Home - List All Discussions

Scott Roeder

by: nancyu

Shame on anyone who claims to want to defend unborn children and then turns their back on Scott Roeder to stay in with the "popular" crowd. You are on the wrong side.
"Pro life" is doing Scott Roeder an enormous wrong. "Pro life" should be honoring Roeder who used the force which was necessary to stop a MASS MURDERER. "Pro life" is doing unborn children an enormous wrong, shuffling and dragging its feet, as the slaughter continues.
If you are condemning Scott Roeder, you might as well quit criticizing abortion. Quit criticizing the pro aborts, because you are absolutely no better then they are.

reply from: BossMomma

Roeder was a murderer who turned his back on defending the pro-LIFE position by aborting another person. God is the only judge Tiller should have faced, Roeder put himself before God and took it into his own hands to dole out judgement. The only difference is that Roeder has the opportunity to repent.

reply from: Shenanigans

The problem with the mindset to support Mr. Roeder for his actions demands that those who support said actions must now pick up rifles and bombs and go kill every abortionist and support personal, perhaps even the women who have abortions. It wouldn't be too hard logistically.

reply from: PanhandleGuy

Murdering a murderer still makes you a murderer.

reply from: B0zo

Condemning a murderous act is not for the sake of being "popular."
But if you think murdering abortionists is the way to go, nobody is stopping you. Or do you want to stay all comfy and cozy in your house instead of in jail? You talk the talk, but sure as heck don't have the courage of your misguided "convictions."

reply from: Banned Member

I recently read a local news story about a woman who killed her sister's ex-husband because it was discovered he was sexually molesting his children during visitation. I am completely OK with her actions. Screw the law when it fails society.
I saw a story on TV where a father went to his ex-fishing buddy's house and shot him to death for raping his (the shooter's) daughter. I feel very sad for the shooter and his family as he is now in prison, but I am pleased the rapist is dead.
This type of vigilantly action is as old as humanity. What Roeder did is nothing new and it will happen again. It's human nature to do what ever is necessary to protect our young.
What of this BOzo? What's your opinion of me and these events?

reply from: Sigma

It's certainly not compatible with pro-life philosophy.

reply from: B0zo

I can sympathize with this father, but this sets somewhat of a bad precedence.
What if I suspected you raped my daughter?
Abortion is unfortunately LEGAL (except where nancyu lives).
My opinion of you is that you is that in spite of the fact you are often unnecessarily insulting, you seem like a nice enough fellow, but you have fallen in with a bad crowd here, and are trying too hard to please the internet bullies. My opinion about your idea is that your reasoning fails because unfortunately ABORTION IS LEGAL (except where nancyu lives), and Dr. Tiller was performing a legal procedure.

reply from: B0zo

In your world abortion is illegal.
In faithman's world, what scott did was legal.
Do you two happen to reside at the same funny farm?
You say abortion is illegal but never call the cops. You say that killing abortionists is good because it protects babies, but you wait for people like Scott to pay the price of your perverted idea of justice, and stand by watching babies being killed instead of following in Scott's footsteps.
You're not so hot either.

reply from: Clint7

Well said and great points leftsnemesis. B0zo is a blinded BOZO that has no idea what child killing consists of or maybe he just don't care because he can't see for the sand.

reply from: B0zo

Why don't YOU kill abortionists?

reply from: Clint7

Mainly because I'm not SuperMan. It would be great to stop all evil on this universe but our abilities are limited. Why aren't you out stopping murders tonight? Probably because you don't care about anyone but *your four and no more* I say this because you are siding with the Pro-Death crowd.

reply from: B0zo

You spend the rest of your life in jail for saving all the babies an abortionist would have killed.
Seems like more than a fair trade.
You don't have to stop ALL evil--just some of it.
Why do you value your freedom more than the lives of all those babies you could have saved but who will die because you did not do what Scott did?

reply from: Clint7

I can do alot more for the unborn on this side of the fence. Scott felt otherwise. You do know that we have freewill. Like I said, you are on the Pro-Death side. You think just like CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and the other wimps that are afraid to stand against child killing. You are also afraid to stand with someone who has done something about it. You put Tiller above Roeder. Unbelievable! and you will answer for it.
Proverbs 6:16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and HANDS THAT SHED INNOCENT BLOOD
Tillers blood was NOT innocent, he had over 60,000 innocent little babies blood on his hands.
THINK ABOUT IT and get the sand out of your mind.

reply from: B0zo

You talk but don't do.
You're worse than me, because I at least believe it's wrong and counterproductive to murder to stop abortion, but you believe it's right, that it works, preach it, but refuse to do it yourself (because you fear punishment), and want others to suffer for the sake of your internet convictions.
Where did I put Tiller "above" Roeder, btw?

reply from: Clint7

I will repeat what I said, I can do alot more for the unborn on this side of the fence. Scott felt otherwise. Roeder did not murder. Why have you avoided the scripture that talks of innocent blood. Do you really think that Tiller's blood was innocent? A better question would be not where do you but Why do you put Tiller above Roeder?

reply from: B0zo

blah...blah...blah
You're a coward. You talk tough but are scared to do what you preach.

reply from: B0zo

But they will claim they can do more good holding up post cards.
They have their ways of wussing out of practicing what they preach.
I don't blame them for valuing their freedom. But I don't think they want to face the fact they value their comfort more than they want to save the lives of babies, or else they don't really believe the bs they're spewing...

reply from: godless

keep up the good work guys. you are helping to keep a woman's choice legal. I hope you keep pro lifers like bozo out in front of your cause. As creepy as Faithman is, he is right. You do not believe blobs in the womb are really people. If you did, you would agree with nancyu that "womb children" ;who came up with that stupid name anyway; are worthy to be protected the same as real live born children. But the posters here are really pro choice. You actually do agree with us. Faithcreep is a very scary dude indeed. It is a very dangerous man who really believes what he says. I would hope that the clown would please stop provoking him. Women need help, and we do not need anymore doctors scared away from providing services to those who need it.
Besides bozo, wouldn't you actually be guilty of helping him commit murder if he killed a doctor because of what you post here? Could you live with yourself if you caused another doctor to be shot?
I regret to say your resident radical is right. There is a shortage of doctors. We had several workers quit our local clinic right after Tiller was brutally murdered by that nut job zellot Roeder. I am sure the authorities are watching Faithcreep, and I would think that what he has post here would at least get him detained, if not thrown in the loony ben.
Something tells me he is not a coward as you suppose. So for the sake of women's rights, let that rabid dog lie. A doctor's life may be in the ballance.

reply from: BortSimpson

Hey, Faithman, what's up, buddy? What was the name of that almost identical alias you got caught using to argue with yourself last time? I forget the name, but feel that deja vu.
Protip: Use spell check when you try to fly under the radar. Referring to yourself as "faithcreep" and such is just glaringly obvious.

reply from: Banned Member

I can assure you that any like mindedness you perceive is entirely co-incidental. I had formed my opinions on virtually everything discussed here prior to joining this forum and, although I have gleaned some new information from this information flow, I can assure you I am not pleasing anyone, save myself.
I am a little disappointed that you would think that I, of all people, were trying to fit in somewhere. This implies that you suspect that I am shallow. Ouch, Mr. Clown.
Oh well. (small sigh)
Having said that, I will admit, that after having been exposed to the self righteously rigid minded arrogant and ignorant leftists babykillers who represent themselves here, I have become somewhat more cynical and aggressively disgusted towards these aged Hippie crotch worshipers. If that's what you mean by unnecessarily insulting then I will cop to that as, for me, it is completely unavoidable. As is my habit, I am articulating my feelings and observations with as much clarity and accuracy as I can muster, Also, sometimes, I'm just having a bit of fun. Guilty as charged, I suppose.
I know that you believe that Jazz about legal abortion but as you know the law is a fluid and oft contradictory and unfair process which many contend that, what you call "LEGAL", is a clear violation of the Constitution. I predict that it's this very unconstitutionality that will ultimately prove to be the undoing of this Supreme Court sanctioned travesty.
Your claim that my "reasoning fails" is off track of what I was asserting. My only assertion was that vigilantly action is, has, and will be the reaction of humans to remedy unjust actions, unpunished misdeeds and/or threats to the safety or security of the family or a community.
All I'm doing is attempting to remind everyone that, outside of the context of legalities, what Roeder did was normal in terms of know human behavior patterns. That's why I am confident in my prediction that it will happen again.

reply from: Banned Member

Murder is a legal term. What then is justifiable homicide?

reply from: Banned Member

I am sorry, but I disagree with Nancy.
There cannot be support for the kind of actions that Scott Roeder took this past year. I also think that because a person is glad that Tiller is no longer performing abortions does not mean that a person supports Scott Roeder's actions or in way celebrates the death of George Tiller. I understand that Scott Roeder wanted to save lives and in that regard I believe that he was sincere. The unborn in the womb are children and human persons, just as the born are. However, that does not excuse in any way the actions of Scott Roeder.
Does a man have the right to take the law into his hands? Sometimes yes. But Scott Roeder did not take the law into his own hands. In a moment of protracted and calculated rage Scott Roeder removed himself from the law and became judge, jury and executioner. As people who support lawfulness, we believe that people are entitled to a trial. Scott Roeder did not give George Tiller recourse to the law. The threat was not imminent. There was no immediate danger. Roeder's action were not of unbridled rage in what would amount to a crime of passion. Scott Roeder executed a man without charge, without rights given and without a trial of any kind. Scott Roeder's action were planned, calculated and meticulous and his options carefully weighed. Scott Roeder did not execute a man convicted of a crime. Scott Roeder executed a man, who by our own system of justice, was a suspect and innocent until legally and properly proven guilty in a court of law. The rule of law applies to every human person, even one whose actions were as depraved as George Tiller's.
I will not take a position of lawlessness to combat what I know is a lawless fate for the unborn. It is a paradox that I must resign myself to and the same paradox which motivates my every other pro-life action. As a friend of mine pointed out, who knew George Tiller, he was still a man, even if a man who had lost his sense of right and wrong towards the most innocent among human persons. George Tiller grew up the son of an abortionist. Perhaps Tiller died for the sins of his father. Perhaps Tiller died for 37 years worth of apathy and indifference on the part of people who normally are a people on conscience. A people who should have long since ridded their nation of abortion.
George Tiller was no different than countless of others who cause the deaths of the unborn out of a grossly distorted sense of doing good either through action or inaction. Sins of omission can be just as grave as sins of comission. But 37 years after Roe V Wade, George Tiller is dead, Scott Roeder will likely serve the rest of his days for the death and tomorrow 4000 more children will die because of abortion. George Tiller and Scott Roeder are both victims of a culture of death larger than themselves and larger than ourselves.
We cannot allow our anger and indignation to consume us and make us a part of the very culture than we seek to reverse, the very culture we wish to transform into a culture of life. A people of faith should pause to remember and pray for the dead. We must be the culture of life, even if that sometimes means we stand powerless before death. But let us be known for changing the world with our righteousness and peace and not with violent rage.
God help us and God help this broken nation.

reply from: Spinwubby

My favorite Faithman alias of all time was "Heartbroke." This is his version of a 24-year-old woman:
"Heartbroke":
Womb children. What a totally beautiful way to put it. I think I will add that to my "lingo". Where did you pick that one up from?
4Given:
I borrowed, did not steal- it from faithman. I always referred to womb children as the unborn.. I far prefer womb children now- I just realized I didn't ever thank him for introducing me to the term.. It makes sense though, does it not?
Heartbroke":
The term is really endearing, and is such a lovely way to present the truth. Kinda reminds us gals how special we are, that God would build in us His workshop. "I HAVE FORMED YOU IN YOUR MOTHERS WOMB" !!! I am so glad that God made me a mom. I still have troubling thoughts about almost throwing it away.
-------------------------
"Heartbroke":
Oh sis, now I got the sniffle snuffles. I am so glad for the promise that my Father God will wipe away all tears. But it does feel good to "talk" about it. I hope any girl listening in will wait for the one God daddy ordained for you to have. [Mandy has her God daddy, and her man daddy]

reply from: Shenanigans

Roeder apparently has a history of mental illness.
Now, if a guy like that, can take down the most infamous abortionist in America, then it surely can't be too hard for pro-lifers of "normal" mind to do similar actions.
I happened to stumble upon the office of NZL's most famous abortionist. Its in the same building as an organisation I sometimes frequent. Even if there was security required to get into the abortionist's office I could, as s 28 year old woman, make an appointment to get in. Then once inside, well, the woman's in her 70s, wouldn't take much to physically bash her brains out, or strangle her. I don't think she's doing surgical abortions any more, she is a fan of RU-486, but this drug can only be dispensed from hospital abortion wards and the woman must remain. So, really, by snuffing this woman, wouldn't I be carrying out justice?
In my home town, the two abortionists are husband and wife. They live a 10 minute drive from where I lived, and they happened to live in a rural area, so I could easily get away.
I also work in hospitals where I can easily access the internal diretory, I could get the schedules and locations, even parking locations of abortionists and support staff.
Abortions are done in hospitals in NZL, bar two large standalone facilities which are still on hospital grounds. So, blowing up an abortion ward could damage surrounding hospital wards injuring other patients.
While blowing up abortion clinics may be hard in NZL, it's easy enough to take out the abortionists. And becuase of the size of the country, I could start a rampage in one centre and be in another within an hour to take out their abortionist. Or, I could get on plane, and its only a 45 minute flight between our two largest centres.
Logistically killing abortionists wouldn't be hard for me to do.
Why don't I do it?
BECAUSE KILLING PEOPLE IS FUC*KING WRONG!!!!
*ahem*
A bunch of idiots who got conned into believing a warped version of Islam were able to kill thousands of Americans on American soil. People harped on about how organised they were, what a load of bullocks, its not hard to get a plane's timetable and book flight lessons. -_-'
Taking out abortionists and clinics in American wouldn't be that logistically difficult.
Just go to google maps/earth and locate the abortion clinics in your town. Borrow someone's dog and walk them past the clinics to "case the joint", then measure the time it takes to drive from one clinic to the next to the next. Come back at like three in the morning with a couple of drums of petrol and have at it?
But why don't people do this? If you guys can justify killing one abortionist because of all the babies that will live becuase the abortionist is dead, then surely, surely, think of all the babies that will live if you blow up every clinic in the city?
Or, if you're a female pro-kill-abortionists then just make an appointment., Spinny is always going on about how Unplanned Parenthood offers other services, so, just make sure when you book your pap smear you make sure the doctor doing it is one of the abortionists. And since women can still get pregnant at 45+ it wouldn't be that out of the ordinary for such a woman to want an abortion. Take in some pee you got from a pregnant woman, and pro-lifers know lots of them, right? The clinic thinks you're pregnant (and some clinics have been busted for doing aboritons on women who are not pregnant). Then, when you're alone with teh abortionist, stab the bastard. You're in a medical facility (well... yeah, techinically) There's bound to be something you can use as a weapon! Let the souls of all those aborted babies guide you in the manner of killing. Why not wrap the suction tubing around the bastard's neck and strangle them?
There are so many ways for people who support abortionist killing to kill abortionists. Its not hard. Its not logistically impossible.
Ahhh... but then people don't put their money where their mouths are, do they? They want to be known as pro-lifers who support the killing of abortionists, who suppot this "justice" being done, but when it comes down to it, they just don't want to save those babies! They jsut want to sit behind a computer praising a mentally unwell man for actions they themselves will never do. Surely intelligent people with no mental illness can do it without getting caught, and even if they do get caught, they could probably do a lot of damage in a few months or years on the run.
God will judge us both on what we have done, and what we haven't.
I don't support killing abortionists. Therefore God won't kick my arse because I didn't kill any.

reply from: broken

Now that many regulars have expressed their verdict just as the jury did, and there is strong agreement among the majority for the condemnation of Scott's actions, just as the jury did, the people have spoken. There is One verdict of Infinitely greater weight from the Highest Court that has the power to overrule or uphold the people's verdict. What will His ruling be?
After and since the Paul Hill execution for a similar killing in Florida, that state has been hit by numerous powerful hurricanes that have destroyed swaths of valuable property and left trails of disaster crisscrossing the state, some intersecting at the very site of the execution. Florida has also been one of the hardest hit states in the subprime mortgage crisis and economic meltdown. Heaven has not been kind to Florida since the Paul Hill death sentence was carried out. Now there is an opportunity to listen for the Creator's Judgment concerning His ruling of the Scott Roeder condemnation by the state of Kansas.
There seems to already be a precedent but a new case is before the Highest court for His consideration, verdict and sentence. This may be a time to wait before offering rash judgment of the outcome of Scott's trial or his actions. Let the True Judge and Jury speak in clear and certain terms that cannot be misinterpreted. He is free and able to express His favor or displeasure with the ruling of the people. If Kansas is spared even more disastrous judgment than it has received up till now, then Heaven's Court agrees that justice is served. However if Kansas experiences tragic events in the coming years then apparently justice has not been served and a further accounting for a faulty justice is required. Let Heaven speak because we require further confirmation of what is just. Shall we wait and listen? Would any of us be willing to change our opinion after the verdict is in?

reply from: joueravecfous

Wow.
Someone needs to take off their foil hat and brush up on Meteorology 101 and Basic Economics for Dummies.

reply from: Skippy

So by your logic, since your god has killed off a few pro-doctor-killing folks, he must not approve of shooting doctors.
I mean, Robert Ferguson was only 51 when he suffered a fatal heart attack. Paul deParrie was 56 when he met the same fate, at a Denny's no less. What an ignominious way to die.
Both were proponents of doctor-shooting. You would think that if your god was so high on the concept, he wouldn't have punched their tickets.
Come to think of it, wasn't that dude that used to post here until he drove his plane into a tree not totally opposed to violence against doctors as well?

reply from: Spinwubby

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Murder is illegal killing.
Homicide is any type of intentional killing.
Example; soldiers who fight in wars commit homicide, but they do not commit murder.

reply from: nancyu

I can assure you that any like mindedness you perceive is entirely co-incidental. I had formed my opinions on virtually everything discussed here prior to joining this forum and, although I have gleaned some new information from this information flow, I can assure you I am not pleasing anyone, save myself.
I am a little disappointed that you would think that I, of all people, were trying to fit in somewhere. This implies that you suspect that I am shallow. Ouch, Mr. Clown.
Oh well. (small sigh)
Having said that, I will admit, that after having been exposed to the self righteously rigid minded arrogant and ignorant leftists babykillers who represent themselves here, I have become somewhat more cynical and aggressively disgusted towards these aged Hippie crotch worshipers. If that's what you mean by unnecessarily insulting then I will cop to that as, for me, it is completely unavoidable. As is my habit, I am articulating my feelings and observations with as much clarity and accuracy as I can muster, Also, sometimes, I'm just having a bit of fun. Guilty as charged, I suppose.
I know that you believe that Jazz about legal abortion but as you know the law is a fluid and oft contradictory and unfair process which many contend that, what you call "LEGAL", is a clear violation of the Constitution. I predict that it's this very unconstitutionality that will ultimately prove to be the undoing of this Supreme Court sanctioned travesty.
Your claim that my "reasoning fails" is off track of what I was asserting. My only assertion was that vigilantly action is, has, and will be the reaction of humans to remedy unjust actions, unpunished misdeeds and/or threats to the safety or security of the family or a community.
All I'm doing is attempting to remind everyone that, outside of the context of legalities, what Roeder did was normal in terms of know human behavior patterns. That's why I am confident in my prediction that it will happen again.

reply from: broken

Those are valid observations and agree with the concept. There have been many pro-life people who have died young and left families. Many of those were also completely opposed to violence. Outspoken pro-life advocates seem to suffer early deaths more than most. Asking why is also worthy of consideration. They are clearly in a small minority and apparently getting smaller. There is a message there that needs to be considered.
The select rich elite keep getting richer too. Those who are stealing from the people in big banks and corporations and government continue to get away with their theft while the people get poorer. Is there a good explanation for that? It would seem to pay well to be dedicated to yourself at the expense of others.
In the case of Kansas it is helpful that the lines are so clear. Since Scott gave such an honest admission of what took place there is no ambivalence. Kansas is on trial. The people are on trial. Pro-lifers are on trial as evidenced by this forum. People are taking sides and have formed their decisions and expressed their opinions.
Asking why pro-lifers die ignominious premature deaths is a reasonable question. Could we be getting closer to an answer? Since many people who take strong positions on abortion either believe in a Creator or don't and since Scott testified that he was motivated by his beliefs what better time for a Creator to speak or remain conspicuously silent. Or perhaps He could cut down another extremist who claims to be doing His will. Why not be willing to listen, consider and learn?

reply from: Banned Member

So why the tsunami in Indonesia? Why the earthquake in Haiti? Why the genocide in Rwanda? Why were the Christians killed in Lebanon and Armenia? Were the Ukranians starved by Stalin because of their abortion practices? If God were going to punish people, wouldn't he have started with the abortionists themselves?

reply from: broken

More excellent valid questions. So is He there or not? Is He involved in His creation or not? Are there any moral standards that He requires or not? Is there any truth? If not then what explains this mess. Why even press your points with such certainty?
Is it possible for people to live in a manner that would bring blessing on their nation instead of tragedy. If not what is the reason for arguing to change things except for the pride of thinking you are right. Why not expect Someone who has claim to Rulership over His creation to express something now and then especially in direct terms if He is being misrepresented? What if all these events were studied to understand the reasons if there truly is a Creator involved in His Creation? Are you worried that if He did speak in clear terms regarding the Kansas case that you may not like the answer?

reply from: Shenanigans

More excellent valid questions. So is He there or not? Is He involved in His creation or not? Are there any moral standards that He requires or not? Is there any truth? If not then what explains this mess. Why even press your points with such certainty?
You're not making any sense. You have claimed that Florida is paying for executing Hill, that God is punishing them, but when someone else brings up other situations in other countries that have not so outwardly pissed off the Almighty you just build a little strawman.
God is involved in His creation, but not by kicking up waves or punching volcanoes. He is involved in OUR lives.
Nature is as disordered as man.

reply from: B0zo

This has been my frustration in trying to reason with a couple of posters here.
They say killing abortion doctors works and that it saves babies.
Then it follows that babies are dying for being negligent in doing what works. They are standing by applauding Scott Roeder and condemning those who criticize him, while watching abortions happening under their noses, even though they know they could stop many of them.
Something is wrong with that picture.

reply from: broken

Nature is as disordered as man.
So then there is nothing to be learned by what has happened in Florida. It is just strange timing. Please excuse the confusion. Like another poster said the sun still comes up every day and things are not so bad after all.
What is the point of all this debate? If a Creator is involved in people's lives then who was Scott listening to? Since people tend to grow up approving of what the Scripture says is evil, how are preborn people not better off never being born if they will have to face an angry Maker after living a full life of supporting and doing evil. The question here is what you talk about all the time? Which one is evil or are both of them evil? If you take one side or the other are you on the evil side. If you take neither side you could still be wrong. Sounds like it is time for a little clarification from the RuleMaker or your arguments are pointless. Of course if nature were all disorder and He has no control over it then Scripture disagrees because it says He does. If you can't believe that then what are your beliefs based on.

reply from: joueravecfous

And something is seriously rotten in Denmark if alleged prolifers can justify killing. It puts them squarely with the opposition and shows how value is assigned and measured. It's pretty hard to be taken seriously when you are guilty of the the very thing you are fighting.

reply from: Banned Member

God is the judge of the world and will judge the world at the end of time. But at the same time God is not an uninvolved God. God is still working in the world but does not exact terrible retributions upon the guilty any more than he outrightly rewards the righteous. Our reward, like the punishment for sins, awaits at the end of the world.

reply from: broken

Then what is all that hail throwing and earthquakes etc. in the book of Revelations? It says three times or more that people will not acknowledge His judgments and give glory to Him and repent of their sexual immorality, murders and thefts. Before you rule out judgments from Him you may want to check with the Book you believe.
Why limit Him? Why not rather count Him capable of doing whatever He wants with what He says is His? If it is from Him it would be better to understand and accept that, so behaviour can be changed and His judgment acknowledged and responded to. Why be so quick to speak for Him and so certain to rule Him out when His may be speaking? Don't you like what He may say?

reply from: Banned Member

Broken, go home, read the entire Bible, new and old testament and then come back. To even engage in this discussion, you have to have some kind of a theological and metaphysical understanding. You apparently have none at all really and it shows. God is not a play-thing for your vivid imagination to make and craft into whatever you choose. We are made in God's image and not the other way around.

reply from: broken

Thank you for your dismissing.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=289417369816&ref=mf
Scott Roeder's actions were right. Any harm done to the pro life movement didn't result from Roeder's actions, but by prolife's inaction by not defending Roeder and the womb children the way it should.
Augustine, you're sitting around waiting for the President, the Congress, the Supreme Court to tell you, okay, abortion is no longer legal. Why do you need any of these entities to tell you what to think? Are the unborn PERSONS or are they not? Are children in the womb worth defending or are they not? Are you another phony PP prolifer? Or are you just stupid?

reply from: B0zo

You hadn't been here for a day or so and I was worried you actually had the courage of your convictions and that you were in jail for knocking off an abortionist.
Thankfully, you don't really mean what you say, that's is all just internet bs, and are comfortable in your home, while the babies you could have saved continue to be killed.
Good for you!

reply from: Banned Member

I am working to make people tell the president and the congress and courts that abortion is wrong. People change laws but not before people change their minds. I know you're angry Nancy but that's not going to change my mind.

reply from: B0zo

You and your friend don't get it do you?
If they are "worth defending" then why are you not defending them and are instead praising a deluded and unbalanced man who is rotting in jail for doing YOUR dirty work?
If Scott Roeder's method is legitimate as you say it is, and is effective as you say it is, and saves babies as you say it does, then why are you sipping your tea in the comfort of your home instead of defending "womb children" as Scott did?
Are children in the womb worth defending or are they not?
And are they only worth defending if someone else does the defending and pays the price?

reply from: nancyu

Yes I AM ANGRY. Very freggin observant of you. You're full of it. There was a time when I thought that you were angry too. You've changed. Who got to you? I hope you enjoy the company of BoZo and concernedparent because you are starting to fit right in.

reply from: B0zo

Yes I AM ANGRY. Very freggin observant of you. You're full of it. There was a time when I thought that you were angry too. You've changed. Who got to you? I hope you enjoy the company of BoZo and concernedparent because you are starting to fit right it.
Maybe he sees that murder is not the answer?
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that you know.
And you don't act as if it's the answer yourself. Your actions (or lack thereof) demonstrate that your comfort is more imortant to you than the lives you say could be saved by doing as Scott did.
You have no right to be angry.

reply from: Banned Member

When did I ever supported shooting abortionists?
None of the people I support, or who inspire me to continue to fight for the unborn, have ever supported the killing of abortionists!
Was I to approve by some kind of active silence? No, I don't think so. I never supported what Roeder did. And unless you are prepared to do what Roeder did, you don't either. I may be angry, but I will not be consumed by hate.

reply from: nancyu

"consumed by hate"???? No Augustine, this is not you. You know me better than this.

reply from: B0zo

Can you explain, nancyu, why you applaud Scott Roeder, why you say what he did saves babies and helps the prolife movement, why you chastise prolifers who criticize him, and yet you do not do as Scott did?
If it saves babies and if you say you want to save them, then why aren't you saving them?
Your words are hollow, disingenuous, and hypocritical when you preach one thing but do another.

reply from: nancyu

Do you eat hamburger Bozo? Do you eat steak? Did you kill the cow? If the answer is Yes and No, how dare you? How dare you eat the meat from a cow that you did not kill yourself?
Do you get mail in your mailbox? Did you deliver it yourself or did you sit back lazily while someone else did that for you? Do you grow the vegetables that you eat? Do you package them? Do you work in the grocery store that supplies them?
Do you: do your own dishes that you eat out of? Clean the toilet that you defacate on?
Did you drill for the oil that heats your home? Do you repair your own car?
Do you support your troops who are fighting to defend YOU so you can type here? How dare you applaud them for doing what you are not willing to do yourself?
I have no plans to go killing an abortionist, nor do I have plans to drill any oil, or grow any vegetables. I do my job. I am thankful for the other people who do theirs. I appreciate and praise God that there are people willing and able to do these things that I'm not in a position to do, so that I and others can live.
I don't do everything. I don't plan to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan. I don't even like war. But I'm sure as hell not going to stab my troops in the back, like you and Brian are doing to Scott Roeder.

reply from: Banned Member

So now George Tiller's death was no more important than the death of a common barn animal? You really have come unhinged.
People just doing their job Nancy? Doing their job? Was that Scott Roeder's job? To kill George Tiller? Did someone pay him I wonder? Who gave Scott Roeder that job Nancy?

reply from: Banned Member

Wrong view no. 1
I have no plans to go killing an abortionist, nor do I have plans to drill any oil, or grow any vegetables. I do my job. I am thankful for the other people who do theirs. I appreciate and praise God that there are people willing and able to do these things that I'm not in a position to do, so that I and others can live. -NancyU
Wrong view no. 2
"Providing abortions and teaching other physicians how to perform abortions is my life ... Maybe it's my faith in God that gives me the courage to go on because I truly believe we are doing the right thing. I think there are certain risks in life that you have to make your mind up that you are willing to take and then take them. If I'm to die doing this then that's God's will, but until then I am doing what He wants me to do." -George Tiller

reply from: B0zo

Do you eat hamburger Bozo? Do you eat steak? Did you kill the cow? If the answer is Yes and No, how dare you? How dare you eat the meat from a cow that you did not kill yourself?
Do you get mail in your mailbox? Did you deliver it yourself or did you sit back lazily while someone else did that for you? Do you grow the vegetables that you eat? Do you package them? Do you work in the grocery store that supplies them?
Do you: do your own dishes that you eat out of? Clean the toilet that you defacate on?
Did you drill for the oil that heats your home? Do you repair your own car?
Do you support your troops who are fighting to defend YOU so you can type here? How dare you applaud them for doing what you are not willing to do yourself?
I have no plans to go killing an abortionist, nor do I have plans to drill any oil, or grow any vegetables. I do my job. I am thankful for the other people who do theirs. I appreciate and praise God that there are people willing and able to do these things that I'm not in a position to do, so that I and others can live.
I don't do everything. I don't plan to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan. I don't even like war. But I'm sure as hell not going to stab my troops in the back, like you and Brian are doing to Scott Roeder.
I see the point you're trying to make, but it doesn't work.
All those jobs and duties are legal and legitimate, and I pay for services that I can't or won't do.
And even though I cannot fight in a war because I'm too old to serve, my tax dollars go to support defense, so I am part of the process and in a legitmate way.
If you can't do the fighting, then are you supporting the troops? Are you sending them money? Are you building bombs in your basement that you could give them? Are you part of an underground network? Are you supporting violent means in any way besides internet posts?
If not, then you are not willing to pay the price of your convictions, and are encouraging others to suffer in place of yourself.

reply from: nancyu

"Death on a Sunday Morning. When will abortion shock people?" written by Brian Hudon January 29, 2010
Share
Friday, January 29, 2010 at 4:42pm | Edit Note | Delete
Today at 4:11pm
January 29, 2010
"Today, Scott Roeder was convicted of killing George Tiller. George Tiller was an abortionist. George Tiller killed more than 10,000 human persons. Today, a jury decided in 37 minutes that Scott Roeder was guilty of murder. 37 years after Roe V Wade, the highest court in the United States of America still does not believe that abortion is murder. I find that as difficult to accept as the fact the actions of Scott Roeder ultimately saved lives. I am glad that George Tiller is no longer performing abortions. As for myself, like so many others who are dedicated to preserving human life, it is difficult to know how to feel about any of this.
George Tiller was not any other abortionist. He called the subjects of his abortions babies. George Tiller admitted what the law will not admit, that abortion kills an unborn human person. He admitted that he liked the work that he did. Tiller's own records show that he performed abortions so that women could go to proms, attend weddings, and in one instance even to go to a rock concert. That was the extent of Tiller's compassion for the unborn human person and the extent to which he was willing to exploit both women and unborn children for his own gain. And his exploitive nature was generational. Tiller's own father performed abortions for a living. Illegal abortions.
George Tiller was killed on a Sunday while at church. Tiller openly claimed that he was doing what God wanted him to do. He would doubtless have been performing abortions on Monday and Tuesday and on every other day of that week and on every other week of the year. George Tiller killed babies for a living. To accept that Scott Roeder took the law into his own hands, you must accept that George Tiller killed human persons for a living. The court that sought justice for George Tiller were reluctant even to allow the jury to hear that George Tiller performed abortions. A defendant in America has the right, no matter how guilty, to testify in court to a jury as to the nature and motive for his actions.
I do not advocate what Scott Roeder did. I wish that he had not done what he did. But I remember that George Tiller did what the monsters of the Nazi regime did for years in killing those persons they deemed unworthy to live, those they deemed unfit even to exist so that they took it upon themselves to exterminate them. And so they killed them in the same cool collected manner that George Tiller performed abortions all these many years. That Tiller even offered the mothers of those children he killed the chance to be with the deceased testifies to the evil of the act. The scope and depravity of what Tiller did and how he responded to the death he caused with his own hands is nearly beyond human comprehension.
It should have been representiatives of the law that entered that church that Sunday morning, or his place of work or any other place, to arrest George Tiller for the deaths of thousands of unborn human persons who he himself publically admitted to killing. If you believe that the unborn child is equal to the child born, you must believe that what George Tiller did for a living was the same as any other murder for which he should have been tried and convicted. George Tiller was a criminal by any moral and legal standard. The nature of his actions were clear to any person of conscience. His actions should have exposed him to the law and should have made him accountable to the law.
I am not glad that George Tiller is dead. But I am glad that this monster is not performing abortions any more. It's a strange place to be in the world for a person on conscience to know that the world is a little bit safer unborn child because George Tiller is no longer in the world. I pray that the people of this nation will soon awaken to this human atrocity and end this disaster of human moral failing before another 50 million human persons are dead. I pray that this nation finally moves to end abortion in all its forms before another desparate man acts out in violence in the name of justice.
It's astonishing that people should have to even consciously consider whether a person who admits to killing 10,000 human persons should be answerable before the law. It's amazing that a man who kills thousands could present himself in a place of Christian worship before a God who tells us that we are all made in His image. The shockig act of abortion happens a thousand times in a thousand places every day in the United Sates of America. If only people could muster the same shock and disapproval for what happens every day in American abortion mills as they have for one death in a Kansas church on a Sunday morning."
Brian Hudon

reply from: nancyu

Who are you? What has happened to you? YOu are intentionally twisting my words to make your twisted point which is WHAT EXACTLY?

reply from: Banned Member

Who am I? I am not a criminal and I do not support criminal behaviour.

reply from: nancyu

You can't even answer a simple question with a straight answer? I asked who you were, not who you were not. And still would like to know why you are playing the word twisting games when you used to be a straight talker. I'm done beating my head against the wall trying to talk to you. You've changed.
God Bless you Mark Crutcher, you will be in my prayers, but I can't stand this forum anymore.
Logging out.

reply from: broken

You and your friend don't get it do you?
If they are "worth defending" then why are you not defending them and are instead praising a deluded and unbalanced man who is rotting in jail for doing YOUR dirty work?
If Scott Roeder's method is legitimate as you say it is, and is effective as you say it is, and saves babies as you say it does, then why are you sipping your tea in the comfort of your home instead of defending "womb children" as Scott did?
Are children in the womb worth defending or are they not?
And are they only worth defending if someone else does the defending and pays the price?

reply from: broken

bozo has repeatedly dared and encouraged other posters to backup their belief that what Scott did was justified to do the same thing. That has been the whole point of his posts in this thread as he chides them for not having the courage of their conviction to act in a similar manner.
There is a huge difference between believing that an act was justified and doing it as well. bozo is telling people to break the law as proof of their convictions. That is wrong. Then he uses their unwillingness to break the law as the evidence that their beliefs are wrong. People can believe what they want without doing the same thing and bozo has no justification to tell them to to break the law. That is also breaking the law.

reply from: Shenanigans

You misunderstand what he's doing, Bozo isn't the one who's lauding Roeder, Bozo isn't the one going on about defending the womb child and how baby killers like Tiller should be culled.
This isn't a war, this isn't butchering your cow for a hamburger, this isn't delivering the mail. Roeder was an unemployed fella with a mental illness. If people are so interested in praising Roeder's actions, then why aren't they doing it?
I'll tell you why, because deep down they know its wrong. Deep down they know when they lie awake at night they know something's not quite right about blasting a guy's brains out on the front steps of his church (albeit a dodgy church). Deep down they know Roeder is wrong, but they have to hold on to his actions as justified because they have lost hope. They have lost hope that the pro-life movement will win with justice and compassion and without shedding blood.
Abortion is a grievous sin that will warrent anyone who engages in it without regret a hot spot in the eternal bon fire.
But too loose hope, that's an even worse sin. To loose hope is to denouce Jesus Christ.

reply from: B0zo

I never told anyone to break the law, and I sure hope they do not.
I was simply demonstrating that they are supremely hypocritical. They are the ones who encourage others to break the law by praising lawlessness, yet they also want others to suffer the consequences.
It's despicable and cowardly.
It's not as if they are praising a "hero"--someone who has done a brave deed which they could not do--but that they are encouraging this behaviour as a way of life and as an acceptable means to combat abortion rights, thereby encouaging other nut jobs to step up and blow someone elese's brains out and ruin their own lives, while they very comfortably sit on the sidelines applauding.

reply from: broken

It doesn't matter what you think he is trying to do. What matters is what he is saying. Here are some of the quotes from bozo
Bozo quotes...
"But if you think murdering abortionists is the way to go, nobody is stopping you. Or do you want to stay all comfy and cozy in your house instead of in jail? You talk the talk, but sure as heck don't have the courage of your misguided "convictions.""
"You say abortion is illegal but never call the cops. You say that killing abortionists is good because it protects babies, but you wait for people like Scott to pay the price of your perverted idea of justice, and stand by watching babies being killed instead of following in Scott's footsteps."
"Why don't YOU kill abortionists?"
"You spend the rest of your life in jail for saving all the babies an abortionist would have killed."
"Seems like more than a fair trade."
"You don't have to stop ALL evil--just some of it."
"Why do you value your freedom more than the lives of all those babies you could have saved but who will die because you did not do what Scott did?"
"You talk but don't do."
"You're worse than me, because I at least believe it's wrong and counterproductive to murder to stop abortion, but you believe it's right, that it works, preach it, but refuse to do it yourself (because you fear punishment), and want others to suffer for the sake of your internet convictions."
"blah...blah...blah"
"You're a coward. You talk tough but are scared to do what you preach."
"But they will claim they can do more good holding up post cards."
"They have their ways of wussing out of practicing what they preach."
"I don't blame them for valuing their freedom. But I don't think they want to face the fact they value their comfort more than they want to save the lives of babies, or else they don't really believe the bs they're spewing..."
"This has been my frustration in trying to reason with a couple of posters here."
"They say killing abortion doctors works and that it saves babies."
"Then it follows that babies are dying for being negligent in doing what works. They are standing by applauding Scott Roeder and condemning those who criticize him, while watching abortions happening under their noses, even though they know they could stop many of them."
"Something is wrong with that picture."
"You hadn't been here for a day or so and I was worried you actually had the courage of your convictions and that you were in jail for knocking off an abortionist."
"Thankfully, you don't really mean what you say, that's is all just internet bs, and are comfortable in your home, while the babies you could have saved continue to be killed."
"You and your friend don't get it do you?"
"If they are "worth defending" then why are you not defending them and are instead praising a deluded and unbalanced man who is rotting in jail for doing YOUR dirty work?"
"If Scott Roeder's method is legitimate as you say it is, and is effective as you say it is, and saves babies as you say it does, then why are you sipping your tea in the comfort of your home instead of defending "womb children" as Scott did?"
"Are children in the womb worth defending or are they not?"
"And are they only worth defending if someone else does the defending and pays the price?"
"Maybe he sees that murder is not the answer?"
"Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that you know."
"And you don't act as if it's the answer yourself. Your actions (or lack thereof) demonstrate that your comfort is more imortant to you than the lives you say could be saved by doing as Scott did."
"You have no right to be angry."
"Can you explain, nancyu, why you applaud Scott Roeder, why you say what he did saves babies and helps the prolife movement, why you chastise prolifers who criticize him, and yet you do not do as Scott did?"
"If it saves babies and if you say you want to save them, then why aren't you saving them?"
"Your words are hollow, disingenuous, and hypocritical when you preach one thing but do another."
"If you can't do the fighting, then are you supporting the troops? Are you sending them money? Are you building bombs in your basement that you could give them? Are you part of an underground network? Are you supporting violent means in any way besides internet posts?"
"If not, then you are not willing to pay the price of your convictions, and are encouraging others to suffer in place of yourself."
end of bozo quotes.
These are quotes from bozo's posts. Over and over he tells them to break the law instead of explaining to them why they shouldn't. It is taunting and daring someone to break the law. It is like saying to someone holding a gun on another to go on an pull the trigger and daring them to. It is being part of a crime. No matter what bozo thinks he should not be telling anyone to commit a crime.

reply from: B0zo

Not goading--just demonstrating that they are the ones who encourage the unstable ones to do their dirty work.

reply from: broken

I never told anyone to break the law, and I sure hope they do not.
I was simply demonstrating that they are supremely hypocritical. They are the ones who encourage others to break the law by praising lawlessness, yet they also want others to suffer the consequences.
It's despicable and cowardly.
It's not as if they are praising a "hero"--someone who has done a brave deed which they could not do--but that they are encouraging this behaviour as a way of life and as an acceptable means to combat abortion rights, thereby encouaging other nut jobs to step up and blow someone elese's brains out and ruin their own lives, while they very comfortably sit on the sidelines applauding.
No, you were challenging them to do the same thing over and over. Even if you were counting on their comfort keeping them from doing something you have no right to keep telling them to proove themselves by doing it themselves. Read your quotes again in the prior list. That is what you said the whole way through. No matter what they think about Scott's actions daring them to do the same thing is not right in any form even in jest.

reply from: B0zo

Many of those posts were taken out of context and are somewhat distorted.
I never told them to break the law, and in the context of my own posting here, they know that, since I've made it clear I oppose violence to fight abortion, and they have criticized me for it.
I have not told them to commit a crime.
I have pointed out their own unwillingness to commit a crime, and their hypocritical willingness and encouragement of others to commit crimes.

reply from: Prolifethelegalway

Omg this is insane! Why would you praise God for the murder or anyone, born or unborn? Isn't that an oxymoron to the words pro life? Pro life should not mean just the life of unborn children, it should be pro life for every human being. Supporting a murderer, of any kind, no matter who it is he killed, is hypocritical and insane. Life is life, we will never all agree on the issue of abortion, the best we can do as people who believe in Pro Life is to try to change things through sane, legal means. I do not support any kind of murder which means that I am against abortion, however I am also against Roeder and others who would do what he did, because he murdered another human being. TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT. THEY NEVER HAVE AND THEY NEVER WILL! God is the only one who has the right to judge any of us, and when we try to play God is when we are truly lost. You seriously need to get your head checked because right now it's screwed on completely backwards.

reply from: Prolifethelegalway

There are legal ways to deal with these people. Do I believe the people who were raping and molesting children and evil vile people? Yes of course I do! and do I believe our ciminal justice system is flawed and too many of these monsters get away with it. Again Yes I do! But does that mean I condone the murder of these people? No I absolutely do not! What must be done is that our legal system must be fixed, it should be damn near impossible for these monsters to commit such atrocities and completely 200% impossible for them to get away with it. They should be locked up in a straight jacket in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives. Unfortuntely that is not going to happen anytime soon, however should we really be lowering ourselves to their standard and becoming monsters ourselves? Because no matter what you believe or not, it is wholly evil to kill another human being, that's why it's a SIN!!!!! Truly it makes me sick to know there are crazy people out there who praise the Lord's name and in the same breath declare that killing in certain situations is perfectly acceptable. You are hypocrites who do not know or understand God in anyway shape or form! God is a loving and merciful God to those who deserve it, but for the evil, demented and twisted monsters in this world he is their judge, jury and executioner sending them where they truly belong.

reply from: Banned Member

There are legal ways to deal with these people. Do I believe the people who were raping and molesting children and evil vile people? Yes of course I do! and do I believe our ciminal justice system is flawed and too many of these monsters get away with it. Again Yes I do! But does that mean I condone the murder of these people? No I absolutely do not! What must be done is that our legal system must be fixed, it should be damn near impossible for these monsters to commit such atrocities and completely 200% impossible for them to get away with it. They should be locked up in a straight jacket in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives. Unfortuntely that is not going to happen anytime soon, however should we really be lowering ourselves to their standard and becoming monsters ourselves? Because no matter what you believe or not, it is wholly evil to kill another human being, that's why it's a SIN!!!!! Truly it makes me sick to know there are crazy people out there who praise the Lord's name and in the same breath declare that killing in certain situations is perfectly acceptable. You are hypocrites who do not know or understand God in anyway shape or form! God is a loving and merciful God to those who deserve it, but for the evil, demented and twisted monsters in this world he is their judge, jury and executioner sending them where they truly belong.
Ok, I agree that it would be nice if the law were fixed and if the law was effective.
But there is this,.. many people of all ages died at the behest of Yahweh and at the hand of man. Therefore, I'm not convinced that every act of homicide is a sin.
I am certain of one thing however, BOzo is trying to catch flies with a Hula Hoop.
Also, I'm not so much glad that Roeder killed Tiller as I'm glad that some children probably will not be murdered as a result of it. I'm torn on this issue. If it weren't for this stinking Roe v Wade decision, these men would never have had any trouble between then at all.
I hate this ruling, I hate this mess, and I hate the way everyone is still beating this dead horse. Sometimes it just gets too damn noisy in here.

reply from: xnavy

i must confess , if i found out a man was molesting my daughter, i would probably take a knife and gut him like a fish.

reply from: faithman

How utterly mean and unchristian of you. You should get the rapist a box of candy, and try to reason with them as they are humping your daughter. It would be an act of vengeance to make a rapist stop. Y you should just join the stop rapist movement, go to the dinner, and listen to the windbag speak for $10,000 a speech, how you should just pray for, and show mercy to, the monster popping it to the kids at home.And if some one were to shoot the poor thing to get it off your daughter, Then you should get in line to condemn such action as cowardly, sinful, and un christ like.
Then go out and find an "ex-rapist" and tout them as a hero [but of course you will have to ignore the memory of the 3 it raped and killed]

reply from: nancyu

The infamous OJ Simpson trial should pale in comparison to the way Scott Roeder's trial SHOULD have been sensationalized. But the trial was kept quiet, because no one dared threaten a woman's precious "right to choose". Choose what? Finish the sentence. No one dares threaten a woman's right to choose to have her own child legally and professionally killed.
Mainstream "pro life" is sweeping an opportunity, to stop abortion once and for all, under the rug - and they are doing it intentionally. Turning it over in my brain, I can't think of any other explanation than, they don't want abortion to end at all, not peacefully, not otherwise. Mainstream "pro life" is not pro life at all.
Anyone who wants to sweep Scott Roeder away as an embarrassment, must not fully understand what abortion really is. These individuals like to think of themselves, and call themselves "pro life" but the only conclusion I can reach is that that term has been hijacked. In part, by downright phonies, and by others more sincerely, who are pro choice with exceptions. I like the term "pro life" But for me the term carries a very specific meaning. So I will try to show the distinction between pro life, which is real, and "pro life" which is the hijacked version.
There is "pro life". Those who are opposed to violence being used to get a point across. "Pro life" who is concerned about the mother's feelings because she might regret what she has done afterward, and need to be comforted with goody bags of tea and chocolate. "Pro life" who thinks abortion is bad, because the woman may be harmed, but no thought whatsoever is given to the child. I don't know what that is, anti invasive medical procedure? I don't know what it is, but I know what it isn't.
Pro life! Those children in the womb really are children! I see it, I've experienced it, I know it, I understand it. They are children. They are being slaughtered. There are thousands scheduled for slaughter tomorrow. We have to stop this! We can't have this on our conscience as a world, as a society, as individuals! We have to do EVERYTHING we can to stop it. EVERYTHING. This is real, this isn't a pansy game where we should be worrying about anyone's image, or feelings- except maybe those of the people in the process of being dismembered or poisoned at this moment!
Scott Roeder is pro life! He acted to defend children. Real children who would have been slaughtered the next day. They would have! And the day after that, and the day after that, and tomorrow there would be more slaughtered. Scott Roeder saved literally thousands upon thousands of lives, and he is being painted as a kook. Think. Who are the real "kooks" in this picture?
Those of us attempting to defend Scott Roeder know that we are not only defending him, but also defending the honor of those real living children whose lives he saved, and the honor and very lives of those real living children who are scheduled for slaughter tomorrow, and the next day and the next.
Scott Roeder's action was not taken out of hatred or vengeance; but to stop this mass slaughter of children, it's just that simple.
Wake up, people, George Tiller was killing children, and Scott Roeder stopped him.

reply from: BortSimpson

Wait, wut?
If it's not "wrong" to defy the law and use lethal force to "defend babies," why are telling us Bozo is "wrong" to allegedly "encourage" others to do it? Does it really make sense to say it's "wrong" to encourage others to do something that's not "wrong?"

reply from: BortSimpson

What makes the church itself "dodgy" in your view? Allowing Tiller to attend services? I seem to remember the Bible telling us that there were people who considered this one guy to be somewhat "dodgy" because he hung out with sinners. What was his name again? Jesus?

reply from: BortSimpson

Many of those posts were taken out of context and are somewhat distorted.
I never told them to break the law, and in the context of my own posting here, they know that, since I've made it clear I oppose violence to fight abortion, and they have criticized me for it.
I have not told them to commit a crime.
I have pointed out their own unwillingness to commit a crime, and their hypocritical willingness and encouragement of others to commit crimes.
Even if you "goaded" them to do it, how would that be "wrong" unless what you "goaded" them to do was itself wrong? How can they say what Roeder did was not wrong, then say you are wrong to "goad" others to do it? That makes no sense.

reply from: BortSimpson

If you knew of a day care center where the proprietors were slaughtering toddlers, what would you do? Post about it on the internet, telling everyone how wrong it is, but never interfere? Since you insist that the unborn are morally = to born children, I must assume you would treat this circumstance exactly as you do in the case of abortion. You wouldn't "defend" them by use of force, and neither would fatman or any of the other self righteous proponents of anarchy who are arguing in defense of murder on this forum.

reply from: B0zo

I wish I would have thought of that...

reply from: BortSimpson

Please understand that I'm making a point, but do not believe you "goaded" anybody. I understand that you were just trying to make a point, and I am in full agreement with you on this.

reply from: Banned Member

Conclusion; if you do not support shooting abortion doctors, you are not pro-life. This is nothing but extraordinary testimony to the obsessive nature of violent extremism.

reply from: nancyu

au contraire -- we are doing exactly that. Thank you for wordifying.

reply from: faithman

http://www.snopes.com/crime/warnings/bottlebomb.asp

reply from: Banned Member

au contraire -- we are doing exactly that. Thank you for wordifying.
Scott Roeder is not brave hero. He is a murderer and a convicted murderer. He belongs in jail.


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