Dissent is no longer the New Patriotism.

[Rev. Calibos]

You're the one who said that people should take responsibility of their actions by what carrying a bay thye dont want? making them give birth and forced to become a parent? Someone brought up the point of making women pay because, oh my goodness, they chose to be sexual beings. Sounds like equating motherhood to punishment to me.


And of course if there was a father who didn't want to shell out any $$$ to raise his child you'd give him a pass too, right?

Would you force him to be a parent by making him pay child support?

Making him responsible for the financial support of a baby they didn't want, never asked for?

[Paul McEnery]

And of course if there was a father who didn't want to shell out any $$$ to raise his child you'd give him a pass too, right?

Would you force him to be a parent by making him pay child support?

Making him responsible for the financial support of a baby they didn't want, never asked for?

And the second outing for that misogynist meme!

Still, that's the way it goes when you let others do your thinking for you, I suppose.

[Rev. Calibos]

And the second outing for that misogynist meme!

Still, that's the way it goes when you let others do your thinking for you, I suppose.



So I take that as a 'yes', you'd feel comfortable telling some parents that they had to care for a child that they don't want.

Interesting. Backwards thinking but interesting.

[Disciple_of_the_Bat]

No life begins before conception. The egg is alive, and the sperm is alive. When the egg and sperm join though there is a fusing of dna and it doesnt then become alive, it already is alive and just now has developed the power to become a different form. and btw in no way do I see a fertilized egg as being the same as me or being a 'human being' yeah it is human, but it isnt a person.

A sperm or egg cell is no more "alive" than a skin cell.




I call BS on that one. while i have no doubt you've come across the research, I'd like to know who carried out this 'study' and in what situations. what are the credentials of the ones who did the study? what was the study based on?
In addition I'd question the morality and the goodness of people who think that a rape victim should be after a rape then have to undergo the additional pressures of an unwanted pregnancy.



http://www.afterabortion.org/rape.html

[FanLove4Blade]

And of course if there was a father who didn't want to shell out any $$$ to raise his child you'd give him a pass too, right?

Would you force him to be a parent by making him pay child support?

Making him responsible for the financial support of a baby they didn't want, never asked for?

actually i wouldn't. I don't see any benefit to making a parent care for a child they ddidn't want / didnt want to pay for. It wouldn't be good for the child he/she'll find out my father never wanted me, he doesn't wanna pay for me' it wouldnt be good for him/her to have that kind of person around them. Incidentally, I am friends with a girl who got adopted by her aunt and uncle because her mother was sick and her father didnt want her. She wanted him as far away from her as possible because she knows he doesnt want her. And I think she's right.

[Paul McEnery]

So I take that as a 'yes', you'd feel comfortable telling some parents that they had to care for a child that they don't want.

Interesting. Backwards thinking but interesting.

I would, of course, in general suggest that people should be careful to avoid unwanted pregnancies, and if stuck with an unwanted pregnancy, carefully think about what for them is the responsible decision, preferably with some degree of counselling to help them think their decision through, though of course ultimately the decision devolves onto the woman, since either way it's her body that will be undergoing stress.

Oddly enough, this is what Planned Parenthood does; which appears to be an offence in the eyes of certain people.

[Tom]

http://www.afterabortion.org/rape.html

That article is 15 years old and bases its thesis on a study that's 30 years old.

[Rev. Calibos]

I would, of course, in general suggest that people should be careful to avoid unwanted pregnancies, and if stuck with an unwanted pregnancy, carefully think about what for them is the responsible decision, preferably with some degree of counselling to help them think their decision through, though of course ultimately the decision devolves onto the woman, since either way it's her body that will be undergoing stress.

Oddly enough, this is what Planned Parenthood does; which appears to be an offence in the eyes of certain people.



So forcing men to pay child support for children they don't want,never planned for, yea or nay?

[Rev. Calibos]

actually i wouldn't. I don't see any benefit to making a parent care for a child they ddidn't want / didnt want to pay for. It wouldn't be good for the child he/she'll find out my father never wanted me, he doesn't wanna pay for me' it wouldnt be good for him/her to have that kind of person around them. Incidentally, I am friends with a girl who got adopted by her aunt and uncle because her mother was sick and her father didnt want her. She wanted him as far away from her as possible because she knows he doesnt want her. And I think she's right.

And that's fair I think. If she has the right to bow out should she please he should as well.

[Paul McEnery]

A sperm or egg cell is no more "alive" than a skin cell.





http://www.afterabortion.org/rape.html

You might want to point to someone who isn't a liar.

The lie? "the welfare of the mother and child are never at odds"

I think we can all see that that's nonsense, yes?

[carabas]

Does this mean you would support abortion untill the onset of labor? Or that you beleive most pro-choicers would¿Reading this thread I am starting to favour extremely late term abortions in some cases. Decades after birth late.

[Disciple_of_the_Bat]

That article is 15 years old and bases its thesis on a study that's 30 years old.

I have yet to find another study that covers the same topic. If you can find one that is more recent I would appreciate it.
So far as I can tell, its either a subject few want to study, or there are so few pregnancies resulting from rape that noone else has done one.

[FanLove4Blade]

A sperm or egg cell is no more "alive" than a skin cell.

Discipleofthebat, all cells are alive. Its one of the ways that biologists use to define just what 'life' is. Have you done biology? I have, had to take them to fulfill the requirements for my degree.


http://www.afterabortion.org/rape.html

Ok I looked it up. Turns out this 'research' was done by the Elliot Institute, a very pro life group in favor of placing strict barriers to abortion. Dr David C Reardon heads it up.

In my opinion all the more reason to question their 'research'

[Paul McEnery]

You know, just when I thought I couldn't possibly get more disgusted with the religious right and the anti-abortion movement, I just went looking for pregnancy for rape studies, and found christian site after christian site all rushing to the same thought:

We can brush this uncomfortable issue under the carpet because it's rare.

There's times I really wish that their idea of God existed, you know?

[howyadoin]

You know, just when I thought I couldn't possibly get more disgusted with the religious right and the anti-abortion movement, I just went looking for pregnancy for rape studies, and found christian site after christian site all rushing to the same thought:

We can brush this uncomfortable issue under the carpet because it's rare.As rare as child-molesting priests?

[Paul McEnery]

As rare as child-molesting priests?

Strangely, not as rare as certain people want us to believe.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248


Holmes MM, Resnick HS, Kilpatrick DG, Best CL.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston 29425-2233, USA.

OBJECTIVE: We attempted to determine the national rape-related pregnancy rate and provide descriptive characteristics of pregnancies that result from rape. STUDY DESIGN: A national probability sample of 4008 adult American women took part in a 3-year longitudinal survey that assessed the prevalence and incidence of rape and related physical and mental health outcomes. RESULTS: The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Among 34 cases of rape-related pregnancy, the majority occurred among adolescents and resulted from assault by a known, often related perpetrator. Only 11.7% of these victims received immediate medical attention after the assault, and 47.1% received no medical attention related to the rape. A total 32.4% of these victims did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester; 32.2% opted to keep the infant whereas 50% underwent abortion and 5.9% placed the infant for adoption; an additional 11.8% had spontaneous abortion. CONCLUSIONS: Rape-related pregnancy occurs with significant frequency. It is a cause of many unwanted pregnancies and is closely linked with family and domestic violence. As we address the epidemic of unintended pregnancies in the United States, greater attention and effort should be aimed at preventing and identifying unwanted pregnancies that result from sexual victimization.

[dupont2005]

As rare as child-molesting priests?

or violent pro-life protesters

[Rev. Calibos]

or violent pro-life protesters

Since, according to certain posters, protests occur outside of every clinic, each and every one of 'em, each and every single day.


Except they don't of course. No sane person believes that.

[howyadoin]

Strangely, not as rare as certain people want us to believe.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248Jesus. 32,101 in the U.S. alone? That's a lot of rape victims to sweep under the carpet in the name of "logic".

[Michael P]

Strangely, not as rare as certain people want us to believe.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248

Horrifying as that figure in bold is, it's the stuff that came after it that got my blood up.

[Brian Cronin]

Please, someone try to argue whether protesting is "actually" harrassment (or if someone "perceives it" to be harrassment). The banning, it will be swift.

-Brian

ETA: And again, I'll allow one exemption for that last post that was done while I was writing this. I see that discussion avenue taken again, though, and it'll be a banning.

[Chris N]

Good point, Brian.

[FanLove4Blade]

And that's fair I think. If she has the right to bow out should she please he should as well.
we agree on something :) well this and why pro lifers call themselves pro life.


Please, someone try to argue whether protesting is "actually" harrassment (or if someone "perceives it" to be harrassment). The banning, it will be swift.

-Brian

i won't argue the point. Its true.. I was an actual protestor and i know protests are a form of, most of it,'legal' harrassment.

Like the 2001 protests of thousands of people in Quebec City where people were protesting the FTAA (free trade agreement of the americas) Now THAT was total harrassment. In fact people I knew who had been up there got thrown in jail. well they did illegal harrassment like throwing smoke bombs and Molotov cocktails at people..(there was a smaller one down here in Newfoundland at the same time that i was involved in)

but point is they are all form of harrassment in one degree or another.

[Brian Cronin]

Asking why just invites argument - so while I know that wasn't the intent, we're not going down that path - so I don't want to see the answer in this thread. If you want to PM Calibos off this thread to get his thoughts on the topic, that's cool, though.

-Brian

[FanLove4Blade]

Asking why just invites argument - so while I know that wasn't the intent, we're not going down that path - so I don't want to see the answer in this thread. If you want to PM Calibos off this thread to get his thoughts on the topic, that's cool, though.

-Brian

K. I'll edit my post and take those sentences of mine and ask him in a PM, Brian. :)

[Tages]

Not really.

The pro-life movement exists to oppose abortion. This opposition includes violent and non-violent methods.

The Islamic religion does not exist one way or the other in regards to terrorism.

The example doesn't work and, once more, you're the only one who can't see it.

So feel free to keep using it if being offensively stupid is your aim.

[Nick Soapdish]

And of course if there was a father who didn't want to shell out any $$$ to raise his child you'd give him a pass too, right?

Would you force him to be a parent by making him pay child support?

Making him responsible for the financial support of a baby they didn't want, never asked for?

Yes, making him partially responsible for the financial support.

It's not his body. It's his wallet. I don't value the two equally.

How about you? Since abortion is legal, do you believe that it should be legal for men to opt out on parental responsibility (even if it's only financial)?

[dupersuper]

In the eyes of someone who is scientifcally ignorant then? Becuase there is a difference. Like it or not its a biological fact that life begins at conception.


Actually, it's a biological fact that life begins BEFORE conception...or are sperm and eggs not considered alive anymore?


No it doesnt. Becuase no lone sperm cell, or unfetilised egg will ever develop into anything. A fetilised egg will become a fully developed human being if left alone.
.

and a sperm or egg will become a person if combined, so they're still potential people, so what's the real difference?
and I say that as a mass-murderer of my sperm...
and fertilized has an "r"and a "z"...unless you meant that to be a pun...


On a slight tangent, today's discussion shows just how valuable said stipulation would have been had it been followed, as it would have avoided, what, 150 posts?
-Brian

Why do you want to avoid posts? This is 1 of the more lively threads on here.

[Rev. Calibos]

The pro-life movement exists to oppose abortion. This opposition includes violent and non-violent methods.

The Islamic religion does not exist one way or the other in regards to terrorism.

Again, a bit slower this time as to not confuse you:

Muslims are, generally, peaceful, law abiding citizens.

There is the fundamentalist fringe however and they're the ones that that engage in violent acts.

To throw them all together into one group is short sighted and bigoted.

As it would be to throw all Pro-Lifers into one group based on the actions of others.



The example doesn't work and, once more, you're the only one who can't see it.

So feel free to keep using it if being offensively stupid is your aim.

Oh sure, because 'terrorism' and 'religion' certainly don't go hand in hand.

Which is why when folks are promised a place in the 'Afterlife' for their actions here it certainly doesn't have anything to do with faith, religion, etc.



No, just kidding of course. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together would see that, yep, the 9-11 attacks had everything to do with religion.

They got it wrong. That's why we consider them to be a part of the 'fringe' and that's why we know that their views don't reflect the views of the rest of Muslims world wide, peaceful, law abiding citizens.

[Tages]

Again, a bit slower this time as to not confuse you:

Muslims are, generally, peaceful, law abiding citizens.

There is the fundamentalist fringe however and they're the ones that that engage in violent acts.

To throw them all together into one group is short sighted and bigoted.

As it would be to throw all Pro-Lifers into one group based on the actions of others.

None of which actually addresses my point.


Oh sure, because 'terrorism' and 'religion' certainly don't go hand in hand.
Never said that.

hich is why when folks are promised a place in the 'Afterlife' for their actions here it certainly doesn't have anything to do with faith, religion, etc.



No, just kidding of course. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together would see that, yep, the 9-11 attacks had everything to do with religion.
Osama bin Laden certainly doesn't think so, since he spelled out al Qaeda's reasoning behind declaring war on America and it had nothing to do with "We're fundamentalist Muslims and that means...uh, we commit terrorist acts. Yeah, that totally makes sense."

Also, word to the wise: anyone that uses the word "fundamentalist" to describe a sect of Muslims (or Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, pagans, pretty much anybody outside of fundamentalist Christians) is using it as a placeholder word for "evil" or "extremist" and doesn't know what the word actually means. There are no fundamentalist Muslims. Islam doesn't work that way.

They got it wrong. That's why we consider them to be a part of the 'fringe' and that's why we know that their views don't reflect the views of the rest of Muslims world wide, peaceful, law abiding citizens.
Preposterous. Instead of to Muslims and 9-11, you might as reasonably make the comparison to white people and Oklahoma City.

But you won't.

Again, to anyone not a troll, a dupe, or mentally ill, that no one else in this discussion except you thinks that the analogy works should be a massive red flag.

So, which is it?

[Paul McEnery]

Anyone with two brain cells to rub together would see that, yep, the 9-11 attacks had everything to do with religion.

Fortunately, most of us have rather more than that.

[Tages]

Fortunately, most of us have rather more than that.

I detect residual resentment that Muslims aren't discriminated against more, since he's so insistent on continuing this absurd line of thinking.

[Rev. Calibos]

None of which actually addresses my point.



You don't have a point. This is what you wrote:


The pro-life movement exists to oppose abortion. This opposition includes violent and non-violent methods.

The Islamic religion does not exist one way or the other in regards to terrorism.


Ah, so OBL doesn't think that it's every Muslim's duty to engage in Jihad and wipe out infidels?





Osama bin Laden certainly doesn't think so, since he spelled out al Qaeda's reasoning behind declaring war on America and it had nothing to do with "We're fundamentalist Muslims and that means...uh, we commit terrorist acts. Yeah, that totally makes sense."

Really?

OBL has written a number of things, this is taken from his 1998 fatwa:


First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.

If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.

Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.

So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors. Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.

All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al-Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said: "As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed . Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life." On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty [B]for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God."
This is in addition to the words of Almighty God: "And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? -- women and children, whose cry is: 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!'"

We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson.



Kind of helps if you familiarize yourself with a number of things he's written before you run your mouth off.



Also, word to the wise: anyone that uses the word "fundamentalist" to describe a sect of Muslims (or Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, pagans, pretty much anybody outside of fundamentalist Christians) is using it as a placeholder word for "evil" or "extremist" and doesn't know what the word actually means. There are no fundamentalist Muslims. Islam doesn't work that way.


Really? Actual Muslims disagree with you.

Let's see....Tages, actual Muslims, Tages, actual Muslims...

Yep, actual Muslims trump you every time I'm afraid.




Preposterous. Instead of to Muslims and 9-11, you might as reasonably make the comparison to white people and Oklahoma City.

But you won't.
Again, to anyone not a troll, a dupe, or mentally ill, that no one else in this discussion except you thinks that the analogy works should be a massive red flag.

So, which is it?

C) You're out of your depth and are just grasping at straws at this point.

Look, I'm sure you have very strong convictions (well, you do online. If you happen to hear someone let loose with slur at a store or just out and about in public that's when you may clam up or some such, but if you happen to suspect it while you're online, watch out! That's when you're on, you know? Not so much in real life though.) but if your 'point' is that the 9-11 attacks had nothing to do with their deep seated religious beliefs I don't know what to tell you.

I'd advise getting up, wiping off the cobwebs and getting some mileage out there by actually heading out into the real world for once and try to pick up whatever it is that you're missing that would cause you to make that disconnect.



I detect residual resentment that Muslims aren't discriminated against more, since he's so insistent on continuing this absurd line of thinking.

Really? I think your 'detector' is off. It could be the reason why you missed out on certain writings by OBL.

[Paul McEnery]

I detect residual resentment that Muslims aren't discriminated against more, since he's so insistent on continuing this absurd line of thinking.

You think? It would be awfully unusual for an anti-abortion campaigner to also promote bigotry.

[Rev. Calibos]

You think? It would be awfully unusual for an anti-abortion campaigner to also promote bigotry.

Huh. Yet bigoted notions about pro-lifers is ok.....somehow......:rolleyes:


I'm detecting that some bigotry is sort of hit or miss here. Certain folks love to call other posters bigots yet it turns out that they're bigots themselves through and through.

Weird.

[Slam_Bradley]

Huh. Yet bigoted notions about pro-lifers is ok.....somehow......:rolleyes:


I'm detecting that some bigotry is sort of hit or miss here. Certain folks love to call other posters bigots yet it turns out that they're bigots themselves through and through.

Weird.


I'm bigoted against people who stand around holding signs for no reason whatsoever because they apparently have nothing else to do with their time.

[Rev. Calibos]

I'm bigoted against people who stand around holding signs for no reason whatsoever because they apparently have nothing else to do with their time.

I know.

Anyway....

Some folks here frown upon bigotry......well, unless it's bigotry against a group that they don't like that is.

Then it's perfectly normal and justifiable.....somehow.....

[Asmith]

You don't have a point. This is what you wrote:




Ah, so OBL doesn't think that it's every Muslim's duty to engage in Jihad and wipe out infidels?





Really?

OBL has written a number of things, this is taken from his 1998 fatwa:




Kind of helps if you familiarize yourself with a number of things he's written before you run your mouth off.




Really? Actual Muslims disagree with you.

Let's see....Tages, actual Muslims, Tages, actual Muslims...

Yep, actual Muslims trump you every time I'm afraid.




C) You're out of your depth and are just grasping at straws at this point.

Look, I'm sure you have very strong convictions (well, you do online. If you happen to hear someone let loose with slur at a store or just out and about in public that's when you may clam up or some such, but if you happen to suspect it while you're online, watch out! That's when you're on, you know? Not so much in real life though.) but if your 'point' is that the 9-11 attacks had nothing to do with their deep seated religious beliefs I don't know what to tell you.

I'd advise getting up, wiping off the cobwebs and getting some mileage out there by actually heading out into the real world for once and try to pick up whatever it is that you're missing that would cause you to make that disconnect.




Really? I think your 'detector' is off. It could be the reason why you missed out on certain writings by OBL.


You've gotta stop thinking that Osama Bin Laden speaks for all the Muslims of the world. Of course he doesn't and to imply otherwise is making you look like a backwards hick that was raised in a barrel.

Go meet some actual Muslims. The ones that actually follow their teachings. You'll find a tremendous amount in common and the differences just may enrich your own faith. Give it a go, don't preach and sermonise, and keep an open mind...

[Rev. Calibos]

You've gotta stop thinking that Osama Bin Laden speaks for all the Muslims of the world. Of course he doesn't and to imply otherwise is making you look like a backwards hick that was raised in a barrel.


Never said that he did.

What I was doing was correcting Tages who seems to think that religion had nothing to do with 9-11.

So, again, where did I ever say that OBL speaks for all Muslims of the world?




Go meet some actual Muslims. The ones that actually follow their teachings. You'll find a tremendous amount in common and the differences just may enrich your own faith. Give it a go, don't preach and sermonise, and keep an open mind...

1) I don't preach, I'm agnostic

2) I spent a year in Afg. and two years in Iraq.

3) I've spent two semesters studying Arabic I and II and have taken two courses studying Middle Eastern Culture.
I figured I spent a chunk of my live over there I might as well soak up the culture/language/etc.

4) I've met many, many Muslims who have taught me a great deal about Islam.

I've nothing but respect for Muslims, that's why I'm working so hard to better understand their culture.

And, again, despite what some would say Islam does indeed have a fringe element.

I know this because this is what actual Muslims have told me.

Their opinions/viewpoints trump those of folks who would claim otherwise.

[Paul McEnery]

I know.

Anyway....

Some folks here frown upon bigotry......well, unless it's bigotry against a group that they don't like that is.

Then it's perfectly normal and justifiable.....somehow.....

Ah, I recognize this whine from the bad old days.

"Call me a bigot? You're bigoted against me!"

No, we're holding you accountable for your actions, pure and simple.

[Dreadstar]

Some folks here frown upon bigotry......well, unless it's bigotry against a group that they don't like that is.

Then it's perfectly normal and justifiable.....somehow.....

While I certainly have had occasion to see that in action around here (fairly often), the defense you're proffering here amounts to: "If I am, then so are you." And it's not exactly the first time it's been put forth in this thread. Even if, say, Tages (roll with it, Tages) can be considered a bigot for disliking a pro-life protesters (debatable) , it makes you no less a bigot for your Muslim prejudice.

Besides, Pee-Wee Herman did it much better with "I know you are, but what am I?"

[Paul McEnery]

Never said that he did.

What I was doing was correcting Tages who seems to think that religion had nothing to do with 9-11.

No he doesn't. That's all you and your dichotomous thinking.

Either religion is everything to do with something, or nothing to do with something. That's you. That's you on every issue in the world.

It's a sign that you've got a serious cognitive problem that you need to address with proper counseling. I'd recommend a neuro-linguistic programming counselor if you can find one.



Again, despite what some would say Islam does indeed have a fringe element.

Too bad you didn't learn to frame your thinking better. Correct is:

Humanity has fringe elements that appear in any and every culture.

And you're a prime example.

Instead of working to fix something you perceive as a social problem through harassment, you would be better served fixing the damage that's been done to yourself.

[Merey]

I'm bigoted against people who stand around holding signs for no reason whatsoever because they apparently have nothing else to do with their time.

Yes, why waste the time with something that they do not and should never have control over, and instead re-focus that time to helping those people are born into unfortunate circumstances. Just imagine how many more lives that could be enriched if all of those abortion clinic protesters worked towards making some tangible positive change in the world. But then again, selfless aid to others in dire circumstances doesn't quite fuel the flames of righteousness quite as well as harassment.

Oh, and because I will enviably get the "but I do charity work already," retort. I will simply reply with: "You can always do more, because you obviously have the time."

[Dreadstar]

Too bad you didn't learn to frame your thinking better. Correct is:

Humanity has fringe elements that appear in any and every culture.

And you're a prime example.

Instead of working to fix something you perceive as a social problem through harassment, you would be better served fixing the damage that's been done to yourself.

Heh. We're all some sort of fringe in some way.

Me? I'm more of a bearded tassle.

[Rev. Calibos]

Ah, I recognize this whine from the bad old days.

"Call me a bigot? You're bigoted against me!"

No, we're holding you accountable for your actions, pure and simple.


Nope. You've made all sorts of comments about pro-lifers, who they are, what they're about, and by doing so you've shown us that while you abhor bigotry there are some forms of it that,well, aren't ALL bad.

It just depends on who you're a fan of at the moment.




While I certainly have had occasion to see that in action around here (fairly often), the defense you're proffering here amounts to: "If I am, then so are you." And it's not exactly the first time it's been put forth in this thread.

Calling someone a 'bigot' is a pretty big deal. Know why that is? Because a bigot exhibits a special kind of ignorance that is detestable and no one likes to think that they're capable of it.


That being said, when the very same people who toss around the word 'bigot' so casually are also engaging in bigotry, calling them out on it isn't 'If I am so are you'.

They themselves are guilty of bigotry. It's plainly evident in the tone and the language offered in regards to pro-lifers, whether they're protesters or not.

They have a bone to pick with pro-lifers and they have this pre-conceived notion about them. They're quite content to lump them alllll in together into one group.

'Well, if I saw a pro-lifer come at me I'd mace them. Who knows WHAT they are capable of? My life could be in danger!'

Comparing that bigotry with 'Well, if I saw a Muslim get on a plane with me I'd leave immediately. Who knows WHAT they're capable of? My life could be in danger!' is an attempt to show that, yes, in a different situation such a thought would be considered bigotry.

But, somehow, when it's a group that no one likes....it's ok.

I guess.





Even if, say, Tages (roll with it, Tages) can be considered a bigot for disliking a pro-life protesters (debatable) , it makes you no less a bigot for your Muslim prejudice.

And here's another disconnect.

By showing an example of how the behavior is wrong by switching 'pro-lifer' with 'muslim' somehow that's some indicator that I'm prejudiced against Muslims?

You're really, really reaching at this point I'm afraid.




Besides, Pee-Wee Herman did it much better with "I know you are, but what am I?"

Except, in this case, they are showing their bigotry against pro-lifers.

So it's not really 'bigotry' that bugs them (since it's ok in some instances) it's just whether or not they support the group.

[carabas]

Never said that he did.Yes you did. When you equated Bin Laden saying that it is every Muslim's duty to go out violently jihading with this actually being every Mulsim's duty.

[Rev. Calibos]

Yes you did. When you equated Bin Laden saying that it is every Muslim's duty to go out violently jihading with this actually being every Mulsim's duty.

I did?

Oh wait, no I didn't.

What I was doing was responding to this:


Osama bin Laden certainly doesn't think so, since he spelled out al Qaeda's reasoning behind declaring war on America and it had nothing to do with "We're fundamentalist Muslims and that means...uh, we commit terrorist acts. Yeah, that totally makes sense."

by posting another statement written by OBL.

So I didn't equate anything.

Sort of helps if you read the posts beforehand before swooping in with commentary, you know?

[Dreadstar]

That being said, when the very same people who toss around the word 'bigot' so casually are also engaging in bigotry, calling them out on it isn't 'If I am so are you'.

It is, noentheless, what you did.




By showing an example of how the behavior is wrong by switching 'pro-lifer' with 'muslim' somehow that's some indicator that I'm prejudiced against Muslims?.
Nope. That's not the indicator, I'm afraid. Nice deflection, but try again.

[Paul McEnery]

Nope. You've made all sorts of comments about pro-lifers, who they are, what they're about, and by doing so you've shown us that while you abhor bigotry there are some forms of it that,well, aren't ALL bad.


Not really getting the hang of this idea, bigotry, are you.

See, a bigot hates people for who they are.

I hate what the anti-abortion movement DOES. Because what it does is harass women and healthcare providers, and seek to take away reproductive rights.

See how that's different?


I

Calling someone a 'bigot' is a pretty big deal. Know why that is? Because a bigot exhibits a special kind of ignorance that is detestable

Now you're getting it.

I

They have a bone to pick with pro-lifers and they have this pre-conceived notion about them. They're quite content to lump them alllll in together into one group.

So?

Anti-abortion is a well-organized ideology and it seeks to take away rights.

You know who else we've got a bone to pick with? Homophobes and bigots. For the same reason.

As long as you call yourself "pro-life" -- which you're not -- you're allying yourself with a bunch of authoritarian goons.

And the actions you take are exactly the bloody same as all the rest, and the words you use are exactly the bloody same as all the rest, and they're both shitty.

Change your ways.

[Rev. Calibos]

It is, noentheless, what you did.

Revealed the hypocricy of others by pointing out their own bigotry?

Darn skippy I did.




Nope. That's not the indicator, I'm afraid. Nice deflection, but try again.

Really? What is it then, since you know?

[Asmith]

1) I don't preach, I'm agnostic

2) I spent a year in Afg. and two years in Iraq.

3) I've spent two semesters studying Arabic I and II and have taken two courses studying Middle Eastern Culture.
I figured I spent a chunk of my live over there I might as well soak up the culture/language/etc.

4) I've met many, many Muslims who have taught me a great deal about Islam.

I've nothing but respect for Muslims, that's why I'm working so hard to better understand their culture.

And, again, despite what some would say Islam does indeed have a fringe element.

I know this because this is what actual Muslims have told me.

Their opinions/viewpoints trump those of folks who would claim otherwise.

In all seriousness I think that's very cool, and really fantastic. More people should have the interest you've displayed. But from your posts I'm left to wonder what you're taking away from all that... as it seems rather askew.

[Rev. Calibos]

Not really getting the hang of this idea, bigotry, are you.

See, a bigot hates people for who they are.

I hate what the anti-abortion movement DOES. Because what it does is harass women and healthcare providers, and seek to take away reproductive rights.

See how that's different?

Not all pro-lifers DO the same thing Paul.

You're making assumptions and lumping them all in the same group.




So?

Anti-abortion is a well-organized ideology and it seeks to take away rights.


Again. Pro-Life isn't a group Paul.

I asked you for your sources, I asked you for an address, a website, for names, etc.

Who leads Pro-life? Who's to blame for Dr. Tiller's death? Who's to blame for that man bringing a shotgun to the rally?

All I get?

'Umm....the Far Right? I guess?'

Specifics Paul, specifics.



You know who else we've got a bone to pick with? Homophobes and bigots. For the same reason.

As long as you call yourself "pro-life" -- which you're not -- you're allying yourself with a bunch of authoritarian goons.

I'm also 'Irish' and I ally myself with a bunch of hard drinkers.

That must mean I'm an alcoholic since so many Irish people drink, right?




And the actions you take are exactly the bloody same as all the rest, and the words you use are exactly the bloody same as all the rest, and they're both shitty.

More lies.




Change your ways.

Stop lying and that will sound a bit less ridiculous.

[Dreadstar]

Revealed the hypocricy of others by pointing out their own bigotry?

Darn skippy I did.
Yep. "If I am, then so are you"

Thanks for owning up to it.


Really? What is it then, since you know?

I thought the indicator would have been pretty obvious. Well, to the rest of us, anyway.

It's the whole "broad brush" approach. It shows that you've already made up your mind in black and white and the grey areas are invisible.

[Rev. Calibos]

In all seriousness I think that's very cool, and really fantastic. More people should have the interest you've displayed. But from your posts I'm left to wonder what you're taking away from all that... as it seems rather askew.

Well, to clear it up:

Tages mentioned this:


Osama bin Laden certainly doesn't think so, since he spelled out al Qaeda's reasoning behind declaring war on America and it had nothing to do with "We're fundamentalist Muslims and that means...uh, we commit terrorist acts. Yeah, that totally makes sense."

And then this:


Also, word to the wise: anyone that uses the word "fundamentalist" to describe a sect of Muslims (or Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, pagans, pretty much anybody outside of fundamentalist Christians) is using it as a placeholder word for "evil" or "extremist" and doesn't know what the word actually means. There are no fundamentalist Muslims. Islam doesn't work that way.


and I corrected him.

There are indeed fundamentalist Muslims out there I'm afraid.

I was pointing that out, never once did I ever say (nor do I believe) that all Muslims are the same.

Compare that to Paul who seems to think that all Pro-lifers are all the same.

Again, some bigotry is ok to some people I guess, as long as it's against a group they don't like.



Anyway....

On a much lighter note...

I'm getting married next year and as a surprise I'm planning our honeymoon in Egypt.

By that time I should be fully fluent in Arabic and will really have the chance to take her and explore the richness of that area fully (without a rifle and a ruck sack this time, all toursit-y and shit, lol.)

I can't wait for it and it's something that she's wanted to do her whole life, it's going to be nice to really be able to make the most of it.

[Tages]

Not responding to the overarching issue at the moment, since I'm not in the frame of mind. I just want to point out how funny it is that someone would try and pull the "So I'm Irish, I guess that means I'm a drunk HUH" card against someone with the surname McEnery.

[Chris N]

To be fair, McEnery probably is drunk.

And I'm looking hard at my whisky.

[Rev. Calibos]

Yep. "If I am, then so are you"

Thanks for owning up to it.

And thanks for owning up to and admitting that 'they are too.'





I thought the indicator would have been pretty obvious. Well, to the rest of us, anyway.

It's the whole "broad brush" approach. It shows that you've already made up your mind in black and white and the grey areas are invisible.

What, regarding the whole 'I hate muslims' theme that's popped up?

But I'm not. I 'hate' them so much that I'm taking Arabic III next semester and am inviting my instructor and his family to our wedding?


How does that work?

I made an example by replacing 'Pro-Life' with 'Muslim' to show that the same behavior, directed at another group would be considered bigotry.

Yet for some folks here some bigotry is a-ok. So it's not bigotry that they hate at all really.

[Rev. Calibos]

Not responding to the overarching issue at the moment, since I'm not in the frame of mind. I just want to point out how funny it is that someone would try and pull the "So I'm Irish, I guess that means I'm a drunk HUH" card against someone with the surname McEnery.

Ooh, hopefully you're in the 'doing some research' frame of mind as you should probably take a look at some of OBL's other writings.

Just a thought.

[Asmith]

Well, to clear it up:

Tages mentioned this:



And then this:




and I corrected him.

There are indeed fundamentalist Muslims out there I'm afraid.

I was pointing that out, never once did I ever say (nor do I believe) that all Muslims are the same.

Compare that to Paul who seems to think that all Pro-lifers are all the same.

Again, some bigotry is ok to some people I guess, as long as it's against a group they don't like.



Anyway....

On a much lighter note...

I'm getting married next year and as a surprise I'm planning our honeymoon in Egypt.

By that time I should be fully fluent in Arabic and will really have the chance to take her and explore the richness of that area fully (without a rifle and a ruck sack this time, all toursit-y and shit, lol.)

I can't wait for it and it's something that she's wanted to do her whole life, it's going to be nice to really be able to make the most of it.

Well maybe some actual points have been missed and have done a detour to the land of symantics...

Anyway, congrats on the impending nuptials and best wishes for a great honeymoon.

[Slam_Bradley]

Heh. We're all some sort of fringe in some way.

Me? I'm more of a bearded tassle.


I made my fringe from all the critters that I've killed.

I'm fringe that way.

[Rev. Calibos]

Well maybe some actual points have been missed and have done a detour to the land of symantics..
Anyway, congrats on the impending nuptials and best wishes for a great honeymoon.

Thanks, it's going to be awesome. I'll put up some pictures when we get back.

[Asmith]

To be fair, McEnery probably is drunk.

And I'm looking hard at my whisky.

Hell, I've drunk half a litre of the damn stuff tonight... is Smith an Irish name? I can never remember...

[Chris N]

Hell, I've drunk half a litre of the damn stuff tonight... is Smith an Irish name? I can never remember...

It's 9am here.

So I'm just having a sip to get me ready to teach.

[Dreadstar]

And thanks for owning up to and admitting that 'they are too.'

I'm doing no such thing. I'm pointing out the method, not the result. Sorry.





What, regarding the whole 'I hate muslims' theme that's popped up?

But I'm not. I 'hate' them so much that I'm taking Arabic III next semester and am inviting my instructor and his family to our wedding?

I'll tell you what: I'll withdraw the entire line in my previous post starting with "I thought" and ending with "invisible." It's unnecessary to the point I was making.

That point being, you can't deflect a charge of bigotry with "So are you."

[Tages]

Ooh, hopefully you're in the 'doing some research' frame of mind as you should probably take a look at some of OBL's other writings.

Just a thought.

OBL specifically listed three items as his reasons for AQ's declaring war on the U.S.:

1. Troops stationed in Saudi Arabia.
2. The sanctions against Iraq.
3. Support for the state of Israel.

None of which, you will note, includes "Fundamentalist Muslims have a duty to commit terrorist acts."

The idea that religion alone was responsible for 9-11 is absurd. You will notice that the 9-11 Commission itself did not reach such a conclusion. The attacks included religion as a factor, secondary to geopolitical motivators.

This is what we call "nuance." People such as yourself who can only perceive absolutes tend to not be able to appreciate it. I pray that one day you will gain this ability.

Oh, and there are still no fundamentalist Muslims. The word "fundamentalist" alludes to the early 20th Century movement that took its name from a series of pamphlets called The Fundamentals, which advocated, primarily, a return to a strict literalist interpretation of Scripture.

The last literalist school of Koranic exegesis died out a millenium ago. No modern Muslim leader, OBL included, advocates such an approach. Hence, there are no fundamentalist Muslims, and using the term as such outs yourself as someone who has only the most superficial knowledge of the topics involved.

[Slam_Bradley]

I'm more than willing to own up to the fact that I dislike people who use their extensive free time to harass, harangue and make life miserable for people who are going about their lawful pursuits when it is none of their fucking business.

The difference is that I dislike them for their actions, not for who a quirk of genetics or culture made them.

[Rev. Calibos]

I'm doing no such thing. I'm pointing out the method, not the result. Sorry.
I'll tell you what: I'll withdraw the entire line in my previous post starting with "I thought" and ending with "invisible." It's unnecessary to the point I was making.

That point being, you can't deflect a charge of bigotry with "So are you."

I haven't exhibited any bigoted behavior.

What have I been saying this entire time? Not every pro-lifer is the same. Not every pro-lifer is a 'dangerous thug'. Not every pro-lifer is a bible thumping, blood tossing dick.


What have I been told in return? 'Yes they are. Yes they are. Yes they are.'

So that sort of mindset, that sort of broad brush mentality, do you consider that bigotry?

Never mind the group or how you feel about them, is it bigotry?

[Tom]

Oh good. That whole "let's define harassment" topic went so well that this new attempt to define bigotry should be equally as productive. After that. let's all debate whether up is really up.

[Tages]

I'm more than willing to own up to the fact that I dislike people who use their extensive free time to harass, harangue and make life miserable for people who are going about their lawful pursuits when it is none of their fucking business.

The difference is that I dislike them for their actions, not for who a quirk of genetics or culture made them.

You mean to say that being a Christian, Jew or Muslim includes an entire culture and, in certain sociopolitical schools (God I wish Moebius or Iangould were here) an ethnicity whereas pro-lifers are a determined political movement with a specific mindset that requires willful commitment?

Do you also mean to suggest that abortion clinic protesters aren't actually preventing any abortions, they're just making what is already an incredibly traumatic experience just a little bit more difficult? That they're causing actual emotional harm to vulnerable people for no other reason than it makes them feel big?

Color me shocked.

[Dreadstar]

I'm going to snip all the stuff that pertained to my point and reply to the rest:


...snip...

Um... OK.

It wasn't a point worth dragging out anyway. I'm certain that I made it if only to a portion of the reading thread. And since it was at best a niggling sort of point, I'll abandon the whole back-and-forth involved with it.

Continue.

[Rev. Calibos]

OBL specifically listed three items as his reasons for AQ's declaring war on the U.S.:

1. Troops stationed in Saudi Arabia.
2. The sanctions against Iraq.
3. Support for the state of Israel.

None of which, you will note, includes "Fundamentalist Muslims have a duty to commit terrorist acts."

The idea that religion alone was responsible for 9-11 is absurd. You will notice that the 9-11 Commission itself did not reach such a conclusion. The attacks included religion as a factor, secondary to geopolitical motivators.

Awesome. When did I say that it was religion alone?

Quote please?


Because that's not what I said at all really.

Religion played a significant role in it though, Jihads are like that.

To suggest otherwise is lunacy.




This is what we call "nuance." People such as yourself who can only perceive absolutes tend to not be able to appreciate it. I pray that one day you will gain this ability.

I pray that you will one day be able to do some 'research'.

I would also pray that you would do your grandpa proud and 'stand up for what you belive in in the real world' the next time you hear a slur somewhere out and about.

Just pretend you have a keyboard in front of you and you should be fine.



Oh, and there are still no fundamentalist Muslims. The word "fundamentalist" alludes to the early 20th Century movement that took......

Oops! Let me stop you before you make yourself look silly again.

Sorry, actual Muslims disagree with you.

Let's see....Tages or actual Muslims....Tages or actual Muslims.....

Nope, you're trumped again I'm afraid.

There are decidely fringe, fundamentalist Muslims out there. That distinction has been made by, you guessed it, actual Muslims.


Go, shake off those cobwebs, meet some 'actual Muslims'. They'll be able to teach you a lot.

[Paul McEnery]

and I corrected him.

Nope, you further displayed your ignorance.

Fundamentalism is a term that applies only to Christianity. All attempts at cultural transference fail, because no other culture operates around doctrinal certainty.

Too bad your classes in arab culture didn't teach you that.



There are indeed fundamentalist Muslims out there I'm afraid.

You are afraid. But no, there aren't. Christianity is Orthodox; Islam is Orthoprax.

If you were less ignorant, you'd understand that the fanatics using Islam as a front are the exact opposite of back-to-basics Islam. A genuine koran-believing muslim (which is the wrong way of thinking, but whatever) wouldn't be a Wahabist, or a suicide bomber, or any of the other things that get thrown at Islam. It is the MODERNISERS who are generating fanatical praxis.

What you mean is "fanatic" or "extremist"; "fundamentalist" is incorrect usage.

And it matters that it's incorrect usage.



Compare that to Paul who seems to think that all Pro-lifers are all the same.

Stop lying.

The anti-abortion movement does share goals, ideology and praxis. You yourself are in fact typical of those goals, that ideology and praxis. And those goals, that ideology and praxis, are objectionable.

You are not a special unique snowflake. You're exactly the bloody same as all the rest of those sign-wielding lunatics who don't understand the first thing about the issue at hand, how they've been played by the leaders of the movement, by corrupt preachers, and by the Republican Party, and how their behaviour does harm to others.


Again, some bigotry is ok to some people I guess, as long as it's against a group they don't like.

"Bigotry" has a meaning. That meaning does not suit your purposes.

[Tom]

I'm going to snip all the stuff that pertained to my point and reply to the rest:



Um... OK.

It wasn't a point worth dragging out anyway. I'm certain that I made it if only to a portion of the reading thread. And since it was at best a niggling sort of point, I'll abandon the whole back-and-forth involved with it.

Continue.

I hope you don't think I was ragging on you with that smartass post of mine. It's just that it's been relentlessly proven that this kind of discussion is going to lead precisely nowhere with this person.

[Slam_Bradley]

You mean to say that being a Christian, Jew or Muslim includes an entire culture and, in certain sociopolitical schools (God I wish Moebius or Iangould were here) an ethnicity whereas pro-lifers are a determined political movement with a specific mindset that requires willful commitment?

Do you also mean to suggest that abortion clinic protesters aren't actually preventing any abortions, they're just making what is already an incredibly traumatic experience just a little bit more difficult? That they're causing actual emotional harm to vulnerable people for no other reason than it makes them feel big?

Color me shocked.


Hell I don't even mind if you're anti-abortion. Guapo is. And I think Winslow is as well. And they're both stand-up guys.

But they aren't dicks about it. And they aren't out harassing people.

[Rev. Calibos]

I'm going to snip all the stuff that pertained to my point and reply to the rest:



Um... OK.

It wasn't a point worth dragging out anyway. I'm certain that I made it if only to a portion of the reading thread. And since it was at best a niggling sort of point, I'll abandon the whole back-and-forth involved with it.

Continue.

Yes or no, that's all.


I haven't exhibited any bigoted behavior.

What have I been saying this entire time? Not every pro-lifer is the same. Not every pro-lifer is a 'dangerous thug'. Not every pro-lifer is a bible thumping, blood tossing dick.


What have I been told in return? 'Yes they are. Yes they are. Yes they are.'

So that sort of mindset, that sort of broad brush mentality, do you consider that bigotry?

Never mind the group or how you feel about them, is it bigotry?

Just type 'yes' for 'yes' or 'no' for 'no'.

[Tages]

I would also pray that you would do your grandpa proud and 'stand up for what you belive in in the real world' the next time you hear a slur somewhere out and about.

Just pretend you have a keyboard in front of you and you should be fine.

Quoted for posterity.

You just tried to use a very fucking painful thing that happened to me very recently against me in a debate. Which means any lingering doubt that you're a trolling ban-baiter is gone.

[Dreadstar]

I hope you don't think I was ragging on you with that smartass post of mine. It's just that it's been relentlessly proven that this kind of discussion is going to lead precisely nowhere with this person.

Oh, no, no. I just came to the same conclusion. Well, not "just", but you know what I mean. I'm pretty sure what I was thinking came across as complete and stand-alone and it was, at best, a minor observation to begin with. So it deserves to be dropped.

[Paul McEnery]

Not all pro-lifers DO the same thing Paul.

You're making assumptions and lumping them all in the same group.

Calling yourself pro-life is an insult to the rest of the world. Just from that moment, everything you say is tarred by that brush.

But since you yourself do harass clinics, you haven't got a leg to stand on.

[Rev. Calibos]

Quoted for posterity.

You just tried to use a very fucking painful thing that happened to me very recently against me in a debate. Which means any lingering doubt that you're a trolling ban-baiter is gone.

You yourself mentioned that you wished you had of said something. I just expanded upon that.

As far 'trolling' you're real quick with personal attacks and insults but the second someone grows sick of it and does the same to you?

You call the waaaah-mbulance.

Typical.

If you don't enjoy being on the receiving end don't post in a similar fashion.

[Rev. Calibos]

Calling yourself pro-life is an insult to the rest of the world. Just from that moment, everything you say is tarred by that brush.

But since you yourself do harass clinics, you haven't got a leg to stand on.

Great Paul, again, some bigotry is ok as long as you dislike the group in question.

[Paul McEnery]

Hell I don't even mind if you're pro-life. Guapo is. And I think Winslow is as well. And they're both stand-up guys.

But they aren't dicks about it. And they aren't out harassing people.

I believe Guapo used the term anti-abortion, actually.

[Dreadstar]

Sorry folks, I guess I lied. This time for sure.


Yes or no, that's all.
Can you deflect a charge of bigotry with "So are you." ?

Just type 'yes' for 'yes' or 'no' for 'no'.

[Paul McEnery]

Great Paul, again, some bigotry is ok as long as you dislike the group in question.

Perhaps you'll be telling us next that disliking the KKK is bigotry.

Again, the word does not mean what you think it means.

In any case, once again, you're lying.

I have no problem with Guapo, Winslow, MacQuarrie, or anyone else who is personally anti-abortion.

What I have a problem with is the anti-abortion movement, which is fascistic in intent and methods.

And before you have a fit about that word, go read a book and find out what it means.

[Slam_Bradley]

Great Paul, again, some bigotry is ok as long as you dislike the group in question.

Ahhhh yes. The "your a bigot because you don't like our actions" defense.

[Rev. Calibos]

Nope, you further displayed your ignorance.

Fundamentalism is a term that applies only to Christianity. All attempts at cultural transference fail, because no other culture operates around doctrinal certainty.

Too bad your classes in arab culture didn't teach you that.


You are afraid. But no, there aren't. Christianity is Orthodox; Islam is Orthoprax.

If you were less ignorant, you'd understand that the fanatics using Islam as a front are the exact opposite of back-to-basics Islam. A genuine koran-believing muslim (which is the wrong way of thinking, but whatever) wouldn't be a Wahabist, or a suicide bomber, or any of the other things that get thrown at Islam. It is the MODERNISERS who are generating fanatical praxis

What you mean is "fanatic" or "extremist"; "fundamentalist" is incorrect usage.

And it matters that it's incorrect usage.


Stop lying.

Let's see....Paul, actual Muslims....Paul, actual Muslims.

Yep, your opinion is trumped too.


It's cute thought but yeah, try talking to some actual Muslims.

Do you a world of good.





The anti-abortion movement does share goals, ideology and praxis. You yourself are in fact typical of those goals, that ideology and praxis. And those goals, that ideology and praxis, are objectionable.

You are not a special unique snowflake. You're exactly the bloody same as all the rest of those sign-wielding lunatics who don't understand the first thing about the issue at hand, how they've been played by the leaders of the movement, by corrupt preachers, and by the Republican Party, and how their behaviour does harm to others.


Ooh, more bigotry!

(grabs some popcorn)

Go on?



"Bigotry" has a meaning. That meaning does not suit your purposes.

You lump allllll pro-lifers into one group.

The meaning suits my purposes nicely when I call that bigoted behavior.

[Slam_Bradley]

I believe Guapo used the term anti-abortion, actually.


Upon further review, I believe you're correct.

I'll take that 5 yard penalty and loss of down.


I'm chagrined.

[Rev. Calibos]

Yes,yes it is.

Fixed. I mean, that's the impression that I got seeing as you you're unable to admit it and all.

[Tages]

You yourself mentioned that you wished you had of said something. I just expanded upon that.

As far 'trolling' you're real quick with personal attacks and insults but the second someone grows sick of it and does the same to you?

You call the waaaah-mbulance.

Typical.

If you don't enjoy being on the receiving end don't post in a similar fashion.

A man I loved very much died recently.

I don't appreciate you using the name of an honorable man who did everything he could to be a community leader, to help out everyone who needed help and who never refused a cry for assistance, who did everything in his power to help the weak and who had nothing but contempt for bullies and people who took advantage of the vulnerable, against me.

Big tough guy, insulting grieving relatives and intimidating women who've just made the most difficult fucking decision they'll ever make.

You're a credit to your movement.

[Rev. Calibos]

Ahhhh yes. The "your a bigot because you don't like our actions" defense.

No, lumping all prolifers into one group, calling them 'thugs' or something equally silly is bigotry.

It's judging someone based on the actions of others.

[Asmith]

Oh good. That whole "let's define harassment" topic went so well that this new attempt to define bigotry should be equally as productive. After that. let's all debate whether up is really up.
Well you can't have an Up without a Down, so it follows that Down is an intrinsic part of Up and the two can not be seperated. And then when you acknowledge the exsitence of Sideways and the other 359 degrees... well how certain of Up can anyone be...? I think the best we can hope for is a consensus on what is Up-Like...

[Paul McEnery]

No, lumping all prolifers into one group, calling them 'thugs' or something equally silly is bigotry.

It's judging someone based on the actions of others.

Except you're being judged on your own actions, aren't you.

[Paul McEnery]

Well you can't have an Up without a Down, so it follows that Down is an intrinsic part of Up and the two can not be seperated. And then when you acknowledge the exsitence of Sideways and the other 359 degrees... well how certain of Up can anyone be...? I think the best we can hope for is a consesus on what is Up-Like...

Bloody upside down people.

[Slam_Bradley]

Except you're being judged on your own actions, aren't you.


Except he apparently can't even admit to himself what his actions are or why he conducts them.

Sad really.

[Paul McEnery]

Upon further review, I believe you're correct.

I'll take that 5 yard penalty and loss of down.


I'm chagrined.

One likes to draw the line between decent conservative liberals and nazi scum.

Ah, I miss the 70s.

[Dreadstar]

Fixed. I mean, that's the impression that I got seeing as you you're unable to admit it and all.

Please, is that the best you can do?

I've seen better baiting from my kid when he was in grade school. :rolleyes:

[Paul McEnery]

Except he apparently can't even admit to himself what his actions are or why he conducts them.

Sad really.

Conducts is good.

It's like he's a conduit for actions that he never integrates.

[Rev. Calibos]

Except you're being judged on your own actions, aren't you.

The action of standing there?

Yes, yes I am.

I'm standing there with a sign.

What in the world does that have to do with the fringe that engage in acts of violence in front of clinics?

[Rev. Calibos]

Please, is that the best you can do?

I've seen better baiting from my kid when he was in grade school. :rolleyes:

You're not answering the question, a simple one at that.

What do you care? You are unable/unwilling to answer it so there you go.

[Slam_Bradley]

The action of standing there?

Yes, yes I am.

I'm standing there with a sign.

What in the world does that have to do with the fringe that engage in acts of violence in front of clinics?


Well you're all harassing people rather than doing something constructive. So there's that.

[Dreadstar]

I try my best to look for the silver lining in every flame-like thread. I think I found it. As long as Rev. is posting here, he can't be on a sidewalk intimidating and confronting women attending the local clinic.

[Paul McEnery]

The action of standing there?

Yes, yes I am.

I'm standing there with a sign.

What in the world does that have to do with the fringe that engage in acts of violence in front of clinics?

One wishes to remind you that the act of standing there has been stipulated to be an act of harassment.

Though perhaps you'd prefer "intimidation".

It IS an act of violence. And anti-abortion activists ARE the fringe.

[Tages]

The action of standing there?

Yes, yes I am.

I'm standing there with a sign.

Heh.

Which an attorney has just told you is harassment.

You need to sit down and reflect on the path you've chosen.

[Slam_Bradley]

I try my best to look for the silver lining in every flame-like thread. I think I found it. As long as Rev. is posting here, he can't be on a sidewalk intimidating and confronting women attending the local clinic.


We take our victories where we can.

[Paul McEnery]

I try my best to look for the silver lining in every flame-like thread. I think I found it. As long as Rev. is posting here, he can't be on a sidewalk intimidating and confronting women attending the local clinic.

I like to think of it as a case study.

Or a kind of collectivist game of reverse whack-a-mole.

Ah, how it brings a community together to have an enemy.

[Rev. Calibos]

Heh.

Which an attorney has just told you is harassment.

You need to sit down and reflect on the path you've chosen.


Oh crap, so I'll probably meet this attorney after I'm arrested for carrying that sign and go to trial and get into a whole heap of trouble and....

Oh wait, no, that's not going to happen.

[Tom]

Just to yank the conversation in a slightly different but no less controversial direction...

I think when ostensibly pro-choice people characterize the decision for some women to terminate their pregnancies as this incredibly difficult, heartbreaking decision, they're not doing the movement any favors. It's kind of like the argument in support of biological determinants for homosexuality: "Who would ever CHOOSE to be gay?! How ridiculous!"
You might be arguing from the more progressive point of view, but you're framing it in distinctly conservative terms.

Yes, for many women choosing abortion is difficult, but for many other women, it's nothing more than a simple medical procedure and a responsible, adult choice to make.

[Paul McEnery]

Oh crap, so I'll probably meet this attorney after I'm arrested for carrying that sign and go to trial and get into a whole heap of trouble and....

Oh wait, no, that's not going to happen.

Too bad.

Like most people who like to use other people's pain as a means to inflict punishment on them, it's probably the only thing you'd understand.

[Tages]

Oh crap, so I'll probably meet this attorney after I'm arrested for carrying that sign and go to trial and get into a whole heap of trouble and....

Oh wait, no, that's not going to happen.

Not yet anyway.

Bullies always eventually slip up and pick on someone they shouldn't. And from there it's a quick trip to jail, or the ER.

Before you encounter such a person I recommend that you change your ways.

[Paul McEnery]

Just to yank the conversation in a slightly different but no less controversial direction...

I think when ostensibly pro-choice people characterize the decision for some women to terminate their pregnancies as this incredibly difficult, heartbreaking decision, they're not doing the movement any favors. It's kind of like the argument in support of biological determinants for homosexuality: "Who would ever CHOOSE to be gay?! How ridiculous!"
You might be arguing from the more progressive point of view, but you're framing it in distinctly conservative terms.

Yes, for many women choosing abortion is difficult, but for many other women, it's nothing more than a simple medical procedure and a responsible, adult choice to make.

Fair point.

But, as the Buggins just reminded me, one of the irritating things about the anti-abortion fanatics is that they make it all but impossible to discuss the issue like grown-ups. Instead, we've got to circle the wagons until they bugger off home.

I'm sure that some people have the temperament to just shrug off an abortion or a miscarriage, just as some people will be haunted by it for the rest of their lives. But those are both the outliers. Most women I've known either describe it as a trauma, or show signs that they're just fronting about it not being a trauma.

[Asmith]

The action of standing there?

Yes, yes I am.

I'm standing there with a sign.

What in the world does that have to do with the fringe that engage in acts of violence in front of clinics?

I'm sorry Calios. I'm sorry that I tried to be a little nice towards you, as I did feel that you were being picked on somewhat. But that was before I realised you were one of those people who thought it was so okay to harrass women going through a highly personal crisis involving their own bodies that you actually make time to harrass them yourself... I feel like saying something along the lines of 'Die Mother Fucker Die Die' but why name call, it expresses little and furthers nothing. So instead I'll just say that I hope the horror and shame and harrassment you visit on others so proudly is never returned to any of your loved ones as nobody deserves the kind of torture you like to dish out... you however can be choked to death on fresh dog turds and I don't think I'd blink for fear of missing a single scintillating second.

[Dreadstar]

You're not answering the question, a simple one at that.

What do you care? You are unable/unwilling to answer it so there you go.

Or maybe I'm not answering because it had nothing to do with the point and the line following that I initiated today.

"You can't deflect a charge of bigotry with 'Well, so are you.' "

"Nevermind that, is *this* over *here* bigotry?"

Moving on...

[Paul McEnery]

Or maybe I'm not answering because it had nothing to do with the point and the line following that I initiated today.

"You can't deflect a charge of bigotry with 'Well, so are you.' "

"Nevermind that, is *this* over *here* bigotry?"

Moving on...

It's rather like the pot accusing the stove top of being a container for water, isn't it.

[Tom]

Fair point.

But, as the Buggins just reminded me, one of the irritating things about the anti-abortion fanatics is that they make it all but impossible to discuss the issue like grown-ups. Instead, we've got to circle the wagons until they bugger off home.

I'm sure that some people have the temperament to just shrug off an abortion or a miscarriage, just as some people will be haunted by it for the rest of their lives. But those are both the outliers. Most women I've known either describe it as a trauma, or show signs that they're just fronting about it not being a trauma.

Don't get me wrong, I doubt there are very many women who just shrug it off like it's a pedicure. At the very least, it represents an important decision for the woman to make and the procedure itself couldn't be classified as anything less than unpleasant by most women. I just think when it's wrapped up in terms like "heartbreaking" you're framing it exactly how pro-lifers would prefer that it be framed.

[Paul McEnery]

Don't get me wrong, I doubt there are very many women who just shrug it off like it's a pedicure. At the very least, it represents an important decision for the woman to make and the procedure itself couldn't be classified as anything less than unpleasant by most women. I just think when it's wrapped up in terms like "heartbreaking" you're framing it exactly how pro-lifers would prefer that it be framed.

Yes, I think that's right. It's showing them the mirror they just thrust into my hands, isn't it.

Which is one more reason to loathe them, really, that we can't talk about the heartbreak of some women giving up their unwanted pregnancies without feeling like we're empowering the goon squad.

[Tages]

What caused me to moderate my stance from anti-abortion to "Abortion sucks but let's find more productive means of helping people than taking choice away" was when two women very close to me had to make that decision.

One of whom (an agnostic, incidentally) was open about how difficult a decision it was, the other (Christian, incidentally) tried to pretend it wasn't difficult but later broke down and admitted how hard it was for her.

[Paul McEnery]

What caused me to moderate my stance from anti-abortion to "Abortion sucks but less find more productive means of helping people than taking choice away" was when two women very close to me had to make that decision.

One of whom (an agnostic, incidentally) was open about how difficult a decision it was, the other (Christian, incidentally) tried to pretend it wasn't difficult but later broke down and admitted how hard it was for her.

That's one of the problems with certain Christian indocrination, isn't it. It makes it harder for women to think clearly about their reproductive rights, and more punishingly emotional to exercise them.

One might almost imagine that there's some powerful men in the background who meant that to happen.

[Calybos]

I try my best to look for the silver lining in every flame-like thread. I think I found it. As long as Rev. is posting here, he can't be on a sidewalk intimidating and confronting women attending the local clinic.

I've really got to consider changing my name now, haven't I? No way I'd want to be mistaken for the Rev....


.

[Chris N]

Just to yank the conversation in a slightly different but no less controversial direction...

I think when ostensibly pro-choice people characterize the decision for some women to terminate their pregnancies as this incredibly difficult, heartbreaking decision, they're not doing the movement any favors. It's kind of like the argument in support of biological determinants for homosexuality: "Who would ever CHOOSE to be gay?! How ridiculous!"
You might be arguing from the more progressive point of view, but you're framing it in distinctly conservative terms.

Yes, for many women choosing abortion is difficult, but for many other women, it's nothing more than a simple medical procedure and a responsible, adult choice to make.


Fair point. Personally, I'm not there. Perhaps I should be but I'm not. I still reside in the "there's more at stake here than a medical procedure." Blame Christianity or whatever you want to, but I'll never find myself looking at abortion as a good thing.

At best, I might in many cases liken it to amputation. A bad thing that's for the best.

I do recognize the conservative assumptions in my viewpoint. I'd like to think there also aren't misogynistic assumptions underlying it, but it wouldn't surprise me.

[Paul McEnery]

At best, I might in many cases liken it to amputation. A bad thing that's for the best..

Amputation is a little strong, but otherwise that's where I stand, for the most part.

Then again, I was too pathetic to kill the mice that infested our kitchen, too.

[Tages]

Then again, I was too pathetic to kill the mice that infested our kitchen, too.

I find the dilemma resolves itself the moment you get a pet snake.

[Chris N]

I capture mice and let them loose outside.

At which point I assume they run back inside.

[Paul McEnery]

I capture mice and let them loose outside.

At which point I assume they run back inside.

The word is "mouse".

[Paul McEnery]

I find the dilemma resolves itself the moment you get a pet snake.

You'd think.

Ours wasn't much use.

And besides, it would only have gone down the hole and wrapped itself around the hot water pipe.

Like the previous one did.

Useless bastards.

[Chris N]

The word is "mouse".

One mouse, one rat.


Then there was the mouse I tried to let outside which outsmarted me and escaped.

[Paul McEnery]

Then there was the mouse I tried to let outside which outsmarted me and escaped.

Excellent bit of brain freeze, there.

[Tom]

Fair point. Personally, I'm not there. Perhaps I should be but I'm not. I still reside in the "there's more at stake here than a medical procedure." Blame Christianity or whatever you want to, but I'll never find myself looking at abortion as a good thing.

At best, I might in many cases liken it to amputation. A bad thing that's for the best.

I do recognize the conservative assumptions in my viewpoint. I'd like to think there also aren't misogynistic assumptions underlying it, but it wouldn't surprise me.

It's good that you recognize the conservative assumptions underlying your viewpoint, but it would be better and more appropriate to recognize that you're ascribing certain emotional responses to women who have abortions without considering whether or not they feel that way. If you feel it's a heartbreaking decision, there's nothing wrong with owning that viewpoint as your own. Just don't assume that the women who make this decision are having the same emotional response.

Again, for the absolutists out there, I'm sure there are women for whom this was a heartbreaking, possibly life-altering decision for them to make, just as I'm sure that there are women out there who considered this decision no more heartbreaking than having an IUD inserted.

[FanLove4Blade]

Yes you did. When you equated Bin Laden saying that it is every Muslim's duty to go out violently jihading with this actually being every Mulsim's duty.

bin laden did say that, most muslims know that is not what the koran says and he is distorting what the word jihad actually means.


Revealed the hypocricy of others by pointing out their own bigotry?

Darn skippy I did.




Really? What is it then, since you know?
Calibos, you can't use that saying to show you arent a bigot. Just cause someone points out what others are doesnt mean they arent one themselves. Its justa bad way to defend yourself. (btw not saying you're a bigot just saying thats a bad way of debate)

Thanks, it's going to be awesome. I'll put up some pictures when we get back.


Nope, you further displayed your ignorance.

Fundamentalism is a term that applies only to Christianity. All attempts at cultural transference fail, because no other culture operates around doctrinal certainty.

Too bad your classes in arab culture didn't teach you that.


You are afraid. But no, there aren't. Christianity is Orthodox; Islam is Orthoprax.

If you were less ignorant, you'd understand that the fanatics using Islam as a front are the exact opposite of back-to-basics Islam. A genuine koran-believing muslim (which is the wrong way of thinking, but whatever) wouldn't be a Wahabist, or a suicide bomber, or any of the other things that get thrown at Islam. It is the MODERNISERS who are generating fanatical praxis.

What you mean is "fanatic" or "extremist"; "fundamentalist" is incorrect usage.

And it matters that it's incorrect usage.


Stop lying.

The anti-abortion movement does share goals, ideology and praxis. You yourself are in fact typical of those goals, that ideology and praxis. And those goals, that ideology and praxis, are objectionable.

You are not a special unique snowflake. You're exactly the bloody same as all the rest of those sign-wielding lunatics who don't understand the first thing about the issue at hand, how they've been played by the leaders of the movement, by corrupt preachers, and by the Republican Party, and how their behaviour does harm to others.



"Bigotry" has a meaning. That meaning does not suit your purposes.
Most people equate fundamentalism with Christianity, I know. But every relgion has its share of wackjobs which we might still call 'fundies'


The action of standing there?

Yes, yes I am.

I'm standing there with a sign.

What in the world does that have to do with the fringe that engage in acts of violence in front of clinics?
What you do share in common with them ones is your goals. What makes you different from them is the type of method you prefer derp - a derp and what type of method you believe is acceptable and not acceptable to use to achieve those goals.


I try my best to look for the silver lining in every flame-like thread. I think I found it. As long as Rev. is posting here, he can't be on a sidewalk intimidating and confronting women attending the local clinic.
shhhh don't gibe him any ideas :tongue:

I like to think of it as a case study.

Or a kind of collectivist game of reverse whack-a-mole.

Ah, how it brings a community together to have an enemy.

well he's probably my enemy that he wants to have my reproductive rights away. But he's civil when speaking with me (even if i do think how he debates is a kinf of phucked up) and he treats me ok when speaking to me so i will him too.

and this thread seems to be helping me become accpted into this community. It seems many people do like what I write. Even Rev Calibos, as he likes it that I speak to him nice.


That's one of the problems with certain Christian indocrination, isn't it. It makes it harder for women to think clearly about their reproductive rights, and more punishingly emotional to exercise them.

One might almost imagine that there's some powerful men in the background who meant that to happen.

yes, many pro lifers believe in anti - abortion - that is until they actually experience the real world and face it themselves..


I've really got to consider changing my name now, haven't I? No way I'd want to be mistaken for the Rev....


.
He's Rev.Calibos. You're just Calybos. spelled differently. I think you'd be ok.

I capture mice and let them loose outside.

At which point I assume they run back inside.

I have 2 cats. Nuff said. :tongue:

~ Blade ~ Or maybe I should say, Miss Blade. :smile:

[Guapo Méndez]

I try my best to look for the silver lining in every flame-like thread. I think I found it. As long as Rev. is posting here, he can't be on a sidewalk intimidating and confronting women attending the local clinic.

We can only hope, but probably he has a laptop and wireless access, so he can confront the local clinic with the sign and be all he can be online.

I mean, standing around a clinic with a protest sign must be incredibly boring.

[Rev. Calibos]

I mean, standing around a clinic with a protest sign must be incredibly boring.

Any protest can be incredibly boring when you get down to it.

[mikekerr3]

Fair point. Personally, I'm not there. Perhaps I should be but I'm not. I still reside in the "there's more at stake here than a medical procedure." Blame Christianity or whatever you want to, but I'll never find myself looking at abortion as a good thing.

At best, I might in many cases liken it to amputation. A bad thing that's for the best.

I do recognize the conservative assumptions in my viewpoint. I'd like to think there also aren't misogynistic assumptions underlying it, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Thinking of abortion as a bad thing is a perfectly reasonable attitude, your values and your choices are yours. Recognizing that it's sometimes necessary is a sign of sanity.

Forcing other, or trying to shame them for their actions, concerning thier own bodies is a bad thing

[Guapo Méndez]

Just to yank the conversation in a slightly different but no less controversial direction...

I think when ostensibly pro-choice people characterize the decision for some women to terminate their pregnancies as this incredibly difficult, heartbreaking decision, they're not doing the movement any favors. It's kind of like the argument in support of biological determinants for homosexuality: "Who would ever CHOOSE to be gay?! How ridiculous!"
You might be arguing from the more progressive point of view, but you're framing it in distinctly conservative terms.

Yes, for many women choosing abortion is difficult, but for many other women, it's nothing more than a simple medical procedure and a responsible, adult choice to make.

Agreed. That's why when I posted I mentioned that they were going about their business and here is the protest faction, giving them grief for an activity they are free to do whenever they can.

Reverend, what you seem to be missing is that you are taking the situation out of context.

Clinic and people getting an abortion versus protestors expressing their disapproval of the situation.

Those are two sides that, given the appropriate conditions, can make a situation detonate.

Me seeing a Muslim in an airport. There are no sides. I am not against Muslims. I will not think by default that he has a bomb and wants to blow us up. We are passengers.


Want a valid comparison for your "bigoted agains Muslim" bit?

Someone in a protest against Muslims on one side of the street and a Mosque on the other side.

That's where Muslims can feel harrassed/persecuted and protestors can feel like....geez, no clue here. Never been in a protest before...like they are in the right? Lording over? Power tripping?

[FanLove4Blade]

Thanks, it's going to be awesome. I'll put up some pictures when we get back.

Oh. just wanted to add and forgot to:

Congrats.Hope you and your wife will be happy.

I have to admit if a guy tells me they are pro life I'm not gonna wanna date them really. Not because i hate pro lifers but such beliefs might mean i may very well get no or little support from my bf or husband if i were to make a life changing decision for myself like an abortion cause a pregnancy can affect your whole life especially for a woman.

[mikekerr3]

Any protest can be incredibly boring when you get down to it.

If your intent is not to intimate, not to interfere with people exercising their rights, and not to destroy those rights, why the hell do you bother? What do you hope to gain thought your efforts?

[Slam_Bradley]

If your intent is not to intimate, not to interfere with people exercising their rights, and not to destroy those rights, why the hell do you bother? What do you hope to gain thought your efforts?

He's been asked this a couple dozen times. Maybe you can be the one to finally get an answer.

[Rev. Calibos]

I'm sorry Calios. I'm sorry that I tried to be a little nice towards you, as I did feel that you were being picked on somewhat. But that was before I realised you were one of those people who thought it was so okay to harrass women going through a highly personal crisis involving their own bodies that you actually make time to harrass them yourself... I feel like saying something along the lines of 'Die Mother Fucker Die Die' but why name call, it expresses little and furthers nothing. So instead I'll just say that I hope the horror and shame and harrassment you visit on others so proudly is never returned to any of your loved ones as nobody deserves the kind of torture you like to dish out... you however can be choked to death on fresh dog turds and I don't think I'd blink for fear of missing a single scintillating second.

I'm sorry you feel that way but I have to stand by the truth here. What we do is completely different from other protesters that actually bully, harass and intimidate.

We don't yell at anyone as that doesn't solve anything.

We don't touch them/throw things at them as that's not what we're about.

We don't block the entrance.

We stand either across the street or a block away. Know why we do that? Because we want to distance ourselves from the loons that do engage in behavior like that.

I'm sorry that you feel what we do is 'torture' or if you assumed that we were engaged in the same activities as other protesters that you may have seen or heard of, but I don't think that we're torturing anyone really.

As tom mentioned earlier, we can't say that the procedure affects every woman the same way. Some women may be bothered by us, some women might not care at all about us being there.

But again, I'm going to speak to some women who have been through that situation to get their input. I'm doing this because I'm being honest and saying that no, I don't know how they feel about it. They've never spoken to me, they've never felt bothered enough by us to call the police nor have the police stepped in to stop us.

So I can't say that any of them felt any way whatsoever about what we were doing.

Which is what I hope to learn.

In the meantime, I'm sorry I gave you whatever impression you got from my posts that made you think that I'm 'joyful' in my protests as that simply isn't the case.

[Rev. Calibos]

Agreed. That's why when I posted I mentioned that they were going about their business and here is the protest faction, giving them grief for an activity they are free to do whenever they can.

Reverend, what you seem to be missing is that you are taking the situation out of context.

Clinic and people getting an abortion versus protestors expressing their disapproval of the situation.

Those are two sides that, given the appropriate conditions, can make a situation detonate.

Me seeing a Muslim in an airport. There are no sides. I am not against Muslims. I will not think by default that he has a bomb and wants to blow us up. We are passengers.


Want a valid comparison for your "bigoted agains Muslim" bit?

Someone in a protest against Muslims on one side of the street and a Mosque on the other side.

That's where Muslims can feel harrassed/persecuted and protestors can feel like....geez, no clue here. Never been in a protest before...like they are in the right? Lording over? Power tripping?



The comparison is with pro-lifers and assuming that all pro-lifers protest or assuming that they're all 'thugs' and 'nazis' as Paul put it.

If someone mentions that they're pro-life and someone immediately flashes to images of clinic bombings or people throwing blood that's a response I chalk up to having preconceived notions about people.

The people that engage in those activities do not make up the entire group.

Now, to be honest, even I don't represent the mainstream pro-lifer as I participate in protests. The majority of pro-lifers don't, but to say that what I do is equal to what a non-protester does to what a clinic bomber does is just as bigoted and shortsighted as assuming that a muslim you're sitting next to on a flight is about to do something violent.

[FanLove4Blade]

I'm curious. why do you choose a MEDICAL CENTER for your protests, where women go for what they need done, they obviously feel like they need it at this point in their lives or they wouldnt be doing it. but why a medical facility, Calibos?

like i said up here pro lifers arent allowed to protest at the one facility that does provide abortions. So they like go the confederation building (the home of the provincial government of NL) or else they go downtown stjohns and start a 'life chain' or something like that.

[Rev. Calibos]

I'm curious. why do you choose a MEDICAL CENTER for your protests, where women go for what they need done, they obviously feel like they need it at this point in their lives or they wouldnt be doing it. but why a medical facility, Calibos?

like i said up here pro lifers arent allowed to protest at the one facility that does provide abortions. So they like go the confederation building (the home of the provincial government of NL) or else they go downtown stjohns and start a 'life chain' or something like that.

We go there because that's where the procedures happen.

Why do people visit Ground Zero?

It's sad, to me at least. When we went there (visited my friend at Ft. Drum back in '06 and we spent the weekend in New York) we stood there and paid our respects. It was a bit sobering. We had both been sent to Afg. because of what happened on 9-11 and to actually go there was important to us.


We go to the clinics for the same reason. It's to pay respects to the lives being snuffed, the potentials being ended.

[Guapo Méndez]

The comparison is with pro-lifers and assuming that all pro-lifers protest or assuming that they're all 'thugs' and 'nazis' as Paul put it.

Well, I wasn't talking about what Paul posted. I was talking about what I posted.
A group protesting is a group confronting. Confronted people may not like it and the situation can escalate. It may not, but it may. That's what I've been saying.



If someone mentions that they're pro-life and someone immediately flashes to images of clinic bombings or people throwing blood that's a response I chalk up to having preconceived notions about people.

The people that engage in those activities do not make up the entire group.

Now, to be honest, even I don't represent the mainstream pro-lifer as I participate in protests.

I saw you giving as good as you got. Don't blame me for thinking you could find a button on a protested-on person who went to confront your group and hammering on the fucker until it exploded.


The majority of pro-lifers don't, but to say that what I do is equal to what a non-protester does to what a clinic bomber does is just as bigoted and shortsighted as assuming that a muslim you're sitting next to on a flight is about to do something violent.


Yes, but you're taking the situation out of the context. A protest is a confrontation. Passive, sure, it can be, but confrontation. You are a protestor. You stand next to those who do not agree-approve. You are on the confrontational side. Hell, you are a side.

Thinking your seat-mate is a terrorist, well, that's profiling and bigotry.

[Slam_Bradley]

We go there because that's where the procedures happen.

Why do people visit Ground Zero?

It's sad, to me at least. When we went there (visited my friend at Ft. Drum back in '06 and we spent the weekend in New York) we stood there and paid our respects. It was a bit sobering. We had both been sent to Afg. because of what happened on 9-11 and to actually go there was important to us.


We go to the clinics for the same reason. It's to pay respects to the lives being snuffed, the potentials being ended.


We still don't know why you go to clinics. Because apparently you don't go there for any purpose. Nor do you actually do anything while you're there.

[Ray R.]

Why do you need the input? Frankly, it's none of your business. At all. And discussing the matter after the decision has been made is dickish and unnecessary. If the decision hasn't been made, then unless it's your girlfriend or sister or other close friend, then again, discussing it on the way to the Planned Parenthood is an invasion of privacy, at best.

I'm not pro-abortion, by any stretch. As Tom infers, there can be an arbitrary and capricious aspect to it that I'm not comfortable with. I am in the position financially to care for an "unwanted child," so to me, abortion is not an either-or choice. But, and this is the controlling factor, it's not my body. And giving me "input" doesn't change that aspect one bit. In my personal circumstances, I would not choose abortion. But I don't get to make the decision. I can advise and give consent to the person I'm in a close relationship with, but under the laws of this country, and fundamental rights to privacy and reproductive rights, that's about it. And I certainly don't have any reason whatsoever to interject myself into someone else's business who I don't know at all. That's assholish, invasive and frankly, pathetic. There are plenty of places to offer my opinion, solicited and unsolicited, regarding abortion. I certainly don't need to "protest" to make my thoughts or beliefs clear. Why be a douchebag if you don't have to?

[Rev. Calibos]

We still don't know why you go to clinics. Because apparently you don't go there for any purpose. Nor do you actually do anything while you're there.

Really? So you must have missed this then:



We go to the clinics for the same reason. It's to pay respects to the lives being snuffed, the potentials being ended.

The 'paying respects' is the 'purpose' you must have missed.

[dupont2005]

I'm curious. why do you choose a MEDICAL CENTER for your protests, where women go for what they need done, they obviously feel like they need it at this point in their lives or they wouldnt be doing it. but why a medical facility, Calibos?

like i said up here pro lifers arent allowed to protest at the one facility that does provide abortions. So they like go the confederation building (the home of the provincial government of NL) or else they go downtown stjohns and start a 'life chain' or something like that.

because pregnant women are easier to intimidate than government building security

[Dreadstar]

because pregnant women are easier to intimidate than government building security

You never met my ex.

[Rev. Calibos]

Well, I wasn't talking about what Paul posted. I was talking about what I posted.
A group protesting is a group confronting. Confronted people may not like it and the situation can escalate. It may not, but it may. That's what I've been saying.



Right, but the example I gave was to illustrate the similarities in making assumptions about all Muslims and all Pro-Lifers, and not all pro-lifers protest (get into those 'confrontational' situations)



Yes, but you're taking the situation out of the context. A protest is a confrontation. Passive, sure, it can be, but confrontation. You are a protestor. You stand next to those who do not agree-approve. You are on the confrontational side. Hell, you are a side.

Thinking your seat-mate is a terrorist, well, that's profiling and bigotry.

But that's not what was being considered. Remember,it's all of 'pro-life' that some consider to be 'thugs' and 'nazis'.

And not all pro-lifers participate in protests.

[Guapo Méndez]

Right, but the example I gave was to illustrate the similarities in making assumptions about all Muslims and all Pro-Lifers, and not all pro-lifers protest (get into those 'confrontational' situations)


Your example was horribly flawed because you removed the context. No similarities found.



But that's not what was being considered. Remember,it's all of 'pro-life' that some consider to be 'thugs' and 'nazis'.

And not all pro-lifers participate in protests.

Told you, not by my posts.
And some are and some aren't, but it's disingenuous to think that a protest cannot contain one of those elements.

[FanLove4Blade]

because pregnant women are easier to intimidate than government building security

Ye know...i was gonna write that at one point then didnt. that many or some women if they think they're gonna be pregnant, like the time i knew i could or might be pregnant, and they know they cant have a baby or cant look after one and they dont wanna adopt it out they're gonna freak. and people who feel hopeless, scared, w/e are gonna be easier to influence.

its reason why a lot of pro lifers try to go the pregnant women.

I wanted to know though, why calibos, himself, personally, as one man, did it (go to medical clinic). Just cause i wasnt going to just assume he was going after the most vulnerable and lump him in with the others as he said he doesnt wish people to do.

[Rev. Calibos]

Why do you need the input? Frankly, it's none of your business. At all. And discussing the matter after the decision has been made is dickish and unnecessary. If the decision hasn't been made, then unless it's your girlfriend or sister or other close friend, then again, discussing it on the way to the Planned Parenthood is an invasion of privacy, at best.

Ray...

I'm going to talk to women who have aborted already not to 'convince' them of anything but to ask them about their experience at the clinic.

Because so many here consider peaceful protest to be a form of harassment I decided to call the Community Help Center here in State College to see if it was possible to get in touch with some of these women to honestly ask them about what they went through.

They know who I am, what I believe and I told them right from the get go so that there wouldn't be any questions about who I was or what I was there for.

I'm going to ask them if there were protesters at the clinic when they had the procedure and if so, what did they do? I'm going to ask them if they were bothered by the protesters or not and I'm going to ask how they felt about it.


I'm doing this to learn a bit about the other side of our protests, the women that actually are going to get the procedure.

I'm of the opinion that we never bothered anyone but if I'm wrong, if I did then I would feel pretty bad about it and I would have to re-examine what we were doing.

I don't think that will happen though but I could be wrong, which is the point of the whole exercise anyway.




I'm not pro-abortion, by any stretch. As Tom infers, there can be an arbitrary and capricious aspect to it that I'm not comfortable with. I am in the position financially to care for an "unwanted child," so to me, abortion is not an either-or choice. But, and this is the controlling factor, it's not my body. And giving me "input" doesn't change that aspect one bit. In my personal circumstances, I would not choose abortion. But I don't get to make the decision. I can advise and give consent to the person I'm in a close relationship with, but under the laws of this country, and fundamental rights to privacy and reproductive rights, that's about it. And I certainly don't have any reason whatsoever to interject myself into someone else's business who I don't know at all. That's assholish, invasive and frankly, pathetic. There are plenty of places to offer my opinion, solicited and unsolicited, regarding abortion. I certainly don't need to "protest" to make my thoughts or beliefs clear. Why be a douchebag if you don't have to?

Again....I'm not trying to counsel women to not get abortions.
I'll be speaking with women who have already had the procedure to get their input about their experience entering and exiting the building.

[Paul McEnery]

Most people equate fundamentalism with Christianity, I know. But every relgion has its share of wackjobs which we might still call 'fundies'

Whack-jobs, sure.

But it's important for us not to call them fundies. That makes us think they're the same kind of whack-job as our whack-jobs. And they're not, not at all.

It's one of those times when the technical language really does do something important, because when we misjudge their whackjobs by using our own standards, we guess wrong about what they're likely to do, and what's the right way to encourage the others.

Like I say, a muslim who's genuinely fundamental -- someone who follows the practice, and reads the Koran religiously -- is someone to be treasured because they're genuinely seeking out the will of "God" in order to enact it. And that's the exact opposite of Islamic whackjobs.

And the exact opposite of Christian fundies, too.

[mikekerr3]

The 'paying respects' is the 'purpose' you must have missed.

Yes, caring a sign that say's they don't have a right to make the choice they are making is suck a sign of respect.

Paying respect doesn't normally require signs.

Rev. Calibos: what does your sign have to do with respect? I don't think that stating a legal falsehood is particularity respectful to anyone.

[Nick Soapdish]

Awesome. When did I say that it was religion alone?

Quote please?


See below.



No, just kidding of course. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together would see that, yep, the 9-11 attacks had everything to do with religion.

Maybe everything means something different to you.



The 'paying respects' is the 'purpose' you must have missed.

The difference between protesting and paying respects is one of the things that I'm having trouble with.

If I am able to visit Ground Zero, I'm not going to be doing it to condemn bin Laden. When I was brought to the Vietnam Memorial, I don't think that my father was doing it to protest the war or to rage against Communism or the Vietnamese.

You can pay respects without protesting. But you've specifically described your activities as protests several times.

[Rev. Calibos]

Yes, caring a sign that say's they don't have a right to make the choice they are making is suck a sign of respect.

Is that what my sign says?

Didn't think that you were there but there you go.

But seriously, they do have the right to make the choice. Abortion is perfectly legal.

Which has nothing to do with anything because that isn't what my sign says.




Paying respect doesn't normally require signs.

Rev. Calibos: what does your sign have to do with respect? I don't think that stating a legal falsehood is particularity respectful to anyone.

What legal falsehood is that?

[FanLove4Blade]

Whack-jobs, sure.

But it's important for us not to call them fundies. That makes us think they're the same kind of whack-job as our whack-jobs. And they're not, not at all.

It's one of those times when the technical language really does do something important, because when we misjudge their whackjobs by using our own standards, we guess wrong about what they're likely to do, and what's the right way to encourage the others.

Like I say, a muslim who's genuinely fundamental -- someone who follows the practice, and reads the Koran religiously -- is someone to be treasured because they're genuinely seeking out the will of "God" in order to enact it. And that's the exact opposite of Islamic whackjobs.

And the exact opposite of Christian fundies, too.

well thats true. if you use the fundamental as applied to the muslim you mention, and fundamentalist as applied to the christian fundamental (ist) it doesnt really mean the same thing.

and if we use the word fundamentalist yeah, it sounds like their whackjobs or nutbars or wingnuts or w/e you like to call em are just like ours. and 'fundamental' means following the practice and koran and a christian fundamentalist, wile may be a new recent usage of the word like 20th cent or something.

[Paul McEnery]

well thats true. if you use the fundamental as applied to the muslim you mention, and fundamentalist as applied to the christian fundamental (ist) it doesnt really mean the same thing.

and if we use the word fundamentalist yeah, it sounds like their whackjobs or nutbars or wingnuts or w/e you like to call em are just like ours. and 'fundamental' means following the practice and koran and a christian fundamentalist, wile may be a new recent usage of the word like 20th cent or something.

Turn of the century, but yeah, absolutely. It's really quite specific, and doesn't even apply to catholics, mormons or most evangelicals when they're acting up. Different methods apply.

[Rev. Calibos]

See below.



Maybe everything means something different to you.

Which doesn't = 'Religion was the only reason'

It played a huge role in it, sure, but it wasn't the only reason.

But I can concede that I could have worded that better.





The difference between protesting and paying respects is one of the things that I'm having trouble with.

If I am able to visit Ground Zero, I'm not going to be doing it to condemn bin Laden. When I was brought to the Vietnam Memorial, I don't think that my father was doing it to protest the war or to rage against Communism or the Vietnamese.

You can pay respects without protesting. The reverse is questionable.

People have asked me why we go there and that's the reason we do it.

Holding it at the State Capital might make more sense for some people but I think it's equally important to actually be there where it happens because, to me at least, it is pretty sad.

[Paul McEnery]

One mouse, one rat.
.

Plus, you just think the rat isn't the mouse because he's taken off his glasses.

[FanLove4Blade]

Is that what my sign says?

Didn't think that you were there but there you go.

But seriously, they do have the right to make the choice. Abortion is perfectly legal.

Which has nothing to do with anything because that isn't what my sign says.



i think he's saying that because you said your sign said 'its a child not a choice

[Paul McEnery]

We stand either across the street or a block away. Know why we do that? Because we want to distance ourselves from the loons that do engage in behavior like that.

You're not trying hard enough.

[Rev. Calibos]

i think he's saying that because you said your sign said 'its a child not a choice

The sign has nothing to do with the legalities of anything.

If I had a sign that truly had a legal falsehood on it it would say something like 'You don't have the right to abort your fetus.'

[FanLove4Blade]

The sign has nothing to do with the legalities of anything.

If I had a sign that truly had a legal falsehood on it it would say something like 'You don't have the right to abort your fetus.'

well true, but the sign does sound like you are saying 'you shouldnt have the right to abort your fetus. because its a child. and not a choice.'

[Paul McEnery]

Which doesn't = 'Religion was the only reason'

It played a huge role in it, sure, but it wasn't the only reason.


No, it didn't. 9/11 was entirely to do with the geopolitics of colonialism. From a different region, Bin Laden's mob could have been Maoists, Trotskyites, Fascists, or any number of other group affiliations.

The only thing that truly marks these groups is binary thinking, ideological loyalty, and so little empathy that their self-righteousness compels them to hurt others.

Now, who else does this sound like?



Holding it at the State Capital might make more sense for some people but I think it's equally important to actually be there where it happens because, to me at least, it is pretty sad.

Sad? Of course it's bloody sad.

And you're not making it any happier, are you.

[Paul McEnery]

The sign has nothing to do with the legalities of anything.

If I had a sign that truly had a legal falsehood on it it would say something like 'You don't have the right to abort your fetus.'

If you weren't such a dip, you'd recognize that that's exactly what that slogan means: "We intend to take that choice away from you by whatever means are available to us."

[Paul McEnery]

The comparison is with pro-lifers and assuming that all pro-lifers protest or assuming that they're all 'thugs' and 'nazis' as Paul put it..

Nope. Nazi is too specific except for the purposes of abuse or humour. What I say is "fascist". Largely on the grounds that refusing women reproductive rights is a feature of all fascist governments, and all governments that refuse women reproductive rights are of the authoritarian right.

Seems pretty thoroughly commutative to me.

Also, while you lie about this constantly, it is inherent to the anti-abortion movement that it seeks to criminalize abortion. There's no two ways about that. (And, for the most part, seeks to ban contraception, too.)

That's why the middle ground is called Pro-Choice. It means what it says on the tin -- regardless of one's personal feelings, one recognizes that legal abortion is an unavoidable feature of women's reproductive rights, and that reproductive rights are central to the equality of women.

The simple business which you want to evade is this: to be anti-abortion is to want women to be baby-making machines with no choice in the matter. And that makes you a fascist thug.

[Merey]

Ray...

I'm going to talk to women who have aborted already not to 'convince' them of anything but to ask them about their experience at the clinic.

Because so many here consider peaceful protest to be a form of harassment I decided to call the Community Help Center here in State College to see if it was possible to get in touch with some of these women to honestly ask them about what they went through.

They know who I am, what I believe and I told them right from the get go so that there wouldn't be any questions about who I was or what I was there for.

I'm going to ask them if there were protesters at the clinic when they had the procedure and if so, what did they do? I'm going to ask them if they were bothered by the protesters or not and I'm going to ask how they felt about it.


I'm doing this to learn a bit about the other side of our protests, the women that actually are going to get the procedure.

I'm of the opinion that we never bothered anyone but if I'm wrong, if I did then I would feel pretty bad about it and I would have to re-examine what we were doing.

I don't think that will happen though but I could be wrong, which is the point of the whole exercise anyway.




Again....I'm not trying to counsel women to not get abortions.
I'll be speaking with women who have already had the procedure to get their input about their experience entering and exiting the building.


WHAT?! Why would anyone release that kind of information? Do they have some kind of list they can release? If so, the only kinds of lists I can imagine are those who are pro-choice activists who want to debate with the opposition. Or those who have an abortion and now regret it and are now pro-life camp activists. If this is so, well, you're not going to learn much either way. Otherwise, if this is any other kind of list... well, that's just horrific.

[Paul McEnery]

We had both been sent to Afg. because of what happened on 9-11 and to actually go there was important to us..

As we now know, Afghanistan had fuck all to do with 9/11, and Bin Laden's crew were Saudi Arabians operating out of Pakistan.

So I expect, as you observe the clusterfuck Afghanistan has become, with massive civilian casualties, you probably feel like a bit of a chump.

[FanLove4Blade]

As we now know, Afghanistan had fuck all to do with 9/11, and Bin Laden's crew were Saudi Arabians operating out of Pakistan.

So I expect, as you observe the clusterfuck Afghanistan has become, with massive civilian casualties, you probably feel like a bit of a chump.

i have my own views on that which agree with you mostly. well and the fact that they think their supposed to be progressing in afghanistan when really the leader over there now is just as either conservative as the rest or dont mind appeasing conservatives to keep his job as he already was in favor of a law allowing some minority group men over there with the right to refuse to feed their wives if the wives dont give them sex.

[Paul McEnery]

i have my own views on that which agree with you mostly. well and the fact that they think their supposed to be progressing in afghanistan when really the leader over there now is just as either conservative as the rest or dont mind appeasing conservatives to keep his job as he already was in favor of a law allowing some minority group men over there with the right to refuse to feed their wives if the wives dont give them sex.

Billions of dollars and tens of thousands of dollars later, and we're back to square one with the Taliban and the warlords, and things are still worse off than they were even under the Soviet Union.

Success!

[Ray R.]

The sign has nothing to do with the legalities of anything.

If I had a sign that truly had a legal falsehood on it it would say something like 'You don't have the right to abort your fetus.'

"It's a child, not a choice" has nothing to do with the legalities of anything?

If you really truly believe that, then either you're willfully obtuse or hopelessly delusional.

I'm really, really, really trying to see your point of view, bud, but when you say patently stupid things, it's impossible.

Honestly, I think you're trying to influence people through negative reinforcement, but you don't want to think of yourself (or others to think of you), as a crazy or bad person. You think it's about accountable deniability because you're not openly hostile or patently offensive.

But, there are two things. One, it's really not about you. Sure, you can claim that you're a victim of guilt by association, and that EVERYONE else sees pro-lifers as a monolithic bloc, but as the last fifty or so posts here have shown, that's really not the case. Guapo, myself, and I believe Dread, Slam, and others are not ideologically opposed to anti-abortion SENTIMENT or OPINIONS, it's anti-abortion ACTION involving patients, nurses, doctors, and other healthcare recipients and providers that takes it from the realm of thinking into invasion of privacy. And you sitting here trying to split hairs about how you're straddling a fence of good behavior versus politics of personal destruction is self-serving at best, and more likely self-justifying pretzel logic.

The second is that, to use an unfortunate metaphor, you can't be "a little pregnant." If you are actively making political statements by protesting/interfering/getting input/carrying signs/blocking foot traffic/harassing, etc., then you're part and parcel of a political "movement." You don't get to consider yourself part of the ideological ground troops, and then be able to stand like a U.N. observer and say "tsk-tsk" to those "members" who spread hate, fear and violence. Sorry. You either "are a pro-life protestor" or you "are not a pro-life protestor." End of story.

And with that, I'm done. I can't really say anything more at this point.

[Paul McEnery]

Guapo, myself, and I believe Dread, Slam, and others are not ideologically opposed to anti-abortion SENTIMENT or OPINIONS, it's anti-abortion ACTION involving patients, nurses, doctors, and other healthcare recipients and providers that takes it from the realm of thinking into invasion of privacy.

Absolutely. That's what it means to be Pro-Choice rather than Pro-Abortion.

Which is why Chris was wrong earlier when he said Pro-Choice was equally as dishonest as Pro-Life.

It isn't. It's completely accurate.

[FanLove4Blade]

Billions of dollars and tens of thousands of dollars later, and we're back to square one with the Taliban and the warlords, and things are still worse off than they were even under the Soviet Union.

Success!

i knew for a fact that this is a 'war' the us cant win. USA hasnt really been good at fighting derp a derp gueriila warfare.

Vietnam, anyone?

well that and the similarity to the usa's actions during the war on terror and its actions during the cold war are similar.

[Paul McEnery]

derp a derp .

Is that some kind of Newfieism?

[carabas]

I did?

Oh wait, no I didn't.

What I was doing was responding to this:No, it was not. Maybe you misformatted the post, or failed to proofread it properly, but that was not what your post said.

[FanLove4Blade]

Is that some kind of Newfieism?

you have no idea how hard i laughed when i read this. =]

'everyone start in with the newfy jokes now....' :tongue:

nah not newfinese.

i also wanted to add, about afghanistan, a spin off of your afghanistan post i suppose, I disliked GW Bush when he was running to become president back in 2000. I said 'that man is gonna be dangerous, he's militaristic he gonna start a war or something' Not long after, 9/11 happened and Bush was in afghanistan. Then later invaded Iraq on lies and deception. All that stuff about weapons of mass destruction and hussein being in kahoots with bin laden and the taliban. Never provedn no such thing.

[Slam_Bradley]

Guapo, myself, and I believe Dread, Slam, and others are not ideologically opposed to anti-abortion SENTIMENT or OPINIONS, it's anti-abortion ACTION involving patients, nurses, doctors, and other healthcare recipients and providers that takes it from the realm of thinking into invasion of privacy.


Everyone has a right to their opinions and sentiments. Got no issue with that. I'll even allow that as long as you're not breaking the law you have the right to harass people, though I reserve the right to say it's chicken-shit and I'd appreciate if you'd have the balls to accept that that is what you're doing.

But I happen to be an odd-duck in this issue. As a libertarian I feel the government has no business in this matter at least until viability. As an lawyer, I find the decision in Roe v. Wade to be a terribly written and reasoned opinion. A large part of that is because it's tied so intimately to Griswold v. Connecticut which I find to be arguably the most poorly reasoned opinions of the last half century.

I really dislike people who are disingenuous. Whether it be with others or with themselves as appears to be the case here.

[Dreadstar]

... As a libertarian I feel the government has no business in this matter at least until viability...

Preach it!

[Slam_Bradley]

Preach it!

I find myself being a poor libertarian lately, as I've seen the horrible state that the free market has left our health care system in.

[Paul McEnery]

I find myself being a poor libertarian lately, as I've seen the horrible state that the free market has left our health care system in.

Anarcho-socialism will welcome you with open arms.

[FanLove4Blade]

Anarcho-socialism will welcome you with open arms.

lol sometimes i wish my friend from another board, a totally right winger, could experience full free market and right wingism at its finest. a taste of the real world,haha. I think he'd wake up in a hurry.

[carabas]

What we do is completely different from other protesters that actually bully, harass and intimidate.

We don't yell at anyone as that doesn't solve anything.

We don't touch them/throw things at them as that's not what we're about.

We don't block the entrance.

We stand either across the street or a block away. Know why we do that? Because we want to distance ourselves from the loons that do engage in behavior like that.
Y'know, all that makes you is a peculiarily timid species of harrassing, bullying loons.

[Greg Hatcher]

Okay. The level of discourse here has bottomed out, to the point where I'm getting complaints and it's not even my goddamn board. So we're done. Move on.