Home - List All Discussions

Namecalling:

This was such a great statement I wanted to share it

by: carolemarie

Courtesy is the hallmark of God's kingdom. Discourtesy is the trademark of Satans. When contending with the devil, Jesus spoke firmly but with the uttermost respect. He did not revile when answerering Satan's temptations. Nor did Jesus speak rudely, disrespectfully or call Satan demeaning names. Rather Jesus simply quoted scripture to rebuke the devil.
(John Paul Jackson from Needless Casualities of War)
So if the Son of God, going head to head with evil incarnate didn't feel the need to call names, why should God's people do it?????

reply from: Shenanigans

I dunno. I wonder the same thing about people who thing PLers shouldn't converse with the pro-abortion crowd. I mean, JC hung out with hookers and tax collectors.

reply from: 4choice4all

I love that...thanks for sharing CM!

reply from: faithman

Of course prodeath scum and phonies would only look at the scriptures they agree with. Jesus did plenty of name calling. Vipers, sons of the devil and such. But I guess you scancs tore those pages out.

reply from: Faramir

Jeus was a better man than you sir, and had the wisdom and authority to do it when necessary.
He didn't tell us to do it, and he didn't do it with malice or meanness.
He had reasons. You have excuses.

reply from: Faramir

Here are some rules from a Catholic forum I sometimes visit:
Some thougths about charity:
"Win an argument and lose a soul."
-- Bishop Fulton Sheen
"Love without truth would be blind; truth without love would be like 'a clanging cymbal.'"
-- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Homily
"Preach the gospel at all times, and, when necessary, use words."
-- St. Francis (attributed)
"You know well enough that our Lord does not look so much at the greatness of our actions, nor even at their difficulty, but at the love with which we do them."
-- St. Therese of Lisieux
"Though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could move mountains, but have not charity, I am nothing.... Love does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil.... Love bears all things ... endures all things. So faith, hope, charity abide, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
-- St. Paul (1 Cor. 13:2, 5, 7, 14)
"Always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence."
-- St. Peter (1 Pet. 3:15; RSV-CE)
Catholics can screw up, but sometimes they get it right, and I think this is one case, and I'm really trying hard to understand the downside of being polite and civil to "the enemy."

reply from: Faramir

IMHO, Mr. Crutcher has it only half right. Yes, in the political arena, it's a war, and the goal must be victory, and victory is stopping abortion.
On the personal level, the war is for the soul, and the goal should be to win the hearts and minds of those on the other side, for their sake, and for the sake of life of the uborn. Alienating them and demonizing them is not the answer. How can it be? What good does it do?
And how does it hurt to be friendly with them--not friendly with abortion--but friendly with the person?
I don't understand what we have to lose.
Someone explain it to me. I honestly do not get it.

reply from: galen

Faramir ,
sometimes it depends on the person you are speaking/ chatting, with.
Some people will continue thier blinders, when everyone is nice, and others need a wake up call of sorts. You can not paint every person with the same brush... you have to search out the nooks and crannies in thier denial, and break down the walls that let them view the unborn as 'lumps of tissue or parasites'. Once they can look at the unborn as persons, even potential persons, then they can look at them as having worth. Untill you have worth its too easy to dispose of a person.
I for one will do everything in my word power here to show the worth of those who are not yet born into this world. The most defensless among us, and if I have to get a bit harsh in order to make a point, i will do so. I would rather save a life than save someones feelings.
Maybe Hitler should have felt bad once in a while about killing Jews... possibly he could have stopped... after all look at what happened with St. Paul.

reply from: Faramir

I don't see why you can't continue to point at the "lumps of tissue" and insist they have a moral worth and explain why, without showing some courtesy to the person who does not see that.
How does, "look at this, baby killer" help the baby or that person?
Can you demonstrate how being harsh has saved a baby, and how being kind or friendly has cost the life of one?

reply from: sander

They have the market cornerned on white out.

reply from: Faramir

They have the market cornerned on white out.
Do you ever say anything of substance? Or is it just put-downs, every single post?

reply from: yoda

Wow. What a radical statement. Who was this "Jeus", anyway?

reply from: yoda

It depends on the person. Are they being paid to kill babies? Do they assist in killing babies? Are they complicit in, and helping to support, the baby slaughter? Are they aware that they are killing babies?
Many posters on this forum go to great lengths to deny that the women who have abortions actually know they are killing a baby, so shouldn't someone tell them?

reply from: sheri

Name calling only makes it hard for the proabort to admit he is wrong when the light of truth enters his mind. We should try to always act as Jesus would have, I dont think it hurts to get fresh in a heated debate but this constant hate mongering we see on this forum from Fboy and the lot is not helpful in any way, shape or form.

reply from: yoda

Two questions come to mind: what is "name-calling" (what is a "name"?), and isn't it pride and greed that makes it hard for proaborts to change their minds?
What we do here on the forum isn't meant to change anyone's mind, really. We're just here exchanging information and practicing how to react to the bloody proaborts. People who allow the "light of truth" to enter their mind don't really care if someone calls them a name, they still know the truth. All these proaborts keep dark sunglasses on anyway. There's no way to reach them, they have to take off their dark glasses by themselves. And whether or not they do that has nothing to do with someone calling them a "name".
This whole discussion is rather immature and childish, and even trivial IMO. Let's get down to speaking out for the babies and quit whining about how other posters talk. That is their problem (or their pride), not ours. There is baby blood being spilled every day, and that makes this whining look rather juvinile.

reply from: faithman

Says you. But not every one agrees with you. I am not here to "convert" anyone, despite the fact that my posts have done exactly that in a few cases. My purpose is to defeat the forces of child murder. To stop monters like Tiller the ex-baby killer from sucking the brains out of the skulls of womb children. I honestly hope for that to happen in peacful ways. But if the monsters insist upon their evil aggression against the womb child, then there is plenty of dirt to fassion quilts for them to rest under in permanant retirement. I regret, and truely morn the loss of a life/soul. But I absolutely rejoice in that evil soul will never suck the brains from another childs skull.

reply from: CDC700

Our nation has never won a war passively, nor will it ever. The blood shed by abortions wouldn't stop even if it were outlawed, the same filthy scum that advocate it now, would do the same things, just not as loud!

reply from: faithman

this country has always advocated peace. That is why it is best for our enemies to let this dog alone when sleeping. Don't grab us by the ears. You won't like the out come. Men of war, may or may not win a war. But men of peace always win when finally provoked to the fight. The criminal elect and his abortion buddies would do well to learn that lesson. They intend to desolve our constitution, and institutions of liberty and freedom. Me thinks the sleeping dog of liberty has just about had enough of ear pulling. Stop the slaughter or reap the whirl wind!!!!!

reply from: MC3

I can understand the emotions of those on this forum who claim to be pro-life and, yet, object to the aggressive rhetoric that some of us use.
But before you judge us, I ask you to imagine that someone has kidnapped you, taken you to a warehouse somewhere, stripped you naked and locked you in a cell from which there is no possibility of escape. You are alone, helpless and completely subject to their will. Next, they tell you that at nine tomorrow morning they are going to take you to another location where someone is going to slowly tear off your legs, rip your arms from their sockets, crush your chest, collapse your skull and, finally, grind you up in a garbage disposal. Of course, there is no way to know exactly when your death will come, but before it does you can expect to experience an unimaginable agony.
Now imagine that there is a group of people trying to stop this from happening. I challenge you to tell me that, under those circumstances, you would care about what your rescuers were saying about the degenerates who were about to torture you to death. Tell me that you would be demanding that they treat your killers with dignity and respect and engage them in a civil discourse.
Anyone who believes that would also believe in the Tooth Fairy.
The reality is, the people trying to save you could have the nastiest, most vulgar and most aggressive attitude on earth and the only thing you would care about is that come bursting through the door of that warehouse before it's too late.
Well, that is precisely the situation over 3000 defenseless babies are in - AT THIS VERY MOMENT! They don't have the luxury of treating this as some ivory tower debate between plaid-jacketed pipe-smokers who adhere to the Marquess of Queensberry Rules. For those babies, this is a knife fight in a waterfront bar. It's not about propriety; it's about being cut open alive and bleeding to death.
Let's also not forget that, tomorrow, another 3000 victims will be thrown into that same brutal situation, and the day after that another 3000, and another 3000 will be teed up the next day, and so on. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, for the unborn, that is the reality of the battle over abortion.

reply from: yoda

No, that's the sort of thing done by those who are totally safe from the abortionist, and enjoy the luxury of snipping and whining about minor breaches of "etiquette".
It's like demanding that a soldier in the midst of battle stand up and apologize to the soldiers on the other side. He'd just get shot.

reply from: Banned Member

Nice try, but I assure you, there are no embryos out there quaking with fear. They don't have a capacity to feel fear. That was really a horrible analogy. Are you even trying anymore?

reply from: yoda

People who are asleep or unconscious don't have any fear, either. Remind me not to go asleep anywhere that you could get to me.

reply from: galen

fear and terror are some of the first sensations to be experienced... and some of the last to leave... don't be so sure you know everything Syrenity....

reply from: Banned Member

People who are asleep can most assuredly feel fear. Ever hear of a nightmare?

reply from: faithman

People who are asleep can most assuredly feel fear. Ever hear of a nightmare?
We see one everytime you post.

reply from: Banned Member

You need higher brain functioning to be able to feel any emotions than fetuses posses. We are not talking about late term abortion here, as that is a very small percentage of abortions.

reply from: faithman

What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.

reply from: CDC700

You need higher brain functioning to be able to feel any emotions than fetuses posses. We are not talking about late term abortion here, as that is a very small percentage of abortions.
Do you have proof of this(I'll answer for you, NO) More meaningless drivel that you have convinced yourself to be true.

reply from: nancyu

Some thougths about charity:
"Win an argument and lose a soul."
-- Bishop Fulton Sheen
"Love without truth would be blind; truth without love would be like 'a clanging cymbal.'"
-- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Homily
"Preach the gospel at all times, and, when necessary, use words."
-- St. Francis (attributed)
"You know well enough that our Lord does not look so much at the greatness of our actions, nor even at their difficulty, but at the love with which we do them."
-- St. Therese of Lisieux
"Though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could move mountains, but have not charity, I am nothing.... Love does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil.... Love bears all things ... endures all things. So faith, hope, charity abide, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
-- St. Paul (1 Cor. 13:2, 5, 7, 14)
"Always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence."
-- St. Peter (1 Pet. 3:15; RSV-CE)
Catholics can screw up, but sometimes they get it right, and I think this is one case, and I'm really trying hard to understand the downside of being polite and civil to "the enemy."
So calling people "hateful bltches" would be a no-no?

reply from: yoda

We're not dreaming every moment, are we? So, it's okay to kill us when we're between dreams?

reply from: yoda

Hold on there! Don't you know Fara has a special dispensation to sling the "B" word around wherever he wants to? He has dozens of indulgences saved up, so watch out!

reply from: MC3

Syrenity:
I never said one thing about, "embryos out there quaking with fear." In my analogy, I described what is in store for them. Whether they know it or not, or fear it or not, is wholly unrelated to the point I was making. And you know it.

reply from: faithman

saw the clip from your project on life talk. Would like to have a public showing here. Make a big event out of it with Johnny. Let us know. Great stuff. Let me say THANK YOU!!!!!!

reply from: Banned Member

Do you have any knowledge of human development (I'll answer for you, NO), dumbass...People are not conceived with fully functioning brains. There you go, being a twat again...

reply from: Banned Member

Fair enough. You're right, I did know it. However, it's fair game to twist every word said on this board. Metaphors & euphemisms that are common when dealing with logical, well-mannered people don't really apply here.

reply from: faithman

Fair enough. You're right, I did know it. However, it's fair game to twist every word said on this board. Metaphors & euphemisms that are common when dealing with logical, well-mannered people don't really apply here.
The scum bag GET'S IT !!!!!!!!! There is no logic behind abortion. Only death and genocide!!!!!!!

reply from: Faramir

I don't see those on the other side of this issue as "moral degenerates with blood stained teeth." I see them as people who have embraced a bad idea.
And I'm trying to understand how calling them that and worse does a thing to save a baby.
It seems to me to be self-serving rhetoric, and exploitive of unborn life.
And it seems to be a way to repel, rather than attract more "soldiers" for the battle, or at least the ones with intelligence and compassion.
Sure, you'll get some who will be more than happy to call women whores and say the most abusive things against the "pro aborts" or even against fellow pro-lifers who have minds of their own, or those who will jump up and down gleefully about Tiller's death, expressing hopes for more of the same--but why would you want them?

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You need to read your Bible. God and Jesus call people what they are. They apply the correct name. Jesus called Satan a murderer and deceiver. The wicked are called Beelzebub (a worthless one). Jesus called sinners sons of Satan to their faces, explaining that they want to commit the same acts as their father Satan. Jesus points out that Satan came to lie and kill; to deceive and murder.
Yes, the Bible does say it was prudent for the powerful archangel (Gabriel?) not to argue with Satan the Devil when it came to the disposition of Moses body after death. The angel was not to presume authority over and above Satan's. The archangel said to Satan, "The Lord rebuke you."

reply from: yoda

Well, you know we've got to think about the sensitive feelings of the abortionists and their supporters. For example, if an abortionist drives home without washing up, it's not polite to point out the blood on their clothes, or call them "bloody killers". We have to avoid saying anything that might make a proabort realize that abortion kills a baby.... because..... because...... well because someone on this forum said so. We don't want to make them feel bad about themselves, do we?

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

An abortionist is a baby-killer. The parents are worthless murdering selfish low-lifes. That is reality.

reply from: galen

You need higher brain functioning to be able to feel any emotions than fetuses posses. We are not talking about late term abortion here, as that is a very small percentage of abortions.
______________________
After 7 weeks the fetus has as much brain function as a chicken... i assure you the chicken is scared when it is being cut up alive...

reply from: sander

Hold on there! Don't you know Fara has a special dispensation to sling the "B" word around wherever he wants to? He has dozens of indulgences saved up, so watch out!
Oh, now that's just hilarious!
What an idiot. ROFLOL!

reply from: sander

Oh, yes I do. I want them to feel bad every waking and SLEEPING moment....what's the difference with the proaborts...they're sleep walking thru life as it is.
If I thought for a minute that the vile proaborts that visit this forum were capable of feeling emotions, I might reign in a little.
They deserve every verbal smackdown they get and then some, after all, they kill babies, don't they?
And I don't care if they've never physically partcipated in an abortion, they're still baby killers by supporting the worst kind of murder there is, the murder of the most helpless and defensless of all.
They're vile human rejects with bloodied hands. I hope that hurt their feelings, but like I said...they don't have feelings.

reply from: sander

You need to read your Bible. God and Jesus call people what they are. They apply the correct name. Jesus called Satan a murderer and deceiver. The wicked are called Beelzebub (a worthless one). Jesus called sinners sons of Satan to their faces, explaining that they want to commit the same acts as their father Satan. Jesus points out that Satan came to lie and kill; to deceive and murder.
Yes, the Bible does say it was prudent for the powerful archangel (Gabriel?) not to argue with Satan the Devil when it came to the disposition of Moses body after death. The angel was not to presume authority over and above Satan's. The archangel said to Satan, "The Lord rebuke you."
Great post.
I hope it penetrates Carole's mind....even if it's just a little. I hope she hasn't been so brainwashed by whoever is teaching her that this just escapes her understanding.

reply from: MC3

Faramir:
You say, "I don't see those on the other side of this issue as 'moral degenerates with blood stained teeth.' I see them as people who have embraced a bad idea."
Call me cynical, but my suspicion is that your attitude toward these people would be a little less "enlightened" if they were coming after you or someone you loved.

reply from: sander

I just want to do fartnomore a favor and bump this so he doesn't miss his spanking.

reply from: sander

I just want to do fartnomore a favor and bump this so he doesn't miss his spanking.

reply from: Banned Member

No one is 'going after' any one. Melodrama doesn't win you any support in the real world, you should know that by now.

reply from: MC3

Syrenity, you say, "No one is 'going after' any one."
However, there are about 50,000,000 people who would say otherwise - if it were not for the fact that a collection of cowards and goons killed them first. And only in a truly demented mind could that be offhandedly dismissed as mere "melodrama."

reply from: Banned Member

The melodrama comes from you trying to paint this picture of pro-choicers as people who are just itching to kill babies. You can put on that act for as long as you want, but honest people know that it is not the case. Honest people know that we are not abortion hungry, wanting all women to abort. We just want women to have that choice for themselves.

reply from: sheri

If i was in a hostage situation like the one described The last person i would want advocating for me is fboy. Of course i would really want someone to come in and rescue me, but that happens very rarely for the preborn. So the only line of defense they have are prolifers who must try to talk a woman out of killing her baby, past experience says that name calling doesnt work so well to save the babies. It also doesnt work to win people over, so why are we defending the practise?
We need to keep in mind that this is about saving lives!

reply from: yoda

Nah, the "itch" involves just wanting to kill ONE baby, usually, the one that is inside that particular proabort.
And the abortionist is just the guy/gal to scratch that itch, ya know?

reply from: yoda

"Advocating" is not what Mark was talking about. He was talking about taking direct action to rescue innocent people. How do you think FMan would rate in that category?
On the other hand, if you'd like to have someone stand outside the building, screaming demands for adherence to some "politeness code", then the other "F-guy" (Fara) might just fit the bill. If your hostage takers were threatening to kill you in five minutes, would you prefer Fara or FMan to be outside?
Responding to proaborts and almost prolifers on this forum is worlds apart from trying to talk women out of abortion in real life. Very few women headed for an abortion will stand and repeat proabort slogans to you, mostly they will just try to ignore you and walk by. You do have to use tact and diplomacy to talk to such women on their way in the front door of the baby killing mill, because you don't know what's on their minds. But these blood thirsty proaborts on forums like this are an entirely different challenge. You have to choke back the vomit in your throat from reading their nasty murderous lies, and try to counter those lies the best you can without expressing how sick they make you. And using tact and diplomacy on these proaborts here is a total waste of time. They are here to convince you to support killing babies, they are not here to learn why you oppose that.
That's the nature of an open, almost unrestricted debate on a very emotional subject like abortion. It's rough and tumble, and if you can't stand that heat, why are you even here? You're not going to influence anyone else to change their style of debating, you should have learned that by now. Mark has already given you his opinion on this controversy, so why do you or anyone else continue to try to make people change their approach to this debate? If we didn't believe in what we are doing, and how we are doing it, we wouldn't waste our time here.
This whole "politeness to the baby killers" thing is a total waste of everyone's time. It ain't gonna happen, and you're just filling up forum space with a never ending disagreement.

reply from: nancyu

You need to read your Bible. God and Jesus call people what they are. They apply the correct name. Jesus called Satan a murderer and deceiver. The wicked are called Beelzebub (a worthless one). Jesus called sinners sons of Satan to their faces, explaining that they want to commit the same acts as their father Satan. Jesus points out that Satan came to lie and kill; to deceive and murder.
Yes, the Bible does say it was prudent for the powerful archangel (Gabriel?) not to argue with Satan the Devil when it came to the disposition of Moses body after death. The angel was not to presume authority over and above Satan's. The archangel said to Satan, "The Lord rebuke you."
Great post.
I hope it penetrates Carole's mind....even if it's just a little. I hope she hasn't been so brainwashed by whoever is teaching her that this just escapes her understanding.
I'm afraid her brain is as squeaky clean as rosalie's.

reply from: sander

If your hostage takers were threatening to kill you in five minutes, would you prefer Fara or FMan to be outside?
Anyone with just half a brain would want Faithman outside....I don't want some wishy washy person who is more worried about how he "looks" to the perps and their willing supporters, then seeing I live another day!
I can't beleive Sheri is that hell bent on putting Faithman in his place that she would let herself or someone else die rather then be rescued...but, then pride is a very funny thing.

reply from: sander

"Advocating" is not what Mark was talking about. He was talking about taking direct action to rescue innocent people. How do you think FMan would rate in that category?
On the other hand, if you'd like to have someone stand outside the building, screaming demands for adherence to some "politeness code", then the other "F-guy" (Fara) might just fit the bill. If your hostage takers were threatening to kill you in five minutes, would you prefer Fara or FMan to be outside?
Responding to proaborts and almost prolifers on this forum is worlds apart from trying to talk women out of abortion in real life. Very few women headed for an abortion will stand and repeat proabort slogans to you, mostly they will just try to ignore you and walk by. You do have to use tact and diplomacy to talk to such women on their way in the front door of the baby killing mill, because you don't know what's on their minds. But these blood thirsty proaborts on forums like this are an entirely different challenge. You have to choke back the vomit in your throat from reading their nasty murderous lies, and try to counter those lies the best you can without expressing how sick they make you. And using tact and diplomacy on these proaborts here is a total waste of time. They are here to convince you to support killing babies, they are not here to learn why you oppose that.
That's the nature of an open, almost unrestricted debate on a very emotional subject like abortion. It's rough and tumble, and if you can't stand that heat, why are you even here? You're not going to influence anyone else to change their style of debating, you should have learned that by now. Mark has already given you his opinion on this controversy, so why do you or anyone else continue to try to make people change their approach to this debate? If we didn't believe in what we are doing, and how we are doing it, we wouldn't waste our time here.
This whole "politeness to the baby killers" thing is a total waste of everyone's time. It ain't gonna happen, and you're just filling up forum space with a never ending disagreement.
Yoda, that was just plain well said! Kudos and a nice cold

reply from: Banned Member

I would rather have somebody that would reason with the bandits, try to keep them calm, collected & try to buy more time. That's what Fara would do. I would not want some one who would only succeed in further enraging said bandits, causing them to lash out. That's what Fboy would do.

reply from: sander

Gads you people are freaks! Calm and collected my arse....you'd be crying your whinning head off for mama....who do you people think you're kidding...

reply from: faithman

I raised my right hand and swore to uphold and protect the constitution, as well as persons under it, in the United states Coast Guard. I joined the Coast Guard because I am a man of peace, and believe in recueing those who are in trouble. We learned life saving in the water, a very high degree of first aid, and advanced fire fighting. All of those skills still serve me to this day, and though I no longer am in the service, I still take my oath seriously. We were commissioned inter national firemen/emt's. But our training did not stop there. We were also trained in the use of 45 auto pistals, and M16 rifles. We were also commissioned as inter national policemen. Men of peace does not mean that we are passifists. It means that we believe that people should be able to live unmolested by evil aggression. We learned very clearly that the only way to repell evil aggression is with suffcient force to deture or repell. I am not cavalier about the taking of life. It is very grievious action to take. All action should be taken to avoid such situations. But if you see an innocent person in immenent danger, you don't think about it, you do your duty to protect them. If that means the aggressor looses his/her life when suffecient force is used to stop them, then that is on them. Don't put yourself in that position and it won't happen. As a trained recuer , I truely morn for the lost life/soul of Tiller the ex-baby killer. But the protector side of me rejoices that an evil aggressor will not suck the brains out of another skull of a womb child. If that makes me a hate mongering extremist, so be it. If you find yourself in danger of evil aggression, and I am around, I would instinctively react, whether you would agree with it, or not, or if you would thank me or spit on me for being "mean". That is simple the way I am made. The abortion issue has literally busted my heart into little pieces. I have failed the innocent miserably of my duty to them. CP is absolutly right. As far as this issue is concerned I am a coward, and have allowed the phonies of pro-life to influence my dereliction. So I have done my best to infasize the recuer side of me with IAAP. But I will never condemn Scott Roeder for using enough force to stop an evil aggressor from sucking the brains out of childrens skulls. Now you bortheads be sure and send this post to the FBI. They took a very simular oath as mine. And they are just as cowardly in not stopping the evil aggression against the womb child. I could really care less what anybody thinks about that. Personal conviction is not based on what pro-death scum thinks about it.

reply from: 4choice4all

The legal doctor practicing legal medicine becomes an evil aggressor when dangerous ideologues distort reality to fit their narrow world view.

reply from: faithman

Like sucking the brains out of children fits yours, huh scanc?

reply from: yoda

True, but you know what Fara and Carole say...... (or is that a redundancy?)
They say we must not say anything negative to the baby killers, nothing that might make them feel bad about themselves..... nothing that might make them realize what they are actually doing....

reply from: yoda

Some of them do, and other cooperate and facilitate. So in the end, every proabort who posts here in support of abortion has some guilt in the killing of every baby that is aborted by anyone who reads this forum.
Even women who go to get abortions don't necessarily try to pull others into the same moral morass with them..... but the vultures who post here in support of abortion do exactly that.

reply from: yoda

That's a basic difference between the two types of prolifers..... the ones who are in it because it hurts them to think about the thousands of babies being slaughtered every day, and the ones who are in it just to try to socialize and fraternize with others, and basically view abortion as merely a necessary, ugly sidelight to their socialization.
To the second group, abortion is "just one of many problems we ought to deal with, and not even the most important one from a moral perspective". It's just an excuse for them to come here and tell us what we're doing wrong. Down deep, down very, very deep, they really don't care how many babies die.

reply from: yoda

Count on it, if I hear about you being in a hostage situation, I'll call Fara and not FMan.

reply from: sander

I make that distinction too.
The "vultures" that post here are the vilest of creatures.

reply from: yoda

Kinda like the doctors who perform lethal injections on death row?
How do you feel about that kind of "legal medicine", btw?

reply from: sander

Count on it, if I hear about you being in a hostage situation, I'll call Fara and not FMan.
Now, that was worth staying up late just to read that!

reply from: CDC700

I would want someone to storm the building and kill every one of the bastards, if I die in the process, so be it. But I wouldn't go down without a fight!

reply from: carolemarie

Hmmmm
the problem is that the woman is the one seeking an abortion....if you kill a doctor, she will go to another one.....
the person who is the most guilty is the woman.
And if you kill her you kill the baby......so your choice is only to reach that woman and help her so she can choose life.

reply from: faithman

So if the woman is the most guilty, why do you advocate she go free, and the abortionist goes to jail? HHHHHHMMMMMMMM tic...tic...tic...

reply from: sheri

Yoda, what did you hope to accomplish by promoting the vitriol attitude toward Farimir?

reply from: carolemarie

So if the woman is the most guilty, why do you advocate she go free, and the abortionist goes to jail? HHHHHHMMMMMMMM tic...tic...tic...
Because taking the profit out of abortion will end it faster than anything else. The women are victims.

reply from: faithman

So if the woman is the most guilty, why do you advocate she go free, and the abortionist goes to jail? HHHHHHMMMMMMMM tic...tic...tic...
Because taking the profit out of abortion will end it faster than anything else. The women are victims.
So the victims is more guilty than the victimizer? So that logic means that the victim of rape is more guilty than the rapist.

reply from: Banned Member

My heart bleeds for you. Really.

reply from: yoda

But it never bleeds for the bleeding aborted babies, does it?

reply from: sander

So if the woman is the most guilty, why do you advocate she go free, and the abortionist goes to jail? HHHHHHMMMMMMMM tic...tic...tic...
Because taking the profit out of abortion will end it faster than anything else. The women are victims.
So the victims is more guilty than the victimizer? So that logic means that the victim of rape is more guilty than the rapist.
Odd how often CM opens mouth and inserts foot.
I truly believe she does not think things thru and is unable to see past her warped sense of justice...oh wait, she has no sense of justice...yikes.

reply from: faithman

But it never bleeds for the bleeding aborted babies, does it?
What actually comes out of a black hole anyway?

reply from: yoda

Yeah, the woman is the "victim" in abortion, so that means that the baby must be one of the perpetrators, right? And we must never mention the baby when talking about abortion, right? Darn, no wonder those proaborts are so gleeful about the number of babies being killed......

reply from: carolemarie

Abortion is chosen because women feel trapped and see abortion as the best option for them....
that is why every woman chooses abortion. For whatever reason, she sees abortion as the best choice for her. And yes, it is her self interest she is looking at. Just as everyone makes choices based on what is best for them
I believe abortion isn't the best choice, and that we need to eliminate the reasons women see it as that.
We need to help pregnant women and single moms if we want women in a crisis pregnancy to choose to have a baby.
If we take the profit out of abortion by prosecuting those who perform them, we basicaly shut down the 1.5 million abortion that we currently have and reduce it to maybe 500 and we can change the attitude and hearts of our culture.

reply from: yoda

But Carole, not "everyone" makes such selfish decisions without considering the human being that will die because of it!
Not "everyone" ignores the innocent life that will die because of her decision to do what is "best for her".
No, some people actually consider the taking of an innocent human life to be a BAD THING....... and won't do it no matter what.
Really, NOT EVERYONE is willing to sacrifice the life of their own child to further their own interests....... didn't you realize that?

reply from: 4choice4all

How can you prosecute someone for doing something legal? How can you prosecute the doctor and not the woman? How can you not prosecute the staff? And once you start going after women, the doctors, the staff, what...the drivers? ....you will lose public support. not to mention...it won't happen. We are a country of laws and we don't prosecute people that don't break them.
I do agree CM that giving women other options is the best way to reduce abortions. Daycare, healthcare, affordable housing, jobs, welfare benefits.....show her a safety net that will allow her to actually be able to raise a child and she may feel like she has a choice.
Yoda, she forgot to point out that many women simply don't consider a fetus a child.

reply from: yoda

You can't, you have to make it illegal first.
By writing the law that way.
By writing the law that way.
Works for me.
And yet, one of the favorite proabort claims is that women will break the law by the millions if we make elective abortion illegal..... go figure!
Why do you even post here, if that's the best you can come up with?
Private, personal opinions do not change a thing about the truth, and I'll be willing to bet that any woman who says that knows better. It's just another lie to try to justify the killing. The killing must go on, no matter what, right? Just like the "show must go on"?

reply from: 4choice4all

Haven't you learned in 36 years that the law will not be on your side?
We know that women still obtain abortions...even when illegal. So even making it illegal will not end abortion....have you looked at drug use in this country? You'll just need to build more prisons I guess.
Your "truth" is nothing MORE than private personal opinion...oh vanity stricken one.

reply from: yoda

That's the same question that Wilberforce was asked about slavery..... and many abolitionists in this country were told slavery was here to stay as well. Why do you really think we give a rat's behind what you think?
Is that what YOU call a linked quote from a legitimate dictionary?
Sad, just sad.

reply from: 4choice4all

Except that slavery was inflicted on living people. You first have the hurdle of trying to convince the masses that a fetus is a person...good luck with that,lol.
dear Yoda....just because you rant about how the argument between fetus and child is one of semantics doesn't make it so. Some people have convictions. And convictions are not whims based on semantics. The theory of personhood is not a whim based on semantics...but a deeply held conviction based on medical, scientific, theological and philosophical studies. When one engrosses them self in such serious introspection it is very hard for someone to shake them with a dictionary entry. THAT is what you are up against dear one....you've simply come to a gun fight with a feather.

reply from: MC3

4Choice 4All / Rosalie:
You dismiss the comparison between slavery and abortion by saying, "Except that slavery was inflicted on living people."
First, if the unborn are not living, please define for us the medical term, "fetal demise." Further, if the unborn are not living, also explain the biological process by which they will continue to grow if not killed by some degenerate like you.
Second, you appear to be out of step with a significant number of your fellow baby killers. After all, many of them will now openly concede that abortion takes the life of a living human being. Interestingly, almost all of the people I've heard admit this actually work in the abortion industry. In fact, I have a tape of your dead hero, George Tiller, in which he repeatedly refers to his victims as "babies." Evidently, even a low-life like this coward could not deny what his own eyes saw.
Third, as for what the "masses" believe, that is wholly irrelevant. History teams with examples where "consensus" was eventually found to simply mean that most of the stupid people were on one side. Referring back to the slavery analogy, it is certainly true that, during this period, "the masses" did not see blacks as either physically or intellectually equal to whites. And by the way, that view continued to be held by "the masses" long after slavery ended. It may even be true that among "the masses," that was the majority opinion until relatively recently. One thing I know for sure, it would not be at all difficult to identify all sorts of things which "the masses" believe right now which will one day be proven wrong.

reply from: 4choice4all

We have clearly stated in numerous threads that a fetus is living...but not a person.
Referring to them as babies for the sake of the patient or the argument is not the same as agreeing that they are in fact no different than a born child. I often referred to my own in utero children as my "baby".(and often my fetus,lol)
I only point to the masses when making it clear that in order to reverse the trend of abortion rights you have to get the masses on your side. I often point to a fact that escaped at least one very vocal(no longer present) prolifer....our country is a republic..where the majority rule is not greater than individual freedom. So i understand that the masses do not control the law.

reply from: Rosalie

I hate to be the one to point this one out to you but I said no such thing.
I am aware of the fact that fetus is alive, I never said otherwise.
I have never killed any babies, you hillbilly wacko. Have you?
LOL get up to date. I never denied that, either.
A deranged sociopath says what?
I don't know what you were taught about slavery (if you have ever even gone to school, that is) but I happen to know for sure that slaves did not live in anyone's body and thus weren't affecting this person's health and life in any way, which is a huge and important difference which makes all your nonsensical analogies null and void.
I personally do not care for the term person at all. Even if fetus was considered a person it wouldn't change anything. Born people are obviously persons and they don't have the right to use my body against my will in any way so even if fetus had the status of a person, it wouldn't change a thing.

reply from: yoda

And you have clearly and consistently lied through your teeth.
per·son (plural peo·ple per·sons (formal)) noun 1. human being: an individual human being 2. human's body: a human being's body, often including the clothing
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861725217/person.html
">http://encarta.msn.com/diction...217/person.html
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
">http://www.infoplease.com/ipd/A0584644.html
Main Entry: per·son 1 : HUMAN: 4 a archaic : bodily appearance b : the body of a human being; http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=person&x=16&y=16
">http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dic...erson&x=16&y=16
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
">http://www.wordsmyth.net/live/...matchtype=exact
Definition person noun [C] plural people or FORMAL OR LAW persons
1 a man, woman or child:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=59039&dict=CALD

reply from: sander

The hoops you disgusting proaborts jump thru to justify killing babies is staggering in it's scope.
You're all blind beyond belief....it has to be that your hearts and minds have turned to stone to not understand killing helpless babies is the worst thing humanity can do.
You people have to change definitions or at the very least argue with what's put right before your faces to justify murder.
Just because the law says it's okay, does not make it moral, it just makes this kind of cruelty worse still.
You people truly are the cruelest on the planet.

reply from: carolemarie

Since Sander missed it, i thought i would restate the original statement....
Courtesy is the hallmark of God's kingdom. Discourtesy is the trademark of Satans. When contending with the devil, Jesus spoke firmly but with the uttermost respect. He did not revile when answerering Satan's temptations. Nor did Jesus speak rudely, disrespectfully or call Satan demeaning names. Rather Jesus simply quoted scripture to rebuke the devil.
(John Paul Jackson from Needless Casualities of War)
So if the Son of God, going head to head with evil incarnate didn't feel the need to call names, why should God's people do it?????

reply from: iCelebr8Life

It appears that some people feel name calling is appropriate for them and this forum. I have observed that the forum is not intended to change proaborts into prolifers but to hone prolife discussion skills and that the proaborts or prochoicers are here for the amusement of the prolifers. With these things in mind it seems perfectly natural that there will be name calling.
Name calling isn't very natural for me and I am not very good at it. I have been called all kinds of names in my life, and they don't bother me. I am a bit of a lamb I guess. Well, at least I know my Shepherd.
I find this personalities here interesting. Many are beyond my limited life experience.
I abhor abortion I trust that God mercifully receives these little ones unto himself. I also believe that the faithful prayers of the children of the living God are powerful to change hearts and minds as we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities asnd powers. I believe that prayer can actually save the lives of the unborn.

reply from: carolemarie

the debating skills of the namecalling crowd have much to be desired, if their great debating skills can't convince someone that they are wrong....
they might as well just shut up if they can't facilitate any change....

reply from: yoda

And yet, we know that you are a "master debater", right?
You can't "convince" someone who knows they are wrong but don't care. In your Alice in Wonderland world, blackhearted people instantly change into goody two shoes the instant they hear a kind word from one of us. Open your eyes, you have no magic wand. Our only hope is to appeal to the conscience of the "great uncommitted middle" by speaking in plain, blunt language about the slaughter of unborn babies, not by butt smooching those who want to see more babies killed.

reply from: faithman

And yet, we know that you are a "master debater", right?
You can't "convince" someone who knows they are wrong but don't care. In your Alice in Wonderland world, blackhearted people instantly change into goody two shoes the instant they hear a kind word from one of us. Open your eyes, you have no magic wand. Our only hope is to appeal to the conscience of the "great uncommitted middle" by speaking in plain, blunt language about the slaughter of unborn babies, not by butt smooching those who want to see more babies killed.
All this baby killer wants us to do is "soften " our stance, so futher baby killers have the same "right" she did to slaughter 3. The truth is the first victim with this one.

reply from: carolemarie

If you are not trying to change the minds of those who are prochoice, then why are you posting? What is the point?
A debate entails presenting a reasonable argument, rebutting misinformation and winning the point. There is not point to win when you just say 'skanc borthead"
that is not debating. it is simply being a jerk....

reply from: sander

You need to read your Bible. God and Jesus call people what they are. They apply the correct name. Jesus called Satan a murderer and deceiver. The wicked are called Beelzebub (a worthless one). Jesus called sinners sons of Satan to their faces, explaining that they want to commit the same acts as their father Satan. Jesus points out that Satan came to lie and kill; to deceive and murder.
Yes, the Bible does say it was prudent for the powerful archangel (Gabriel?) not to argue with Satan the Devil when it came to the disposition of Moses body after death. The angel was not to presume authority over and above Satan's. The archangel said to Satan, "The Lord rebuke you."
Great post.
I hope it penetrates Carole's mind....even if it's just a little. I hope she hasn't been so brainwashed by whoever is teaching her that this just escapes her understanding.
In case Carol missed this.
You quote some man, try reading the actual Word of the Living God to get your instructions.

reply from: carolemarie

I do read the Word and try to do what it says...."love one another" and "love your neighbor as yourself" "as much as it depends on you, live in peace with all men"
perhaps you should read that bit about love again....remember...love is patient, love is kind,.......there is no divine mandate to call people ugly names or be hateful to them Sander. in fact we are told to do the opposite of that.

reply from: sander

I do not love baby killers, was I suppose to love the nazi's who killed my family members?
Wake up Carol...you're going to be in for a very rude awakening when Jesus comes back. He's NOT coming back as the mild Lamb who takes away the sins of the world, He's coming back to do some very swift house cleaning as the LION of Judah.
Familiarize yourself with the God of the Bible and not some made up version.

reply from: carolemarie

Actually yes, we are required to love, forgive and bless the people who do evil to us.....nobody said it was easy to be a Christian!
read the book!
Right now we are living in the time of grace, and we are told to make disciples of the world, and it is on us to do it, we have to build the bridge and reach out to the people Jesus misses most, those who don't know him! its all about relationships and you can't build them namecalling.
Love is the weapon He gave us to use--like i said, read the book

reply from: carolemarie

Obviously we have different viewpoints....
I hope you will find healing for the anger you harbor against people and find that love God has for his lost and erring children and tell them......

reply from: yoda

Have you not read a thing that Mark has posted about this forum? Did he not explain in detail about his vision for it?
Will someone please repost Mark's statement for Carole?

reply from: yoda

And I hope you will someday find "righteous anger" at the unremitting slaughter of the most innocent of all human beings.
Doesn't it upset you in the least? Not even a little bit?

reply from: MC3

CaroleMarie:
You stated that, "If you would talk to the prochoicers and women who have had abortions, you would know that they don't view it that way. Solve the reasons people seek abortions and you prevent them."
I suspect that I have talked to exponentially more of both groups than you, and I can tell you that you are being hopelessly naïve if you believe what you are saying.
As for your Biblical admonitions, while there is certainly the loving and caring side to Christ's ministry, we cannot ignore the other aspects to it. Consider these passages:
Matthew 10:
34Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
Luke 12:
49I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?
50But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!
51Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
53The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
Although I would certainly not hold myself out as a Bible scholar, I can at least read. And it has always seemed to me that Christ's message of love and caring was in reference to those who are lost. There seems to be no argument but that we are to deal with them with kindness and compassion and attempt to win them into the Kingdom by being examples of God's love.
However, it is just as clear that Jesus sent us a different message for dealing with those who advocate heresy and those who are not lost to His teachings but, instead, openly reject them. Those are the people we see here. Be assured, anyone who is so committed to abortion that they would come on a forum like this and attempt to defend the slaughter of the unborn, is not lost. These people know exactly what they are doing. This is especially true about those who come here and suggest that one can be a Christian and still support legalized abortion.

Luke 10
10But into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you not, go your ways out into the streets of the same, and say,
11Even the very dust of your city, which cleaveth on us, we do wipe off against you: notwithstanding be ye sure of this, that the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you.
12But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city.
I ask you to think about what is being said in this passage.

reply from: ProInformed

As a woman who has held various POVs on abortion in my life:
- personally opposed to abortion for myself but not involved in either the anti-abortion or pro-abortion movement
- then pro-choice primarily because I believed the lies that my baby was 'microscopic' and that suposedly both my baby and I would have died if I had not aborted
- then grieving but still wanting to be pro-choice when I found out the truth
- then undecided
- then pro-life
I can assure you Carole Marie that while there are some women who would never abort if they knew the truth and/or were not coerced (THE reason women are lied to and coerced), and women who abort because of problems they think there is no help with, there ARE also women who will abort, repeatedly, for selfish, sociopathic reasons having nothing at all to do with the problems and excuses that are pointed to as reasons.
Therefore even if it were possible to solve all the problems used to excuse abortion, that would not stop all abortions.
You state: "If you would talk to the prochoicers and women who have had abortions, you would know that they don't view it that way."
First of all the assumption that other pro-lifers have not been listening to what pro-abort women have been saying is a ridiculously dishonest judgement.
This chastisement from you is an indication that perhaps YOU haven't been paying attention to what aborters say, or else you only pay attention to what some aborters claim, or that you believe whatever they say (even when it's easy to see they are blatantly lying).
There isn't exactly a shortage of evidence that there are many, many defenders of abortion who admit they abort for selfish reasons and that even if all the problems commonly pointed to as excuses for abortion were solved, they'd still abort.
Unless you include solving selfishness, coldheartedness, and sociopathy when you state:
"Solve the reasons people seek abortions and you prevent them"
then the truth is there still will be plenty of aborters.
I do agree that BOTH pro-lifers AND pro-choicers should do all they can to solve societies problems, and that of course would help save the lives of some babies, but until you acknowledge that there are aborters who aren't struggling with poverty, health problems, relationship problems, etc., that they are just aborting for selfish and irresponsible reasons, then YOU will not be very effective at stopping all abortions either.
You don't seem to get it that while some women indeed are lied to and pressured to abort, other women really do choose to kill their own babies, not because of any dire circumstances or lies/coercion, but just because they want to.
When confronted with aborters who reveal or even admit they are the latter type,
pro-lifers rightly challenge them as being coldhearted and of killing their own babies for shameful reasons like wanting to have casual sex minus compassion for the innocent babies they create.
It's as if you (for some reason) need to pretend that there is no such thing as a whore or porn industry employees, no such thing as sexually promiscuous females, that casually have sex and casually abort. There have been some pro-abort posters here who openly defend fornication, promiscuity, prostitution, and simply wanting to have sex without being required to behave non-fatally towards any babies their sex creates. There are some pro-aborts who don't bother to pretend they kill babies beacuse of dire circumstances. Other pro-lifers HAVE listened to them, why haven't YOU?
NEITHER extreme is honest:
the pretense that ALL aborters would have refused abortion if it weren't for lies, coercion, and problems they weren't offered help with...
or
the pretense that ALL aborters are whores or sexually promiscuous baby killers...
Both types of females DO exist and of course plenty of females somewhere in between too.
Maybe you personally only want to save the lives of the babies of the mothers in the first group? so for thsoe babies that you wan to limit your pro-life efforts to, things like the patient protection of Informed Consent, assistance, resousreces, adn problem-solving will save thsoe mothers and babies from the tragedy of abortion.
But why are you condemning the pro-lifers who want to save the lives of the babies of the mothers in both groups and in-between? The pretense that females are incapable of being sexually promiscuous or creul does NOTHING at all to save the babies of that sort of female.
Don't forget that the goal of the pro-abort version of feminism is to allow females to be equal with the sexually promiscuous, irresponsible, and cruel sort of males.
Their whining that they shouldn't be called 'scancs' shouldn't be taken seriously if they in fact are killing their babies BECAUSE they value 'sexual freedom' over the lives of their own innocent babies.

reply from: BossMomma

Says you. But not every one agrees with you. I am not here to "convert" anyone, despite the fact that my posts have done exactly that in a few cases. My purpose is to defeat the forces of child murder. To stop monters like Tiller the ex-baby killer from sucking the brains out of the skulls of womb children.
Good thing we have laws to stop trigger happy monsters like you.

reply from: sander

And I hope you will someday find "righteous anger" at the unremitting slaughter of the most innocent of all human beings.
Doesn't it upset you in the least? Not even a little bit?
This is what floors me, Yoda. She REFUSES...REFUSES to open her mind or her heart to knowledge. There is such a thing as having a balanced view, her's is so one sided the babies cannot possilby fit into the equation.
I know you don't prescribe to the Word, but it does say, "My people perish for the lack of understanding (knowledge)."
I guess she thinks Jesus is sitting on His Throne just poo-pooing the slaughter of these children or just shakes His Head and moves on........

reply from: sander

How dare you be so condensending.
You have NO idea what's in my heart, you have never seen me write the word hate, never mind be able to look within me and see it.
Your self righteous, holier than thou attitude is constantly on display here and quite frankly, it's down right sickening.
Those who would kill these babies in ways that would make hitler blush are the scum of the earth, and the sooner YOU learn to deal with reality, the sooner you might actually understand how our Lord feels about this and what it's like for Him to watch this continue day after day....
You just plain need to GROW the heck UP.
And I hope the scales fall off your eyes so that can actually happen.

reply from: faithman

The kind people who have given us this free forum, have poured their very lives, and treasure into a powerful documentary called MAAFA 21. I believe the cost is going to be $20. Please seriously consider buying a copy, as well as sending what you can for copies to others. Life talk had several clips from it, and from just what I saw, It will be one of the most powerful projects in pro-life history. Do what you can. We owe MC3 so much, and could never hope to repay his kindness and suport for IAAP. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE consider this request, and do what you can for this project.

reply from: carolemarie

How dare you be so condensending.
You have NO idea what's in my heart, you have never seen me write the word hate, never mind be able to look within me and see it.
Your self righteous, holier than thou attitude is constantly on display here and quite frankly, it's down right sickening.
Those who would kill these babies in ways that would make hitler blush are the scum of the earth, and the sooner YOU learn to deal with reality, the sooner you might actually understand how our Lord feels about this and what it's like for Him to watch this continue day after day....
You just plain need to GROW the heck UP.
And I hope the scales fall off your eyes so that can actually happen.
I have no illusions about people. I choose to love them anyways.
Being hateful and namecalling isn't help and just makes people more dedicated to their position.
And before you tell me I am condesending, go back and read all your post which are nothing but condesending put downs.....if you want people to treat you with respect try showing some to others.

reply from: carolemarie

And I hope you will someday find "righteous anger" at the unremitting slaughter of the most innocent of all human beings.
Doesn't it upset you in the least? Not even a little bit?
Of course it makes me sad and breaks my heart! If it didn't i wouldn't be prolife.
But that doesn't mean I get to be abusive and rude and call other people hateful names and advocate killing abortion providers or hailing those who do as hero's!
Jesus SAID LOVE

reply from: yoda

But you feel no anger at all that around four thousand healthy, innocent babies are being killed every day in this country by healthy mothers? No anger at all? Nothing?
If someone made a living killing bugs, they would be "bugkillers", right? Would "bugkiller" then be a hateful name?
Your protective attitude towards baby killers is very, very puzzling.

reply from: Yuuki

Yes, it would be a hateful name. Just because it's true doesn't make it nice. Black people are "technically" n*gg*rs. But that doesn't make it right or nice to say the n-word. Or are you ok with justifying the KKK when they call black people that? I mean, they're technically "right", so it can't possibly be hateful to call people n*gg*rs.
*The section in italics is sarcasm. I do not personally think it is right to call black people the n-word and I consider it very hateful to do so.

reply from: nancyu

Are you saying ALL black people are *technically* naggers? That's a pretty racist generalization isn't it!

reply from: carolemarie

But you feel no anger at all that around four thousand healthy, innocent babies are being killed every day in this country by healthy mothers? No anger at all? Nothing?
No, it doesn't make me mad. It makes me sad....it breaks my heart....

reply from: Faramir

As a Catholic, I could say you're a heretic too, and be correct, but it would be better I give you the benefit of the doubt that you believe as you do in good faith, and have rejected Catholicism because you do not see it to be the true Church as Catholics do.
But if you're correct about those who come to this forum, where does it say in the Bible that they are to be demonized and demeaned?
And how does that save babies, and how does treating them respectfully (without respecting their view about abortion) kill babies?
From my perspective, those who call them vicious names are doing so for the sake of their own egos. It is a way to elevate oneself at the expense of another, and is not serving the unborn, but exploiting them.
Do you think those who nailed Jesus to the Cross were rejecting His message?
Did he call them bad names because of it? Or did he show love and compassion for them, and did he die for them too?
Also, some who have rejected Christianity may instead have rejected a distortion of Christianity or a very bad example. Someone who is not a Christian tuning into this board, for example, seeing Christian men call women "whores" or "moral degenerates with blood drenched teeth" might question whether Christiainity is really about love and forgiveness at all. We don't know for certain that those who appear to have heard Christ's message have heard it fully and clearly understood it, and therefore cannot be certain they rejected it. And even if they do understand it and still reject it, it doesn't mean they might not accept it later.
We are called to love our neighbor and to love our enemy.
That doesn't mean we have to love what they say or do, and that doen't mean singing "kumbayah" with them. It just means a certain level of respect for their personhood, even if we hate that they have no such respect for the person in the womb, and patiently waiting, hoping and praying for their conversion, while our steadfast example of compassion and willingness to love them in spite of their errors, might eventually be what turns their hearts.
We're hypocrites if we do otherwise, and are using the babies and the gospel as an excuse to feel superior, and that does nothing for the babies, the person we are putting down, and in the process we diminsh ourselves and destroy our own credibility.
And please note that "aggressive rhetoric"--which seems to me to be a euphemism for "verbal abuse"--is not just a special treat reserved for the "pro-aborts," but has been lavished upon Christians and pro-lifers. For example, here in your own forum, and with your permission, a postabortive prolife advocate has been called a "killer" a "scanc" a "whore" and god knows what else, hundreds of times, and I would like to see a Bible verse that supports or excuses that kind of treatment. And I cannot for the life of me understand how a Christian man could allow someone to be so horribly abused and demeaned in his own "home."

reply from: Yuuki

Are you saying ALL black people are *technically* naggers? That's a pretty racist generalization isn't it!
"N*gg*er" means "black". "Black" is an acceptable term in English to describe people with very dark skin (despite the politically correct liberals attempting to change it to "african amercian"). However, the term "n*gg*r" has VERY negative connotations in our language, so while it is technically "correct" in that it calls black people black, it is VERY wrong and hateful due to its political and social connotations.
I do not and would not EVER call black people n*gg*rs. I do not call gay people fags, either. I don't call people kikes, or spics, or any other racially/sexually degrading terms. It's wrong, and I don't do it. For the same reasons, I do not call pro-choicers baby-killers.

reply from: Faramir

As a Catholic, I could say you're a heretic too, and be correct, but it would be better I give you the benefit of the doubt that you believe as you do in good faith, and have rejected Catholicism because you do not see it to be the true Church as Catholics do.
But if you're correct about those who come to this forum, where does it say in the Bible that they are to be demonized and demeaned?
And how does that save babies, and how does treating them respectfully (without respecting their view about abortion) kill babies?
From my perspective, those who call them vicious names are doing so for the sake of their own egos. It is a way to elevate oneself at the expense of another, and is not serving the unborn, but exploiting them.
Do you think those who nailed Jesus to the Cross were rejecting His message?
Did he call them bad names because of it? Or did he show love and compassion for them, and did he die for them too?
Also, some who have rejected Christianity may instead have rejected a distortion of Christianity or a very bad example. Someone who is not a Christian tuning into this board, for example, seeing Christian men call women "whores" or "moral degenerates with blood drenched teeth" might question whether Christiainity is really about love and forgiveness at all. We don't know for certain that those who appear to have heard Christ's message have heard it fully and clearly understood it, and therefore cannot be certain they rejected it. And even if they do understand it and still reject it, it doesn't mean they might not accept it later.
We are called to love our neighbor and to love our enemy.
That doesn't mean we have to love what they say or do, and that doen't mean singing "kumbayah" with them. It just means a certain level of respect for their personhood, even if we hate that they have no such respect for the person in the womb, and patiently waiting, hoping and praying for their conversion, while our steadfast example of compassion and willingness to love them in spite of their errors, might eventually be what turns their hearts.
We're hypocrites if we do otherwise, and are using the babies and the gospel as an excuse to feel superior, and that does nothing for the babies, the person we are putting down, and in the process we diminsh ourselves and destroy our own credibility.
And please note that "aggressive rhetoric"--which seems to me to be a euphemism for "verbal abuse"--is not just a special treat reserved for the "pro-aborts," but has been lavished upon Christians and pro-lifers. For example, here in your own forum, and with your permission, a postabortive prolife advocate has been called a "killer" a "scanc" a "whore" and god knows what else, hundreds of times, and I would like to see a Bible verse that supports or excuses that kind of treatment. And I cannot for the life of me understand how a Christian man could allow someone to be so horribly abused and demeaned in his own "home."

reply from: yoda

What a weird, strange post. The "N" word is not a technical term, so how can it be "technically" correct? And how can it's use be a parallel to the use of terms that are not specific to any race, color, or creed? Do you consider abortionists to be a "protected class"?
So you consider "baby killer" to be a pejorative term? A put down? A derogatory label? EVEN IF it is true?
Then I guess you'd get bent out of shape if someone called a convicted serial child rapist a child rapist, right?
You don't have to kiss the butts of the baby killers, Yuuki...... it's not a legal requirement.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, that really is racist.

reply from: yoda

Can you be more specific? Do you agree with Yuuki that "baby killer" is equal to the "N" word?
And when is your next big announcement about leaving due?

reply from: yoda

"Baby killing" is degrading? Then why do people support it?
And why do you want to protect them from their rightful label?

reply from: ProInformed

Originally posted by: 4choice4all
"Hosanna! Hosanna!
I told you I would yell it on your triumphant return on the back of an ass.......now get off of Sander."

reply from: ProInformed

Originally posted by: Faramir
"Hey, nobody is perfect. We have a couple of prolife ladies who flew in here from each coast on their broomsticks, and their faults are overlooked by many, so maybe you could cut me some slack too (though regarding those two--I do have glasses of water handy if they get anywhere near me)."

reply from: yoda

You do know he's opposed to name calling and personal attacks, right?
Oh, and hypocrisy, too.

reply from: Faramir

The point?
That me referring to them this way because of their cruelty, distortions of the truth, and hatefulness, is the same as what they do?
What would be a better way to deal with their meanspiritedness?
I thought humor would be one way, but maybe you have a better idea?
As far at the content of my post in this thread--do you agree or disagree?

reply from: yoda

So that's your "Christian" way?


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