with, though overall, I think it's counter-productive to use them.

reply from: scopia19822

I agree with you 100% on this one.

reply from: carolemarie

actually, it is a flat out lie. A serial killer is a designation relating to the unlawful killing of human beings by a psychopath.
Dr. Tiller is doing legal procedures, he isn't a deranged killer. He is a medical doctor, who specializes in abortions.
Why not abortion provider, or abortion Dr? They are factual descriptions of what he does and who he is.

reply from: scopia19822

Because what he is doing is lawful makes it less henious? Actually abortionist is in the merriam webster dictionary as a term for an abortion provider. Tiller is a sociopath, one has to be to do what he doing. With your rational what Dr. Mengle did to Jews and his experiments on them were lawful at the time should not be henious either. Mengle must not have been duranged either. You claim to find abortion appalling and only you know deep down, but when you try to sugar coat it and make it sound less henious because it is legal one can find that hard to believe. Just because something is legal does not make it right.

reply from: faithman

Because what he is doing is lawful makes it less henious? Actually abortionist is in the merriam webster dictionary as a term for an abortion provider. Tiller is a sociopath, one has to be to do what he doing. With your rational what Dr. Mengle did to Jews and his experiments on them were lawful at the time should not be henious either. Mengle must not have been duranged either. You claim to find abortion appalling and only you know deep down, but when you try to sugar coat it and make it sound less henious because it is legal one can find that hard to believe. Just because something is legal does not make it right.
SSSSOOOOO Hitler was just another head of state, and not a cold blooded mass murderer because killing jews was "leagal"? I think some one needs to loosen the laces on the whore boots to relieve the preasure on their brain. Maybe they could think a little clearer?

reply from: yoda

No, a serial killer is anyone who kills several people, one or more at a time.
serial killer NOUN: A person who attacks and kills victims one by one in a series of incidents.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/7/S0280700.html

The term "serial killer" has nothing to do with anyone being deranged. Most of them, in fact, are not deranged, or they would be much easier to catch.
Maybe because we do not wish to kiss the asses of such butchering monsters, as you seem to.
If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

reply from: Faramir

When the Ted Bundy was on trial and the judge was referring to him as "Mr. Bundy" was he kissing his behind?
After conviction, they were still respectful to the dignity of his person, even if he was not to others, and did not refer to him as "The dirty scumbag killer."
There is nothing wrong with that in or out of the court, and that is not going to the extreme of "kissing someone's backside."
On the other hand, I think that on message boards, radio programs, political cartoons, etc., there's a place for satire and less than flattering portrayals of people.

reply from: yoda

Pretty good comparison, actually. No, the judge was doing his job. We do not have the same responsibilities towards impartial expression that your typical judge does, however.
I disagree. That is exactly what it is, when it happens here.
And there's a place for bluntness and candor in describing how you feel about the baby butchers of the world. And it's NOT by respectfully calling them "Doctor".

reply from: Faramir

I think there's a place for it. Like on my favorite radio program Rush Limbaugh would refer to Clinton sometimes as the "Commander in Heat," or to Jim Wright as "Fort Worthless Jim Wright." I think it can be theraputic to have "special names" sometimes for those who we oppose.
However he did meet Clinton in person, and their meeting was friendly, so I doubt he was laying any of his political satire on him then.
I can't say it's wrong on a message board to call Dr Tiller, "Tiller the Killer," but I also can't say it's wrong or in any way showing approval for what he does by refusing to be insulting and referring to him as "Dr. Tiller."

reply from: yoda

Then we'll just have to disagree on that point. Calling him a "doctor" is an insult to the entire medical profession, and to the whole purpose of medicine.

reply from: lukesmom

MDs are trained in healing and disease prevention NOT intentional killing of human beings. Abortions may be trained in medical sciences but they are NOT "doctors" in any sense of the word. Yoda is right, they are not only an insult to others in the medical profession but an ugly stain most of us try to avoid and are embarrassed of.

reply from: Yuuki

Some Gynos end up doing abortions. They were doctors beforehand; when do they "stop" being doctors? When do they forget all of their previous training and only remember how to abort?
Never. They are still doctors. They are doctors who have done horrible things, but still doctors. They could stop tomorrow and go back to caring for women instead of hurting them.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

A doctor heals, an assassin kills. Abortionists are paid assassins and serial killers. Assassins and serial killers should be executed.

reply from: Faramir

MDs are trained in healing and disease prevention NOT intentional killing of human beings. Abortions may be trained in medical sciences but they are NOT "doctors" in any sense of the word. Yoda is right, they are not only an insult to others in the medical profession but an ugly stain most of us try to avoid and are embarrassed of.
What if they do other things besides abortion, such as delivering babies or surgery?
Are they doctors during those times?
Do you think other doctors, even those who despise abortion, if they had to write a letter to Dr. Tiller about something, would address him as "Killer the Tiller"?

reply from: faithman

MDs are trained in healing and disease prevention NOT intentional killing of human beings. Abortions may be trained in medical sciences but they are NOT "doctors" in any sense of the word. Yoda is right, they are not only an insult to others in the medical profession but an ugly stain most of us try to avoid and are embarrassed of.
What if they do other things besides abortion, such as delivering babies or surgery?
Are they doctors during those times?
Do you think other doctors, even those who despise abortion, if they had to write a letter to Dr. Tiller about something, would address him as "Killer the Tiller"?
"Good works" does not cover up murder dumb a$$. Tiller is a killer. The name fits, and he should wear it.

reply from: scopia19822

Most gynos that end up doing only abortions do so because they could not hack it in the healing feild. Just because one has an medical degree does not entitle them to be called a doctor. If they harm or kill a patient due to intent, negligence or incompetence they lose the privalage of being called a doctor. I would not got to a doctor that I knew had ever performed abortions, even those who are now prolife because they have blood on their hands.

reply from: yoda

I think that the point I want to make here is the difference between two equally accurate labels. One is accurate but unflattering, the other is accurate but seems to confer respect.
Yes, technically they are still physicians as long as their license hasn't been revoked or has expired, but I see no need to use a label that confers any respect upon them. Nor would I shake their bloody hand, nor would I take a meal with them. Not until they stop killing babies.

reply from: Yuuki

Most gynos that end up doing only abortions do so because they could not hack it in the healing feild. Just because one has an medical degree does not entitle them to be called a doctor. If they harm or kill a patient due to intent, negligence or incompetence they lose the privalage of being called a doctor. I would not got to a doctor that I knew had ever performed abortions, even those who are now prolife because they have blood on their hands.
And how would you know that? Have you asked them? Or are you just smearing them? I thought that was Spinny's job.

reply from: scopia19822

"And how would you know that? Have you asked them? Or are you just smearing them? I thought that was Spinny's job."
From your prespective because they have a medical degree that makes them a doctor. Growing up with a doctor in the family and being expsoed to members of the medical community at an early age you pick up on things. Abortionist in the medical community are viewed with the same disdain as child molesters are in prison. A lot of these abortionist become what they are because the money is good and they usually have been disciplined by the medical board and/or had the medical liscences spended or revoked. A doctor is supposed to heal, not take life. They have to be diligent, there is no room for error when you have lives at stake.

reply from: yoda

That's what I always thought, until I got interested in the abortion issue.
Hiring themselves out to be paid baby killers is a sleazy thing to do, isn't it?

reply from: Yuuki

It makes them a doctor in name, yes. Doesn't mean I wouldn't stress sarcasm on the "Dr." when talking to them in person. If you have the degree, you're a doctor in name at least. I wouldn't call them Practicing Doctors though, since they aren't practicing the preservation of life but the destruction of it. They still earned the title of Dr. however.
Child molesters are still prisoners. Abortionists are still doctors.

reply from: nancyu

It makes them a doctor in name, yes. Doesn't mean I wouldn't stress sarcasm on the "Dr." when talking to them in person. If you have the degree, you're a doctor in name at least. I wouldn't call them Practicing Doctors though, since they aren't practicing the preservation of life but the destruction of it. They still earned the title of Dr. however.
Child molesters are still prisoners. Abortionists are still doctors.
What an idiot.

reply from: carolemarie

calling a baby a fetus dehumanizes it so it is easier to kill it, the same goes for calling an abortion provider a butcher.
my whole point is what is the benefit of calling people names? Is it simply to make yourself feel better, and is that a good reason? Is the rhetoric hurting the prolife cause? Is it helping it? Is it having no impact on it?
Should Christians be name calling, is that reaching out with the love of Christ?
Does it help reach people?
Or turn them from us....?

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

I can imagine Jesus walking up to an abortionist and saying, "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning...." John 8:44 "Oops, wrong speech. I better tone it down a little so I don't drive this murdering sob away...." "Certainly, I Christ need to have fellowship with Beelzabub (the evil one)."

reply from: carolemarie

Jesus ate with sinful people, sinners, drunks and whores, in fact, the religious people said he was a drunk since they judged him by the company He kept,
He came not to condemn but to redeem the lost....

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Jesus kept company with the repentant. Those who were ready to commit to and make a change. Those continuing in sin, like Judas, Ananias and Sapphira suffered serious consequences: death. Judas was a thief and Ananias and Sapphira were liars. They were not allowed to continue communing with God.
Jesus specifically told the adulteress: "Go, and sin no more." To a paralyzed man that Jesus healed he said, "Stop sinning, lest a worse thing happen to you." Continuing in sin results in serious consequences, up to and including death.
Sin leads to death. Rightousness tendeth to life. Law breaking leads to death. Obeying the Law leads to life.
This is the Law: "You shall love." Failure to love leads to death. "Love God, Love your neighbor." (This is detailed in my signature.)

reply from: Faramir

I can imagine him talking with an abortion doctor like he did with the woman at the well, who was also leading a sinful life.
The point is that he is not here to talk with him.
WE ARE, though, and we might have a chance at changing some of these people if we're humble and compassionate, and don't come them with our big fat egos and supiority complexes.
We don't have to respect what they do but we do have to respect them as people.

reply from: ChristianLott2

They are not people, they are murderers and they should be in jail permanently.
They don't belong in a society, they belong in a cage.
Respect a murderer for what exactly? Existing? I don't.

reply from: yoda

I think there comes a point when we have to decide which is more important: Converting the baby killer, or stopping the baby killer. IMO, the stopping part should be of a higher priority than the conversion. Protecting the lives of the innocent ought to take precedence over "saving the souls" of the killers while they are still engaged in the act of killing. After the killing is stopped, there will be plenty of time to try to convert them, IMO.
That's a very ambiguous statement, since "respect" has so many different meanings. Got anything more specific?

reply from: Yuuki

What a human being you are.

reply from: ChristianLott2

What an idiot.
She claims to be anti abortion yet bestows the esteemed title of 'doctor' to a murderer. She probably gets confused when she looks in the mirror and can't figure out which one is real.

reply from: Faramir

What an idiot.
She claims to be anti abortion yet bestows the esteemed title of 'doctor' to a murderer. She probably gets confused when she looks in the mirror and can't figure out which one is real.
I think the law and the medical profession give them that title.
If she really had that power, I'd ask her to make me into a doctor too.

reply from: Yuuki

What an idiot.
She claims to be anti abortion yet bestows the esteemed title of 'doctor' to a murderer. She probably gets confused when she looks in the mirror and can't figure out which one is real.
I think the law and the medical profession give them that title.
If she really had that power, I'd ask her to make me into a doctor too.
I bestow upon you, Faramir, the title of Doctor! All hail Dr. Faramir!

reply from: Yuuki

no sh*t?
A duh, that means I didn't.

reply from: Faramir

no sh*t?
A duh, that means I didn't.
I used to think he was just a very angry man.
Now it appears to me he is angry and also not the brightest crayon in the box.

reply from: ChristianLott2

you people are pathetic.

reply from: nancyu

no sh*t?
A duh, that means I didn't.
I used to think he was just a very angry man.
Now it appears to me he is angry and also not the brightest crayon in the box.
Are you sure you're not looking in the mirror frmr?

reply from: 4choice4all

"I think it is a mistake to attempt to "demonize" the opposition and refuse to acknowledge the fact that most abortion supporters honestly do not see human beings in the earlier stages of development as significant in any way, and believe that supporting legal abortion is the right thing to do from a moral/ethical standpoint. They are not necessarily "evil," just misguided or deluded in most cases."
Although I do not feel misguided or deluded....I do think CP comes closest to hitting the nail on the head. I do not view a fetus as a person.(and of course I've heard all the arguments and analogies..trust me, it's not my first rodeo even though I'm a newbie here) I've even called myself pro-abortion because I do find it perfectly acceptable from a moral and ethical viewpoint.

reply from: 4choice4all

I just noticed my avatar is a man...off to change that,lol.
I happen to be a deathscort,lol. And considering the source from where the insult is thrown...it really has no effect on me. Although, we do (fellow deathscorts) find the irony of the rosary-waving bible-pushing christians behaving in the most unchristlike manner. What did Ghandi say about liking our Christ but not recognizing our christians? Oh...and there are a few regular prolife protesters that do treat us in a very christlike manner and after years of doing this I developed a repore with them. They happen to be the ones that appear to be in it out of genuine concern and not the ones that are obvious self promoters doing it for the attention.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You find killing babies "perfectly acceptable from a moral and ethical viewpoint". I find you perfectly "unacceptable" murderer. Killing another human being, can you believe it? You are way over the top. Advocating killing people. What's wrong with you evildoer? Is your life built around killing people?

reply from: 4choice4all

Yes, in my spare time I am a mass murdering bomb building terrorist mercenary executioner.....sheesh, and I thought I did a good job hiding that!
Evildoer? lol....hmmm, I wondered what Dubya was up to these days...didn't think I'd see him hanging out on abortion debate boards. Actually, I have a pretty normal average life full of friends family and community service when I'm not advocating the slaughter of the unborn.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Heck, most Nazi's and concentration camp executioners had a very normal appearing life outside of killing Jews within the camp walls. They danced, dined, partied, golfed and engaged in enjoyable activities like everyone else. It was hard to tell who the mass murderers were!

reply from: 4choice4all

sheesh...I at least thought I had successfully hid my nazi party affiliation.
But you missed my point...my life doesn't have an illusion of normalcy...it actually is normal. And that's what scares so many extremists in the prolife movement...the fact that the opposing side doesn't fit into the shoebox of crazy labels you'd like to place them in. We're not nefarious and scary....I'm the mom at the pto that helps distribute the birthday books and helps out in the library. Your kids high five me in the halls of their school. I'm helping out on field trips...leading girl scout activities and hosting sleepovers. I crochet my neighbors baby blankets when they have babies and offer to pull the elderly neighbors trashcans to the curb and back on trash pick up day. I've celebrated my 15th wedding anniversary...made sacrifices as a military wife. My husband and I were the foster parents. And i started volunteering as a clinic escort after the head of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice spoke in my church. So that's why you use your rhetoric...because the reality of it is too scary for you to face.

reply from: yoda

To make that statement is to make a conscious decision, but that does not establish any genuine conviction. Rather it is merely a claim made to establish the "innocence of conviction", IMO. I don't think there is a rational human being in the world who will argue that unborn humans are not human beings, and therefore by dictionary definition all are "people". Thus it follows that if you are a rational human being, you are simply stating a rationalization for your support of baby killing, not a genuine "conviction", as in a religious belief.

reply from: yoda

The claim that baby killing is "normal" in our society is indeed frightening, but most of all sickening..... because there is an element of truth to it. Just as slavery was "normal" in the Antebellum south, and that was sickening also.

reply from: 4choice4all

Of course a fetus inside a human is human...it's not canine. But whether it's a person is greatly debated.....hence this board and this national issue. Just because the fetus has human dna doesn't mean it's a "person". Trust me, it's a genuine conviction. As long as you marginalize the beliefs of those on the opposite side you will never have real dialogue. If you only want to be a placard waving person and remain part of the problem...continue on. If you wish to be part of the solution...you might need to engage on a different level.
I know you refuse to listen to the opposing side...you disregard it as "proabort rhetoric"...but slavery and abortion are not similar in our eyes because...and it's been said here many MANY time...even acknowledged by the rational sensible prolifers on this board(see, I'm a grown up, I can admit the opposing side is sometimes rational and sensible)......drumroll......some in the prochoice movement don't bestow personhood on the unborn...so slavery is inflicted on people...and abortion is inflicted on potential people. You may not agree....but it is the crux of the debate. To fail to acknowledge the points of the other side and stick your fingers in your ears and spew "lala can't hear you" is just obtuse.

reply from: yoda

No, it's only disputed by proaborts wishing to justify the slaughter of the unborn by re-defining the word. The fact that a legal definition exists which differs from the common definition is not at all important to this discussion. You're simply trying to create doubt where there is none:
per.son Pronunciation: (pûr'sun),-n. 2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing. 6. the body of a living human being, sometimes including the clothes being worn: He had no money on his person. http://www.infoplease.com/ipd/A0584644.html [/a]
And please, by all means, give me that tired, dishonest, crappy old proabort argument that we aren't human beings... I LOVE that crap!
Trust you? You are kidding, right?
Who the hell wants "real dialogue" with you and your baby killing allies? I'm here to DEFEAT you, not to become your buddy!
Look Einstein, NO ONE SAID they had to be "similar" to make the point!
What IS similar is that slavery was an EVIL that was WIDELY ACCEPTED by the antebellum society in the south, and abortion is an EVIL that is widely accepted by 41% of our society today (versus 52 who oppose it).
If there were a grain of truth in that, I'd be the happiest person on earth. You can kill as many "potential people" as you want to, baby killer, because there is NO SUCH THING AS A POTENTIAL PERSON.
You proaborts just love to make up silly crap like that, and throw it out like a three day old dead fish to stink up the forum.
You really make yourselves looks stupid that way, so carry on!!

reply from: 4choice4all

I'm not distorting.....many views say a person is a "living human being".....again, gray area. Who in the world argues that the fetus of a woman isn't human? I do take issue with the being portion though,lol.
When you compare things...they generally are supposed to have some similarities and commonalities.
I'm sorry if presenting an argument instead of name calling is upsetting to you. I have no desire to roll in the mud. Defeat me? good grief, take up kick boxing or something...you need an outlet for that anger.
If you define "person" as a born living breathing sentient being then yes, a fetus is merely a potential person.

reply from: iCelebr8Life

For me, speaking in a way that I will be heard is important to me, as well as listening to where others are coming from. Being abrasive is not persuasive. I am concerned about making a mother feel precious and to show her how much I care about her as a human being and her unborn baby, even if the mother is pro-choice. If I treat the mother as less than human, how can I ever expect her to begin to see her unborn child as a precious human life?
Pre-born human beings are being aborted, destroyed or frozen indefinitely at an alarming rate. It is beyond my control. But I can make a difference in the lives of individual woman and work to change one heart at a time. I don't care if a woman believes in abortion as an option. I really care about her choosing to carry her child to term.
.

reply from: Utilitarian

Well said. 100% true. Brings in anger and emotions. All it does is call out a person's pride and takes away from the issue.

reply from: Faramir

Hey, that's what's fun about this board.

reply from: 4choice4all

I was at the clinic a few weeks ago and a prolifer that I had never seen before was trying to wave us over.(we stand in the lot...they can't cross onto private property) So my fellow escort and I walked over and she was so nervous I had to wonder what she expected from us,lol. Anyway, she calmly and politely talked to us about her new position at a non-profit offering post abortive counseling services and wanted to know if she could ask us a few questions to get some ideas on how to best reach her audience. We talked for a while and then she asked if we would be willing to talk some more about why we volunteer there and how we came to be prochoice. She was very respectful and genuine. Unfortunately, I haven't seen her back. I think the crazed rabble rousers scared her off.
Anyway, I think if more people outside of the clinics were like here....the prolife movements sidewalk counseling would be way more effective. Dialogue and demeanor matter! Respect matters! Screaming fornicating baby killer does not work.
Example....a rough looking highly tattooed woman came with a friend that frankly, appeared to be a lesbian. They were far from clean cut...and the prolifers REALLY let them have it verbally. The women reacted by screaming f**k you...f**k your god..you don't know me b*tch....and then the prolifers upped the ante and it ended with more profanities, the security guard standing in between them...and finally the two girls full on kissing and grabbing each other's privates and saying how do your kids like seeing this?(many prolifers bring small children, another debate,lol) then they went inside. Later, I was heading out and the woman came out to smoke. She said something like thanks for doing this and I said I'm just here to help...and she was shaky and looked upset. I asked if she wanted me to stay with her(they noticed her outside smoking and started yelling..although it was a smaller group by now) and she was like, no..go home..I don't want to keep you. Well to me that was, yeah I want someone to stay with me but I don't want to impose..so I stayed. We talked and she did start crying when she explained why she was there. She was saying "they don't know me..they don't know what drove me here...they see the tats and the piercings and hair and think whore...trash." She told me the lesbian was actually her cousin and best friend..it wasn't a big deal to kiss her or touch her butt because they grew up next door to each other and took baths together as kids and just wanted to shock them. She explained that she was an addict..she had no clue who the dad was because she used sex to get drugs...she said that she didn't know the effects the drugs would have on the baby(fetus!) and she wanted to go through treatment but if she were pregnant they wouldn't give her certain prescription drugs that would help her get through withdraw symptoms.
It struck me that because I didn't yell...and I smiled and looked friendly..she poured her heart out. She JUST needed a friendly face. That friendly face could've met her on the lot and smiled instead of calling her a fornicating whore. Who knows the outcome. She hugged me and went back inside. I went home. For all I know, she could've walked out 5 minutes later..or not.

reply from: yoda

I don't, and neither does any other honest person who has a dictionary.
Person: Pronunciation puhr sEn Definition 1. a human being. Definition 2. the body of a human being. Example the clothes on his person. http://www.wordsmyth.net/live/home.php?script=search&matchent=person&matchtype=exact

You proaborts simply love to make up exclusionary definitions on the fly, and try to pretend that they mean anything. They don't, except that they show your unquenchable desire to facilitate the slaughter of unborn babies.
Why not spend your time trying to come up with an honest argument in support of the slaughter, instead of wallowing in your dishonesty?

reply from: yoda

Welcome to the forum, iCelebr8Life.
Being bluntly honest and plain spoken may not persuade your opponent (who has no intention of considering your arguments anyway), but it can sometimes other persuade open minded readers. Conversions are very rare, but providing plain, honest information can contribute to changing those minds that are actually open to new information...... and generally that does NOT include the proabort opponents that post here. Plain speaking is always the best policy.

reply from: 4choice4all

Definition of person: human being
Definition of human being: any living or extinct member of the family Hominidae characterized by superior intelligence, articulate speech, and erect carriage
Ignoring reality helps nothing. There's no distortion...it's an honest assessment by honest people. You may disagree....you may have another take on it....but your opinion alone doesn't validate your argument.

reply from: yoda

Wait, you're saying that definition means that a newborn human baby is not a human being because they can't demonstrate any of those characteristics? Is that your claim?
Hmm..... what about the fact that dictionaries typically use a definition of a mature specimen (a "definitive" specimen) to define any particular species? Like for example, they describe antelopes as having horns, and yet they do not have them at birth? And yet, you're willing to ignore that fact, and insinuate that unborn human children are not human beings because they can't speak our language or walk yet?
Hmmm...... does the term "intellectual honesty" mean anything to you?
definitive: 4. biology fully grown: fully formed or completely developed
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861603351

reply from: 4choice4all

No..they qualify as living because they have been born.

reply from: iCelebr8Life

Welcome to the forum, iCelebr8Life.
Being bluntly honest and plain spoken may not persuade your opponent (who has no intention of considering your arguments anyway), but it can sometimes other persuade open minded readers. Conversions are very rare, but providing plain, honest information can contribute to changing those minds that are actually open to new information...... and generally that does NOT include the proabort opponents that post here. Plain speaking is always the best policy.
Thank you for your kind welcome.
Speaking plainly and being abrasive are not synonymous. My Holy Book tells me to speak the truth in love. And as far as opponents, I refuse to have a competition here to prove who is right.
I am less concerned about a conversion that I am about stopping abortions. Pro-choicers can choose to carry to term. If we keep communication open, civil and as compassionate as possible so when a woman is having trouble choosing the pro-choicers will send her our way.
I will rather be persuasive than be right. I will use the vernacular of the person I am talking with to facilitate understanding. I can speak plainly without clobbering someone.

reply from: carolemarie

i am glad you see it that way! I agree 100% with you

reply from: Faramir

I really admire your style iCelebr8Life.
Thank you for your wonderful example, and welcome to the board.

reply from: Yuuki

I'm with the above folks ^^

reply from: iCelebr8Life

Thank you all sincerely for the kind words.
It is important for me to honor and protect human life and I strive to inspire others to do the same.
Blessings

reply from: yoda

Are you really going to try to tell us that unborn humans are not "alive"?
Is that the extent of your "logic"?

reply from: yoda

It depends upon whose ears are being tickled. To me, the same words that are just plain speaking might sound "abrasive" to others.
Typically, you will be MORE persuasive IF you are also "right".
I will rather be persuasive than be right.
I will use the vernacular of the person I am talking with to facilitate understanding. I can speak plainly without clobbering someone.
Again, it is a matter of opinion as to what constitutes "clobbering" someone. If that means telling the plain, simple truth to you, then you must be in favor of withholding the plain, simple truth.

reply from: iCelebr8Life

It depends upon whose ears are being tickled. To me, the same words that are just plain speaking might sound "abrasive" to others.
Typically, you will be MORE persuasive IF you are also "right".
I will rather be persuasive than be right.
I will use the vernacular of the person I am talking with to facilitate understanding. I can speak plainly without clobbering someone.
Again, it is a matter of opinion as to what constitutes "clobbering" someone. If that means telling the plain, simple truth to you, then you must be in favor of withholding the plain, simple truth.
Yodavatar, where am I wrong in stating that a zygote and a fetus are human life and abortion destroys a human life? I am not wrong. I do not have to clamor "abortion is murder and you are a murderer to be "right," but it seems important for you to do so just because you are right, not because it will help the mother choose to carry to term. I choose to be persuasive with compassion, a humble spirit and facts without grandstanding because "I am right to call her a murderer,"
You appear to enjoy playing with words and semantics and being "right" all over this forum. If it is wrong for me to not call a woman that had an abortion a "baby killer" then I would rather be wrong and give her inspiration , encouragement, strength and hope to carry to term. Your getting to call her a baby killer seems to be good enough for you because you are "right."
I have noticed you asking a lot of questions, bringing up some interesting points and saying a lot of stuf stirring up passions all without any hint of genuine empathy and compassion. I'm not saying you lack these, I am just having a hard time seeing them. I am really interested in what you want to accomplish. What are your pro-life aspirations?

reply from: Faramir

He and other posters in this forum often express themselves using a "false dichotomy" approach, which is a logical fallacy.
Two choices are presented as if they are the only two (does not have to be a question as in the example below--could be a statement too).
"Do you call the pro-aborts 'baby-killers' like the rest of us real pro-lifers, or do you suck up to them and kiss their butts?"
The question does not allow for the possibility that you can be a pro-lifer who is strong in pro-life convictions, but does not see name-calling, brow beating, and verbal self-gratification as proper or effective.

reply from: Shenanigans

Don't you ever think its awfully convinenant to class the unborn as human but not as a person?
I mean, to dust off an old chestnut, Hitler considered the Jew as human just not a "person". The Supreme Court once said the Black guy was human, just not a person... you see a connection yet?
To throw around semantics that change in meaning don't help and seriously, how do you justify to yourself that the only reason you support abortion is based on a word which in ten years could mean something completely different anyway?

reply from: Shenanigans

You know what's really fun about this board?
I can type arse and not get censored by an American spell checker. Hahahahahah.

reply from: Shenanigans

Regarding the lifers you see screaming at the women going into those places. You have to understand, those people view what is going on is bloody, bloody murder.
Now, if you saw a man start beating his child with a mace with intent to kill said child, and you were across in another building or on the other side of the river, what would you do? Would you stand there and politely ask the father if he would like to discuss his feelings and his options?
I don't agree with the loudness of some of those Lifers, I'm of the mindset that you catch more flies with honey.

reply from: Shenanigans

Are you really going to try to tell us that unborn humans are not "alive"?
Is that the extent of your "logic"?
See! SEE! How many times have I been ranting about zombies only to not be taken seriously!

reply from: faithman

Regarding the lifers you see screaming at the women going into those places. You have to understand, those people view what is going on is bloody, bloody murder.
Now, if you saw a man start beating his child with a mace with intent to kill said child, and you were across in another building or on the other side of the river, what would you do? Would you stand there and politely ask the father if he would like to discuss his feelings and his options?
I don't agree with the loudness of some of those Lifers, I'm of the mindset that you catch more flies with honey.
Some folks aint out to catch flies, they are out to swat them, and keep the dirty maggots from killing womb children. The "nicer than Jesus" crowd wouldn't know what to do with a baby killing fly if they caught one. We have had 36 years of honey coated fly catchers. They would rather protect the abortionist, and the clinics, with rhetorical honey, than put the killers out of business with a little vinegar. You make the killers stop first, and if they live thru it, apply all the honey you want past the bars of justice.

reply from: yoda

You're not making sense here. I'm the one who advocates telling the plain, simple truth. What did you mean?
When have you seen me say that abortion is murder? Or does it help you to misstate my position, in order to make yours sound better? Abortion is not murder, technically, because it is legal. But it is baby killing, and I will not be timid about saying that.
Who said it was wrong for you not to call anyone a baby killer? In which post was that? You seem to need to distort my position in order to state yours.
I am saying that it is wrong to say that those who kill babies are not baby killers, plain and simple. As to when you actually "call" someone a baby killer, that is another matter. I personally would reserve that label for those who are "proud" of their baby killing, and need a dose of reality as to what they are supporting. But I won't quarrel with anyone else who sees it differently, as long as they don't claim that killing babies is not "baby killing".
Then you are blind. I focus my compassion and empathy FIRST on the victims of abortion, not on those who perpetrate the "baby killing".
We each have our priorities for our empathy and compassion, and mine goes out first to the unborn victims. Until we stop the slaughter, I have no compassion or empathy for those who support, and those who enable the slaughter of the innocent.

reply from: yoda

In which post of mine did that question appear? You're as bad a liar as the poster you are addressing.

reply from: yoda

Exactly! And notice that 4choice has not responded?

reply from: yoda

That's the thing, if you offer kindness and sympathy to a serial killer, it will just encourage him to kill more. You must convince him he's doing something wrong, and must stop.

reply from: Faramir

In which post of mine did that question appear? You're as bad a liar as the poster you are addressing.
That question appeared nowhere, and was attributed to no one in particular.
It was an example of a "false dichotomy" and a characaterization of some of the bs I've seen posted numerous times. Call it sarcasm, if you like.

reply from: Faramir

That's the thing, if you offer kindness and sympathy to a serial killer, it will just encourage him to kill more. You must convince him he's doing something wrong, and must stop.
Sometimes you have to open a line of communication to convince someone, especially when they are supporting something that is LEGAL and condoned by our culture, very much UNLIKE the serial killer situation.
You once again are confused about what being civil means. It does not mean in any way shape or form condoning what they do or support.

reply from: ProInformed

If the wording didn't matter then there would be no arguments about the words being used.
The 'good' citizens of Nazi Germany just singing louder, instead of doing whatever they could try to stop the 'solution', was relevant wasn't it?
Anyway trying to hide the facts behind euphemisms doesn't change the reality that thousands of innocent unborn babies were killed yesterday, and the day before that, and the day before that... for 35 years now... and thousands more are being KILLED today, and will be tomorrow, and the day after that... for who knows how many more years or decades... while some 'pro-lifers' are worried about the words used to describe the killing and the killing?
Anyway, since there ARE abortionists and choicists who DO admit it is killing/murder, then it's just plain dumb for pro-lifers to worry about calling it that too.
"There wasn't a doctor, who at one time or another in the questioning did not say, "This is murder."
Dr. Magda Denes, who spent two years interviewing abortionists for her book In Necessity and Sorrow: Life and Death Inside an Abortion Hospital

reply from: yoda

Yes it was. You attributed it to me. Stand up like a man sometime.
"He and other posters in this forum"

reply from: yoda

There are many ways to condone the actions of another, one of those ways is to show friendship and support when that person is doing something immoral, like supporting abortion. Another is walking on egg shells around the immoral actions of that person, and not speaking plainly and bluntly about them. That's what you do. You support their actions by the absence of any condemnation, and by not even telling them what it is that they are doing that is immoral.

reply from: carolemarie

i am glad that some of us have behaved in a way consistant with our beliefs. I apologise to you for the way Christians have treated you, especially those who were calling you names....
I love that Ghandi quote~

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

i am glad that some of us have behaved in a way consistant with our beliefs. I apologise to you for the way Christians have treated you, especially those who were calling you names....
I love that Ghandi quote~
You do realize this person is advocating murder. This person wants to see others killed.
You act is if the murder of your own three children was no big deal, so why should I be surprised that you speak soothingly to an incorrigible who admits to yielding the knife of death that he/she wants thrusted into the skull of a child.

reply from: Faramir

You're an a**hole for rubbing a postabortive prolifer woman's nose in her previous abortions.
She did not condone her belief about abortion. She just did not behave like a jerk to her.

reply from: Yuuki

You're an a**hole for rubbing a postabortive prolifer woman's nose in her previous abortions.
She did not condone her belief about abortion. She just did not behave like a jerk to her.
GodsLaw is simply a human being. That's my new response to offensive material.

reply from: Faramir

You're an a**hole for rubbing a postabortive prolifer woman's nose in her previous abortions.
She did not condone her belief about abortion. She just did not behave like a jerk to her.
GodsLaw is simply a human being. That's my new response to offensive material.
I hope I didn't traumatize him by calling him that.
I know he's got some kind of hangup about a certain orifice.
Anyway...I should not have reacted so angrily, but I hate when people are attacked over personal issues that they shared in good faith, and especially that they regret.

reply from: Yuuki

You're an a**hole for rubbing a postabortive prolifer woman's nose in her previous abortions.
She did not condone her belief about abortion. She just did not behave like a jerk to her.
GodsLaw is simply a human being. That's my new response to offensive material.
I hope I didn't traumatize him by calling him that.
I know he's got some kind of hangup about a certain orifice.
Anyway...I should not have reacted so angrily, but I hate when people are attacked over personal issues that they shared in good faith, and especially that they regret.
The nastiness is horrific. But I figure "you are a human" is just as annoying as an insult but doesn't actually get me in trouble, unless for some reason they decide that "human" is an insult, and that of course jeopardizes their whole stance...

reply from: carolemarie

i am glad that some of us have behaved in a way consistant with our beliefs. I apologise to you for the way Christians have treated you, especially those who were calling you names....
I love that Ghandi quote~
You do realize this person is advocating murder. This person wants to see others killed.
You act is if the murder of your own three children was no big deal, so why should I be surprised that you speak soothingly to an incorrigible who admits to yielding the knife of death that he/she wants thrusted into the skull of a child.
This person is a human being who volunteers his/her time to help women enter into a clinic. That is a far cry from wielding a knife and wanting to kill people....
I disagree that abortion helps women or that it should even be evil, but I find calling people names and sterotyping them very counter productive.
I regret my abortions, i have been depressed and suicidal over those choices, happily I have found healing and am over all of that. I have an amazing blessed life because Jesus is sufficient for anything I have ever done, and I am not guilty or have to be upset anymore. Too bad you havn't found that peace that passes all understanding...

reply from: Faramir

I discovered a new expression for that the other day. (Or would it be better called a "euphemism"?)
Don't call it "nastiness." Call it "aggressive rhetoric."

reply from: faithman

That's the thing, if you offer kindness and sympathy to a serial killer, it will just encourage him to kill more. You must convince him he's doing something wrong, and must stop.
You don't have to convince anyone of anything to make them stop. You simply do what is nessisary to make them stop. Until we get that one figured out, the killers kill.

reply from: yoda

Come on, fess up, you really don't give a rat's patootie, do you? Slinging mud and names is fine as long as it's you or one of your friends, isn't it?

reply from: yoda

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?

reply from: yoda

The old saying that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar is absolutely true.
On the other hand, you don't stop serial killers with honey, do you?

reply from: faithman

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
When you are a killer yourself, you do anything you can to blur the line. Death courts are directly involved in killing children. We ran all of them off at the clinic here. A very good tactic is to picket the homes of clinic workers. The real Operation Rescue has used that tactic to help close several clinics. It is hard for them to stay open if they can't get workers.

reply from: Yuuki

That's the thing, if you offer kindness and sympathy to a serial killer, it will just encourage him to kill more. You must convince him he's doing something wrong, and must stop.
You don't have to convince anyone of anything to make them stop. You simply do what is nessisary to make them stop. Until we get that one figured out, the killers kill.
Violence only begets violence. There is no room for vigilantes in this world. If Faithman ran around forcing people to follow his personal ethics I would lock myself in my house or leave the country.

reply from: Yuuki

I discovered a new expression for that the other day. (Or would it be better called a "euphemism"?)
Don't call it "nastiness." Call it "aggressive rhetoric."
Lol. Yes, it's a euphamism.

reply from: Faramir

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
Wrong, dude. She's said time and again they are people. You haven't been paying attention.

reply from: Faramir

That's the thing, if you offer kindness and sympathy to a serial killer, it will just encourage him to kill more. You must convince him he's doing something wrong, and must stop.
You're agreeing with faithman about killing the killers--you know--the ones that DON'T "live through it"?
Which ones are you guys saying should be killed?
The moms?
The abortion doctors?
The security gaurds and bystanders that happen to be there?

reply from: yoda

Good plan. Let's start by disarming the police. No nightsticks, even. Agreed?
BTW, here's a nice quote:
"...unimpeded and massive atrocities are worse than war. ... It is as though you come upon a gang molesting an elderly woman. You have no idea whether intervention will save her or just double the casualties. All you know is: this cannot be left unopposed. I must try.
-John Piper"

reply from: yoda

You're agreeing with faithman about killing the killers--you know--the ones that DON'T "live through it"?
I detect a reading comprehension problem here..... do YOU convince people they are doing something wrong by killing them?

reply from: Yuuki

Good plan. Let's start by disarming the police. No nightsticks, even. Agreed?
BTW, here's a nice quote:
"...unimpeded and massive atrocities are worse than war. ... It is as though you come upon a gang molesting an elderly woman. You have no idea whether intervention will save her or just double the casualties. All you know is: this cannot be left unopposed. I must try.
-John Piper"
So then let's just murder those who abort! Didn't you call someone a troll for advocating such a thing? Either you're against violence or you're for it, right? Can't have shades of grey in the abortion debate.
Police are not civilians, and my comment was talking about VIGILANTISM.

reply from: Yuuki

You're agreeing with faithman about killing the killers--you know--the ones that DON'T "live through it"?
I detect a reading comprehension problem here..... do YOU convince people they are doing something wrong by killing them?
Yet you just told me that violence was appropriate and I am wrong for saying that violence isn't the answer. Do you have multiple personality syndrome or something? Are you advocating violence or not?

reply from: yoda

Is that you final answer?
Yeah, good thing that I didn't advocate that, isn't it?
Really? I couldn't tell. You seemed just to be saying "Let's do away with all violence".
So, is it vigilantism to protect your own life, or the lives of your family?

reply from: yoda

Actually, I said none of those things. Try again?

reply from: Yuuki

Is that you final answer?
Nope, it was sarcasm. Clearly. My final answer is STILL "breaking the law is wrong".
Really? I couldn't tell. You seemed just to be saying "Let's do away with all violence".
Perhaps next time you'll read my whole post. Sometimes I say things that clarify my statements. And I did mention vigilantism SPECIFICALLY.
In a way yes it is. That's why self-defense cases go to court and aren't just passed off. You are taking the situation into your own hands because no law enforcement is available.

reply from: scopia19822

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
Wrong, dude. She's said time and again they are people. You haven't been paying attention.
Anybody who volunteers or works for an abortion clinic in any capacity is an accomplice to murder.

reply from: Faramir

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
Wrong, dude. She's said time and again they are people. You haven't been paying attention.
Anybody who volunteers or works for an abortion clinic in any capacity is an accomplice to murder.
You haven't read the exchanges carefully.

reply from: scopia19822

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
Wrong, dude. She's said time and again they are people. You haven't been paying attention.
Anybody who volunteers or works for an abortion clinic in any capacity is an accomplice to murder.
You haven't read the exchanges carefully.
Ok they are PEOPLE who are accomplices to murder.

reply from: Faramir

This is the comment I was referring to scopia:
The comment was to CM saying that she doesn't consider the unborn to be people, which is a blatant falsehood.

reply from: nancyu

The comment was to CM saying that she doesn't consider the unborn to be people, which is a blatant falsehood.
I sure wouldn't call it "blatant". She has used the words "unborn" and "person" in the same sentence exactly once that I've seen. And she certainly doesn't equate unborn children with born children.
She does not support personhood for unborn children for fear that women will be punished for aborting, and for fear that birth control will be outlawed or restricted.
The thought of women being inconvenienced in any way is much more revolting to her than to have the slaughter of unborn children to continue.
Tell me, what is the difference between her and a typical pro choicer?

reply from: yoda

In a way yes it is. That's why self-defense cases go to court and aren't just passed off. You are taking the situation into your own hands because no law enforcement is available.
You poor, deluded thing. The "law" allows for legitimate self-defense. It is not illegal to defend yourself with "violence". Most such cases never even make it to court, charges are never filed if the prosecutor thinks it was self-defense.

reply from: yoda

Good question. Making a one time statement does not over rule hundreds of other examples that demean or dismiss the personhood of the unborn.

reply from: faithman

The comment was to CM saying that she doesn't consider the unborn to be people, which is a blatant falsehood.
I sure wouldn't call it "blatant". She has used the words "unborn" and "person" in the same sentence exactly once that I've seen. And she certainly doesn't equate unborn children with born children.
She does not support personhood for unborn children for fear that women will be punished for aborting, and for fear that birth control will be outlawed or restricted.
The thought of women being inconvenienced in any way is much more revolting to her than to have the slaughter of unborn children to continue.
Tell me, what is the difference between her and a typical pro choicer?
The blatant falsehood is that CM is pro-life. She is a baby killer, and a friend to baby killers. Only a self deluded poly anna would refuse to recognize this deadly enemy [both in word and deed] to pre-born children.

reply from: faithman

That's the thing, if you offer kindness and sympathy to a serial killer, it will just encourage him to kill more. You must convince him he's doing something wrong, and must stop.
You don't have to convince anyone of anything to make them stop. You simply do what is nessisary to make them stop. Until we get that one figured out, the killers kill.
Violence only begets violence. There is no room for vigilantes in this world. If Faithman ran around forcing people to follow his personal ethics I would lock myself in my house or leave the country.
I am sure we could get donations for your plain ticket. This country was started by "vigilanties". Men who took the law into their own hands, thru off the yoke of GB, and became the hope of freedom around the world. You are simply a useful idiot for the abortion industry at best. Until we put the same value on womb children that we do born children, and shut stupid idiots like you up, the children die. You do not advocate for the child, you are not pro-life, and you would rather protect abortionist, and their killing centers than the innocent children being slaughtered. Every clinic should be burned to the ground, and the earth salted where nothing would ever grow on that blood drenched earth. Violence doesn't "only" begets violence. Lethal force is also used to stop evil aggression. Dumb a$$es like you would make all of us a prey to evil doers, just so you could hold up your pretence for "being nice". You are the deadly enemy of the womb child. Whether you are too stupid to realize it, or a 5th collum subversive, makes no difference. The result is the same. Dead womb children.

reply from: Faramir

The comment was to CM saying that she doesn't consider the unborn to be people, which is a blatant falsehood.
I sure wouldn't call it "blatant". She has used the words "unborn" and "person" in the same sentence exactly once that I've seen. And she certainly doesn't equate unborn children with born children.
She does not support personhood for unborn children for fear that women will be punished for aborting, and for fear that birth control will be outlawed or restricted.
The thought of women being inconvenienced in any way is much more revolting to her than to have the slaughter of unborn children to continue.
Tell me, what is the difference between her and a typical pro choicer?
The statement was that she does not see the unborn as people, and I know that she has more than once said "the unborn are people," so a statement that she does not see the unborn as people is false. If you can find something since then in which she says, "I DON'T see the unborn as people," or something the that effect, then I will happily stand corrected.
Whether she agrees or disagrees with your idea of the perfect law is irrelevant.
She's different than a prochoicer because she sees that a fetus has a moral worth, that an abortion causes an unjust death of a person, and has sacrificed many hours of her life to save them from death by abortion.
If there were a way verify it, I would bet a lot of money that she's been responsible for preventing more abortions than anyone who posts here, yet she has been the most villified, and has been persecuted cruelly.
She sees the unborn as people, has stated that she has, and she has worked hard to save them, and deserves encouragement, gratitude and support, instead of false accusations.

reply from: carolemarie

I believe that a embryo is a person, I never said I didn't.
I just don't agree with personhood amendments or trying to punish women--I see abortion as a different type of crime.

reply from: faithman

Because your lying pro-death self does not see the womb child as equal in value to a born person, and have said so numerous times on these boards. You do not believe in blind justice for all, and just because the womb child has no voice, you berlieve a woman should be able to murder them and not be punished for it. You can not call the pre-born a person, and then turn right around and disagree with extending the same rights and protections under the law that all persons enjoy. That is the double speak of a fraud, which you havbe proven to be on more than one occassion.

reply from: faithman

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
Wrong, dude. She's said time and again they are people. You haven't been paying attention.
You lying sack of fecal matter. Your scancy pro-death wolf in lambs wool has said on many occassions that the womb child is not equal in consideration to the born child. You and your street walking friend can not have it both ways.

reply from: 4choice4all

We justify "killing' all the time. Sometimes we call it self defense, sometimes we call it euthansia, sometimes we call it the justice system/death penalty, sometimes we call it manslaughter, sometimes we call it war...sometimes we call it murder. But very rarely is the "death of a person" black and white. (btw, this is NOT me recognizing personhood of the fetus)

reply from: Yuuki

Hm. Why did I ever wonder where Faithman went?

reply from: Faramir

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
Wrong, dude. She's said time and again they are people. You haven't been paying attention.
You lying sack of fecal matter. Your scancy pro-death wolf in lambs wool has said on many occassions that the womb child is not equal in consideration to the born child. You and your street walking friend can not have it both ways.
She disagrees with you about how to best protect them, but it doesn't mean she doesn't see them as people, and she just said it again.

reply from: Faramir

But whatever killing we justify is rare, with a purpose, and is a last resort.
If a fetus or embryo is a person, then the killing of these people in one year is more than all the others you mentioned put together over many years, and there is rarely an instance when it could be called self defense.

reply from: 4choice4all

I don't equate a fetus or embryo with a person though.
And when a woman is pregnant she has her personal reasons...and it very well may feel like self defense or self preservation. It might feel like cutting short what would be a miserable existence. It might feel like a final piece of justice....it might be negligence.
I don't agree that the killings we justify are rare. With a purpose? Sure..but abortion has a purpose...to end the pregnancy. As a last resort? We don't always kill as a last resort. War isn't always conducted as a last resort, the death penalty isn't the last resort. We justify it because we recognize that not everything, including causing death, is black and white.

reply from: faithman

No, it is the SAME THING.
You just don't consider the babies the deathscorts are helping to kill to be people, do you?
Wrong, dude. She's said time and again they are people. You haven't been paying attention.
You lying sack of fecal matter. Your scancy pro-death wolf in lambs wool has said on many occassions that the womb child is not equal in consideration to the born child. You and your street walking friend can not have it both ways.
She disagrees with you about how to best protect them, but it doesn't mean she doesn't see them as people, and she just said it again.
yOU REALLY ARE THAT BIG A DUMB A$$ ARENT YOU? sHE HA ONLY BACK OFVF WHEN BACK INTO A CPRNER AND EXPOSED FOR THE PHONY THAT SHE IS. sHE WAS CAUGHT RED HANDED IN ONE LIE, WHAT MAKES YOPU THINK WE CAN TAKE ANYTHING THE BABY KILLER SAYS AS TRUE? sHE HAS SAID MANY TIMES THAT SHE DOES NOT THINK THAT THE WOMB CHILD IS EQUAL TO THE BORN. SHE HAS NOT DISAGREED ON HOW TO BEST PROTECT THE WOMB CHILD, BUT HAS SAID POINT BLANK MANY TIMES THAT THEY DO NOT DESERVE PROTECTION IF IT INTERFEARS WITH A WOMAN'S INTEREST. yOU ARE JUST TOO STUPID TO PAY ATTENTION.

reply from: scopia19822

Carole how is murdering a preborn child and for the sake of this posts I will limit that to post viabilty any less of a crime than me going and shooting someone in the head at point blank range? Should I not go to jail for shooting that person because I have committed murder. Even in the prolife community it seems that abortion is not seen as henious as murdering a born person and that is not the case at all. It maybe legal the public maybe decieved because the severity of it has been down played. But murder is still murder and in the eyes of God if not the state the woman who is not repentant for her abortion will be just as guilty as any other killer.

reply from: Faramir

What if you did see a fetus or embryo as a person?
And why don't you? Is it because you don't think it has what it takes to be one, or because of the legal definition?

reply from: scopia19822

What if you did see a fetus or embryo as a person?
And why don't you? Is it because you don't think it has what it takes to be one, or because of the legal definition?
I have to wonder if 4choice supports late term abortions as well ? Most people in America that do favor abortion rights want it to be restricted not a wild wild west type thing.

reply from: 4choice4all

hypothetically, if I felt an embryo/fetus were a person from the moment of conception?........hmmmm....I guess I would fall more on the prolife side but with conditions. Like if the mother's health/life were at risk...I would feel it would be reasonable because it would be taking one life to save another. I would support a woman's right to end a pregnancy when it's likely the child has a condition incompatible with life. ( I actually know someone that found out the child she was carrying had died and she waited a week to be induced and deliver her dead child and it was the hardest week of her life. She couldn't go out in public because she was noticeably pregnant and people would ask when she was due and she couldn't answer. I can't imagine continuing to carry a child that I knew had no chance at living. I wouldn't make a woman go through that) So yeah...if I felt it was a person I would certainly have more issues with abortion on demand but not necessarily 100% prolife. As of now I acknowledge it's human and it's living....I just have strong feelings on personhood and the act of being born which makes me fall on the prochoice side.
I don't feel like I fail to acknowledge science or facts to be prochoice. In fact, many in the medical community and scientific community are in fact prochoice and surely they know the reality of what the fetus is. I know a fetus has the potential to be a normal living breathing functioning human...I don't ignore that. Nor do I care what the legal definition says since I'm talking about my own convictions and not merely the law. I think personhood implies something. For me it's a culmination of being born(therefore physically independent of another source) and rapidly developing sentience and consciousness. That is why I would be ok with Faith's mother having the choice to terminate. Even if Faith is eventually physically independent...she will never be conscious in the way I recognize personhood. Of course, again, I support Faith's mother and any other mother choosing not to abort.
"support" late term? I don't support the government taking them off the table completely but I understand the state having some interest in post viability cases. I really trust that women don't use abortion like a wild west scenerio.
This is what I find sad about this board...so many(not you...and there are others like you) just write the prochoice side off as babykillingproabortbuttnugget*****s....and that makes it easy to not listen to us or acknowledge that our convictions are strong and valid to us. We're prochoice so we must be baby hating vile antichrists. I've birthed 3 amazing children and I felt them move and grow and my pregnancies were far from easy and I sacrificed a lot to bring them into the world as healthy as I could. I nursed them for years because I felt it was best. I slept and bathed with them and watched them breath and just sat in awe of them. It's the most surreal experience...ever.....to give birth and meet your child for the first time. So no...I'm not heartless and cold and *****ilicious. I know it's easier to vilify me if I'M not human....but I am.

reply from: scopia19822

"support" late term? I don't support the government taking them off the table completely but I understand the state having some interest in post viability cases. I really trust that women don't use abortion like a wild west scenerio. "
Do you know that the AMA says there is no medical reason for "partial birth abortion" ? Most of the abortions George Tiller does are eugenic abortions not to save the life of the mother. Most complications can be managed to get both mom and baby as close to term as possible. What about abortionist being mandated to transfer babies who survive late term abortions to a hospital?You have no problem with a baby getting stuck with scissors at the base of the skull and its brain sucked out? If we did this to animals the public would be outraged. It is shame that if a post viable baby is wanted it will get the lifesaving medical care, yet if its not it is killed without a thought.

reply from: carolemarie

Carole how is murdering a preborn child and for the sake of this posts I will limit that to post viabilty any less of a crime than me going and shooting someone in the head at point blank range? Should I not go to jail for shooting that person because I have committed murder. Even in the prolife community it seems that abortion is not seen as henious as murdering a born person and that is not the case at all. It maybe legal the public maybe decieved because the severity of it has been down played. But murder is still murder and in the eyes of God if not the state the woman who is not repentant for her abortion will be just as guilty as any other killer.
Abortion is first of all legal and not a crime! So saying it is okay to kill people who have one is way beyond the pale.
If you go shot someone in the head, that is a crime and you should go to jail. It is not a crime to have an abortion. Hasn't been for over 30 years! And even when abortion was against the law, women were not jailed for getting one. So why should I have to support killing women or jailing them, when it never was the law. This desire to punish women is sick and I oppose it.
I think the personhood amendment is a bad idea and I don't believe it will pass. I have given my reasons over and over.

reply from: scopia19822

Oh carole just because something is legal does not mean it is ok and acceptable. In the eyes of God abortion and shooting a person in the head is the same. On a moral level it is a crime against God if not the state. I am not talking about legalites but morality. Would you not agree that an unrepentant woman who aborted will have to answer to God and face judgment/punishment from Him?

reply from: carolemarie

Sure.
So will unrepentant liars. And really good non believers, but if she calls on the name of the Lord, he will save her....that is the cool thing.
But you are talking about killing people who are doing legal thing. That is just as wrong morally as having an abortion. God would find you guilty of murder for shooting an abortion provider it isn't okay with God to hate your brother in your heart

reply from: 4choice4all

First, the AMA wouldn't use the phrase "partial birth abortion"....they use intact D&X. The AMA said they recommend other alternatives unless they would increase the risk to the mother. They recognize that it should be at the doctor's discretion.
I fundamentally disagree that God sees no difference between an abortion and walking up and shooting someone in the head. That makes a mockery of religion,imo. Where does the Bible discuss the loss of a fetus? Exodus 21:22....if you cause a miscarriage(by hitting a woman) you are fined..not killed. If the woman dies, you are killed.(eye for an eye) So please tell me why you believe God feels that an abortion is the same as shooting someone in the head? I don't think that passage should be the reason to support abortion...but I do think the bible is full of contradictions about killing, murder and causing death. What about in Genesis with the pregnancy of Tamar? God demands she is burned for sexual transgressions even though she's pregnant. God didn't say wait until after birth to kill her to spare her fetuses. Wouldn't you say that was inconsistent with your take that God sees no difference between taking the life of the unborn and taking the life of the born?

reply from: scopia19822

I
I dont want to kill anyone. Would I like to see the likes of Tiller in jail for life, yes. Maybe one day he will be, but I do not want to kill him. Any person who is unrepetant about any sins are subject to judgement. I do beleive that if Tiller does not reform his ways he will be in danger of hell. But God does not send people to hell, they send themselves.

reply from: scopia19822

Know the AMA would not use that term, however a lay person would be familar with PBA. I do not know what type of Christianity you follow,but is not what I was taught. Jesus said the least you do unto them you do unto me. All of those punishments in the OT were done away with on the cross. The NT is the book for Christians . In Ezekial it says that children arent to be punished for the sins of their parents. Do you think Jesus would approve of abortion? I think the law needs to be clarified that if any part of the babies body is outside of the birth canal whether it be the head, feet or bum the child is born and cannot be killed.

reply from: carolemarie

Then you should care about reaching those who currently are not in the kingdom like Dr. Tiller or those who volunteer at the clinics. We have the truth and we need to share it with them in a way they can accept it. Name calling gets in the way of that....

reply from: faithman

Heres the thing idiot. Stopping evil aggression against innocent life is not morally wrong, nor an act of murder. Abortionistist are not "brothers" anyway. You obviously do not know the God of the bible very well at all. His word tells us to put murderers to death. That is not an act of "vengance" as you like to misrepresent it. It is an act of justice. Murder is the shedding of innocent blood. Abortionist are not innocent. They know exactly what they are doing. They should be made to stop, by lethal force if nessisary, just like any murderer who takes evill agression towards innocent life.

reply from: scopia19822

I pray for Tiller I think that man is beyond human help.

reply from: 4choice4all

Why do you assume the least of them is a fetus or even a "baby" and not a beaten and raped pregnant woman? Wait...every law from the old testament was done away with? Does that include thou shalt not murder? All of the commandments?

reply from: 4choice4all

Fm...I dont recognize anything about you that resembles christianity or Christ. Your excuses are no different than Fred Phelps or the men that executed the terror of 9/11...you distort God and religion to suit your bloodlusting ways and to justify having so much hate in your heart.

reply from: faithman

I pray for Tiller I think that man is beyond human help.
You don't "reason" with killers. You make them stop with what ever force is nessisary. You can try to "convert" them thru the bars of justice. Tiller should be shot period.

reply from: scopia19822

Jesus affirmed that we are bound by the 10 commandments, but we are not bound by the punishments, the dietary laws etc. The least can be the unborn, the poor the abused anyone who is mistreated and vulnerable. So when does the soul enter the body at conception, the quickening ( which is a stupid concept IMHO) or birth? Do you think a woman who miscarries or loses a child inutero has less of a right to grief?

reply from: carolemarie

I think Dr. Tiller is a bit hardened to the gospel after being shot by a prolife christian nutjob. That kind of put the idea in his head that we want to kill him. Then calling him things like Tiller the killer probably reinforces that idea to him.
We are suppose to love those who are well, disgusting and icky. It isn't easy to love someone who does such terrible LEGAL things, but Jesus wants you to.
I don't know about Dr. Tiller. I pray for him and nothing is impossible for God....so there is still hope...
The chick who shot him is still in jail, she is the evil doer who was punished, because you are not allowed to kill people.

reply from: 4choice4all

JC affirmed that we follow commandments....but I don't agree that he conceded we were still bound by "the" ten commandments....what about the "new" commandment to love one another as I love you?
Ah...the soul...there's a question for the ages. IMO...at first breath...God breaths into us our soul. Purely opinion...I mean, what's the universal take on the soul? I have a problem with a soul at conception because that would mean that twins shared a soul or split their soul and that doesn't jive with me. The quickening...no...I'm with you..that's pretty arbitrary.
As for a woman's grief...that's personal...as personal as religion itself and I don't wish to tell any woman how she should feel about her loss. For me, I've miscarried and I've given birth and the miscarriage was hard but I can't imagine it comparing to losing one of my 3 children today. After my miscarriage I was emotionally able to continue to try to build a family and have more children. If I lost one of my 3 today I would have a hard time continuing to live. Everyday would be a struggle to open my eyes. I didn't experience that sort of grief when I miscarried. But that means nothing to any other woman and her experiences.

reply from: Yuuki

Faithman's filthy posts are not made by a true Christian with LOVE in his heart. His opinions are ones of intolerance, death and sexism.

reply from: scopia19822

"The chick who shot him is still in jail, she is the evil doer who was punished, because you are not allowed to kill people."
Both are evildoers and Tiller should be in jail IMHO. Just because it is legal does not absolve him and you are not allowed to kill people in the eyes of God and that is what Tiller does, he kills for money.

reply from: carolemarie

I pray for Tiller I think that man is beyond human help.
You don't "reason" with killers. You make them stop with what ever force is nessisary. You can try to "convert" them thru the bars of justice. Tiller should be shot period.
Abortion is legal in America. Dr. Tiller and the other providers are obeying the law. Talkin about killing them is evil and wrong. In America, we put people in jail for breaking laws, not disobeying God.

reply from: Yuuki

Very thoughtful post, Carole.

reply from: Faramir

I pray for Tiller I think that man is beyond human help.
You don't "reason" with killers. You make them stop with what ever force is nessisary. You can try to "convert" them thru the bars of justice. Tiller should be shot period.
By whom should Dr. Tiller be shot, sir?
If "real" prolifers had the courage of their convictions, he and many like him would have assumed room temperature long ago, unless they are simply very bad shots.

reply from: yoda

Wow, fara is encouraging us to shoot Tiller..... never thought I'd see the day......

reply from: CharlesD

Pretty good description of Tiller, if you ask me.
As to the lawful part, Roe was a court decision that defied the wording in the constitution. The constitution does not list having been born as a requirement to be a person.

reply from: nancyu

...we can't shoot him, that would be illegal. I've heard that abortion is legal, however; maybe I will decide to concede that point IF we can abort abortionists (and all other pro aborts as well).

reply from: CharlesD

Things that used to be legal:
1. Owning a black person.
2. Severe punishment of that black person if he tries to run away or otherwise performs his duties in a manner that doesn't please you.
3. Segregated public facilities.
4. Women can't vote.
5. Child labor.
Does anyone want to make the case that the above things were acceptable when they were legal?

reply from: yoda

Just because he was "OJ'ed" by the last jury doesn't mean "Dr" Tiller is "obeying the law". And even if he was, why would you protect him like he was a saint? You really ought to join his fan club.

reply from: yoda

Fara? Carole? Jump right in!

reply from: scopia19822

Just because he was "OJ'ed" by the last jury doesn't mean "Dr" Tiller is "obeying the law". And even if he was, why would you protect him like he was a saint? You really ought to join his fan club.
I wish carole would quit defending his actions....

reply from: carolemarie

Just because he was "OJ'ed" by the last jury doesn't mean "Dr" Tiller is "obeying the law". And even if he was, why would you protect him like he was a saint? You really ought to join his fan club.
I wish carole would quit defending his actions....
I can't belive you said that! Try reading what I type, not what you feel like spinning!
First of all, i am not defending Dr. Tillers actions! I think abortion is deplorable. However, i do know it is legal and I oppose shooting Dr. Tiller or calling him names.
The hateful name calling doesn't save one baby, so it is just away to vent your spleen and it is WRONG in the eyes of God.
Calling for his death is WRONG in the eyes of God, but it would be against the law to do so as well, since abortion is legal in this country. You can't demand to punish people who are not breaking the law.....

reply from: yoda

What about frowning at him? Would that be too severe for you? Must we all put on happy faces if we come face to face with him? Must we bow to him too?
And why is "baby killer" a name? Isn't that what he does for a living? Do you insist that we ignore what he does for a living?
Do you insist that we pretend that he's a "respectable physician"?

reply from: carolemarie

You know perfectly well why babykiller is a terrible name to call him
I think you can be civil because calling him names isn't going to help him change sides, isn't that what you want? Or do you just want to be ugly to people????

reply from: yoda

No, I do not know why baby killer is a "terrible name" to call him. He IS a baby killer, is he not?
WHY on earth would you PROTECT him from the truth about WHAT HE DOES??????
Why not use your energy to protect the babies he kills, rather that protect his feelings???????

reply from: carolemarie

Newsflash: He knows what he does.
As long as he is name called, shot at and otherwise treated as garbage, do you believe he will stop and listen to what prolifers have to say?
You save babies by helping their mothers.....not calling Dr. Tiller names

reply from: Faramir

Another false dichotomy fallacy.
It's not either/or.
One can be respectful and still abhor abortion.
I believe she has helped save many babies. How do you propose she save the particular babies Dr. Tiller is killing, and why don't you save them? Do you think spouting "killer tiller" on a message board is saving them? Do you think if she joined you in your rhetorical feeding frenzy it would save babies?
How is she "protecting his feelings"?
You think he reads the posts here?

reply from: Faramir

Pretty good description of Tiller, if you ask me.
As to the lawful part, Roe was a court decision that defied the wording in the constitution. The constitution does not list having been born as a requirement to be a person.
So are you saying abortion is illegal?
If you really believed that, you would have reported some abortion clinics to the authorities.

reply from: Faramir

Just because he was "OJ'ed" by the last jury doesn't mean "Dr" Tiller is "obeying the law". And even if he was, why would you protect him like he was a saint? You really ought to join his fan club.
Wow, she implied that he was a SAINT??
That's the last straw. I'm going to take your side and join you in carolemarie bashing.
But please first show me the post(s) praising his saintliness.

reply from: yoda

Then WHY ON EARTH would you be reluctant to state what he ALREADY KNOWS?
Quite honestly, I doubt he will ever change. I'm interested in STOPPING HIM, not trying to convert him. You're tilting at windmills if you think he is going to change on his own, or because of your "politeness" towards him. Lord Chamberlain thought that he could trust Hitler to live up to the treaty he signed, too. You're as naive as Lord Chamberlain.
That IS one way, but there are MANY MORE THAN ONE way to save babies. I've seen them saved by a single photo of an aborted baby. I've seen them saved by being afraid of having their photo taken. There are many, many ways to save babies, you don't have a monopoly.

reply from: yoda

Why else would she object to his being called "baby killer"?
Can you think of a reason?

reply from: yoda

I don't have a "side" that bashes Carole. My "side" disagrees strongly with many things she says.
I'm sure you'll be happier on the "side" that calls him "Doctor Tiller", and says he should be treated with "respect". In his case, that's as good as calling him a saint.

reply from: carolemarie

I think everyone, every person should be treated with respect Yoda, even you and even Faithman.
All humans were created in the image of God and because of that we give them respect. We can not like what they do, in the case of abortion we can be strongly
opposed, but there is no good reason to call names. Not one.
And however you save a child, you don't do it by calling Dr. Tiler names.....
And it is possible that Dr. Tiller can change, with God nothing is impossible....

reply from: scopia19822

"Calling for his death is WRONG in the eyes of God, but it would be against the law to do so as well, since abortion is legal in this country. You can't demand to punish people who are not breaking the law...."
It should be against the Law. I thought PBA was against FEDERAL law? I do not call for his death I called for him to be stopped and locked up. He has broken Kansas law before but Seblius managed too stop any investigations. It is just a matter of time before he is investigated again and charged.

reply from: Faramir

Dang, I was hoping there could be some exceptions.
But you're right. Even they should be treated with repect, even if they are disrespectful of others.

reply from: yoda

Define your terms. Does "respect" include calling them a "doctor" but not a baby killer? That's not "respect", that coddling. He doesn't work as a doctor, he works as a hired killer, and YOU know it!
A "job title" is NOT a "name", it is a description of WHAT THEY DO FOR A LIVING. Does he not KILL BABIES FOR A LIVING????
Yeah, it's possible a unicorn may fly in a land on your house, but I wouldn't hold my breath. And kissing up to him will not move him in the direction of NO LONGER KILLING BABIES. All it will do is get you some brownie points with him and his minions. What will you do with all those brownie points?

reply from: yoda

Define your terms, fara. And don't just copy carole's post, okay?


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