Another Sunday extra, a photo sent me from a FL pro-lifer.
The Naples Pro-Life Council erected the following billboard sign a month ago, but sometime September 1-2 someone took a knife to it. The vandal(s) took particular care to slice through “Stop Planned Parenthood NOW.” Click to enlarge…
[HT: Therese]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
From this view, it looks like they took great care not to slice through the baby. Wierd how that works, won’t slice a pic, but have no problem dismembering a real baby.
Great point, Justnapd8.
Why can’t pro-choicers just debate with facts? Why can’t they just educate with literature and ultrasound photos how the unborn are not humans? Why can’t they change peoples hearts and minds with love and support and thus keep the public pro-choice? They CAN’T so they knife billboards. I’m sure it does just as much to further their cause!
The funny thing is, even though it’s torn it’s not unreadable. You’d think if they were really trying to destroy it, they’d make it unreadable.
This kind of vandalism kinda indicates when the truth of what abortion really is, hits a nerve! Deep down that person who sliced the billboard KNOWS abortion takes an innocent life. But they want the “freedom” to play God with their own bodies if they aren’t willing to carry an unwanted pregnancy. I’ve heard all the tired arguements (just read RH Reality Factor-puke!) …what will get thru to pro aborts that there HAS to be another solution to an unwanted pregnancy besides abortion? It boggles my mind that giving a baby up for adoption by carrying him/her for 9 months in order to do so, is so objectionable to give that baby a decent chance at life. I hope many more billboards like this one (intact) will appear more & more around our U.S. cities! :)
The anger over a past abortion will keep you from finding true healing. Reach out for help instead of slicing up a billboard. Face the truth over what you have done in the killing of an innocent child.
From what I can see in the photo, it would appear the perpetrator couldn’t reach any higher. It was probably teens carrying out a bit of vandalism. Unlike whoever it is that scales higher hoardings to deface atheism billboards.
‘Why can’t pro-choicers just debate with facts?’ – really Sydney M.? Really? Is that why after repeatedly claiming abortions are more dangerous than deliveries, claiming the CDC data supports your assertion but failing to supply it; since I supplied the CDC data, you have been absent from the other thread? I’m left with the impression you have assiduously avoided the exposure of your false claim.
DNFTT, Sydney! :) ‘Tis the season for them, it seems…
Cranium, I can’t find the CDC links. They were from over 3 years ago. That doesn’t mean they didn’t exist because I did use that before in a debate with another pro-choicer claiming what you claimed. However, I did link you to a MEDICAL DOCTOR explaining the risks of abortion but you wouldn’t face those FACTS either.
And btw, Cranium, even if they perfect abortion to the point where NO WOMAN EVER dies or is EVER INJURED, how does abortion NOT take the life of a preborn human being?
Now that it is election season look for pro-life candidates across the country to have their signs stolen or defaced by the same kind of moron who did the damage to the Florida sign.
My Families againgst Planned Parenthood signs that I post in my front yard have been vandalized multiple times. Some post-abortive people get rage in them when they are faced with what they have done.
One time a pro-abort swerved their car at me and my daughter while we were kneeling down and praying outside the Planned Parenthood abortuary in Aurora Il.
The CDC data Sydney M. – I’ve supplied it for you – the CDC data. For some strange reason you seem unable to take in the fact that I have posted the CDC links for you.
The point is the comparative death rates of women. It is 9-11 times higher in delivery than abortion. I’ve posted the CDC links for you as you are unable or unwilling to do so.
That’d be the CDC data Sydney M. – are you starting to comprehend the message yet?
What thread cranium? What links? 9-11 times seems high.
Does the data include the deaths of mothers who aborted their children caused by the increased risk of breast cancer? Or those that commit suicide?
The point is the comparative death rates of women. It is 9-11 times higher in delivery than abortion. I’ve posted the CDC links for you as you are unable or unwilling to do so.
Your argument only works if one assumes women in the earliest stages of life are not part of the “at-risk” set. That’s highly discriminatory.
You’re painfully begging the question – you’re assuming the female human child isn’t a a female human child and discounting their deaths completely. You have an unstated premise which is tainting your conclusion.
Before you get to the CDC stats you must acknowledge the validity of the scientific evidence that in roughly 50% of abortions, a female human being is destroyed.
If you want to argue that the “product of conception” is not a human person – and is therefore not entitled to the same protections others who possess that same kind of flesh have – then I suggest you demonstrate personhood is non-intrinsic by subjecting yourself to the same kind of butchery those young females undergo (a tree chipper would work nicely) and then when your flesh is completely shredded you can prove your person was not destroyed.
You can play semantics all you want, but you can’t invalidate the fundamental facts regarding humanity.
Cranium,
Are you fine with the defacing of this sign?
Cranium, yes, you linked to the CURRENT CDC website. That is not what I am referring to. I am referring to a specific graph on CDC website from 2007. That showed per 1,000 abortions vs births there were more complications in abortions than births. I don’t doubt that they received major backlash for that and will never post such information again.
You didn’t answer my question either while you were being your usual endearingly snarky self. Even if abortion is perfected to be the SAFEST procedure ever and no woman ever dies again, let alone faces irreparable reproductive harm, how does abortion NOT kill a living preborn human being?
Truthseeker, I had a pro-life bumper sticker and I was tailed and cursed and flipped off several times. When we sold that car my husband said NO MORE BUMPER STICKERS! He was so scared at the clear insanity of pro-choicers that they would put a woman and her baby’s life at risk because of a slogan on a bumper. I have driven behind people with pro-choice stickers and I never rear-ended them or flipped them off. in fact, I kindly let them merge into traffic. I guess pro-lifers are just generally nicer people. Its kinda hard for pro-choicers to live the golden rule “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” when you’re ripping the limbs off some of those “others”.
We may be reading too much into this incident. Vandalism is just that, vandalism. Any middle school child could have done this. Do we spend time and energy psychoanalyzing vandalism? Maybe someone who could care less about the abortion issue is getting some satisfaction from watching the accusations fly.
This works two way. Several years ago someone put a plastic grenade on the door of the local abortion mill. Naturally this caused a stir and a lecture to the PL community about resorting to such antics. Again, any middle school child could have done this.
In situations concerning vandalism, its easy and foolish to jump to conclusions. Unless the perpetrator is found one is only making assumptions and they very well could be wrong.
Like all pro-aborts, and propagandists in general, they will find any and all data sets that supports their mindset.
The truth is that abortion is murder and an innocent life always ends.
To try to substantiate or support such heinous action, like abortion, should cause one to truly want to examine who they are, what they believe and how they will answer to a Holy God.
True, I think it could possibly just be some kids vandalizing. You know..”Hey..wouldn’t it be funny to rip this thing and watch them blame some pro-lifers for it?” Whatever the case, it does seem like a level of immaturity was involved here.
Posting test.
Ah, the usual nefarious wanderings all over the place in an attempt to ignore/obfuscate/distract from the salient point.
Sydney M. claimed that abortions kill more women than full term deliveries do. I said that this is far from the truth. Sydney M. keeps claiming that there is CDC data which supports her assertion but continues to fail to provide such.
Therefore, I provided the CDC data which proves that the death rate for women is 9-11 times higher in delivery than for abortion. The ‘CURRENT’ CDC data does not differ from that of several years ago. The data goes back over decades. The claim being discussed is comparative ‘death rates’ between full-term delivery and abortion. And as I have said previously, Sydney M. is wrong.
Dragging all the other aspects about dead fetuses, personal convictions and the spurious and disproved claims regarding mental health and breast cancer do not change the facts regarding maternal mortality.
You are well behind the discussion Ed. Chris, we were discussing women giving birth and women having abortions. Your words do not impact on the applicable data set, yours is another topic.
Carla, no I’m not. Whoever did so was wrong to do so.
Sydney M., don’t use fresh questions to avoid the truth or change the topic.
Phil, you’re extrapolating to avoid the truth of the data.
Pamela, I doubt whoever did it was even smart enough to think that. I think they were just numbskulls.
I feel so left out…lol
Mary:
You could be right and I certainly respect your insights. Your word of caution is well taken.
However, as I and many other local pro-lifers (and truthseeker above) have had similar experiences in our signs defaced/stolen/knocked down on multiple occasions, coupled with the fact of so many reports from accross the country in ’08 of vandalism of McCain/Palin signs, plus as activist pro-lifers our having witnessed on hundreds of occasions the rage/flipping off/laying on the horn/swerving/expletive screaming from livid “choicers”…and so on, the sign slashing fits the behavior profile that we have become accustomed to from those quarters. But of course we do not know for certain it was not a prankster kid. Just seems though the sign slashing fits the M.O. of the screaming lunatic type of ”choicer”.
At the time of delivery or abortion, yes abortion provides a slightly lower death rate. But due to the complications it engenders, a year after the delivery vs. abortion, women with abortions have a higher death rate. Also, in 1980 the US rate of breast cancer was 8%. Due to more cumulative numbers of women having gotten abortions in the meanwhile, AND due to the aging of women who got abortions in the 1970’s and 1980’s who are now getting old enough to develop cancer, today in 2010 the rate of breast cancer is about 13%. Europe’s lowest rate of breast cancer is in Ireland, where there is Europe’s lowest rate of abortion. Also, nuns have a higher rate of breast cancer than most women because nuns have an extremely low maternity rate and therefore are overly high on estrogen throughout their lives, whereas women who have babies have consequently lower estrogen, more progesterone, and therefore less breast cancer.
‘…yes abortion provides a slightly lower death rate…’ – no, not slightly lower. 9-11 times lower. Maybe you could let Sydney M. know.
‘…a year after the delivery vs. abortion, women with abortions have a higher death rate…’ – how high? What impact does it have on the overall rate? Does it change the comparative ratio by any significant margin? Does the ratio become 8.5-10.5 to one instead? Oh what a change! Scientific evidence for the correlation between deaths and the abortion in the 12 months following the termination?
‘in 1980 the US rate of breast cancer was 8%’ – ‘today in 2010 the rate of breast cancer is about 13%’ – do you have any scientific/statistical date to support your asserted correlations? Where is the proof of any link between abortions and the increased breast cancer rate? Do you realise that there are a massive number of possible causes evinced by change over that period? All the scientific information I’ve seen precludes your claim, so you will need to enlighten me.
Do you realise how many environmental and social variations there are between Ireland and other countries, to state the difference is due to the illegality of abortion is a big stretch. Any evidence?
Nuns also supposedly don’t have sex. Could the lack of release of hormones etc. which occur through the sexual act have an effect? Do you have scientific evidence for your claim?
You have made a number of claims Randy, all you need to do now is provide some relevant evidence.
Well, Cranium, what I CAN provide is the understanding that maternal death numbers include not only deaths during labor and delivery itself, but any maternal death in the first 42 days of the child’s life. In addition, some maternal death number tolls include all deaths from women who had abortions in addition to those who died during or after delivery. Now, if the abortion numbers are included in the maternal death numbers then, of course the maternal death numbers would appear to be much higher.
For example, also from the CDC, “‘Maternal deaths’ are defined by the WHO as ‘the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of the pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and the site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management, but not from accidental or incidental causes’.” http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf
It also states that if a woman died of indirect maternal causes of death, such as a previously existing diseases, the death is classified as a maternal death.
They also point out that the rate of “maternal deaths” is rising, not due to an increased risk of maternity, but because they are now including both direct and indirect effects being included and because they are now including pregnancy status on death certificates. Woman is pregnant and happens to die of a heart attack? It is now a maternal death, even if the pregnancy was simply incidental.
In addition, those rates are based upon rates per 100,000. For every 100,000 pregnancy outcomes, those 9-11 times numbers you are citing are based upon the number of complications of abortions not out of every 100,000 abortions but for every 100,000 pregnancy outcomes in total. This drastically skews the way the numbers come out.
As they say, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
No Elisabeth, the CDC data I supplied are per 100,000 live births for the maternal mortality rate and per 100,000 abortions. The maternal death rates do NOT include deaths from abortion.
The maternal mortality rate data I have supplied is LIVE BIRTHS.
And again, no. The abortion death rate is per 100,000 actual abortions. It is NOT pregnancy outcomes in total. The numbers are not skewed.
The rates are pure – maternal mortality per LIVE BIRTHS and abortion fatalities per ACTUAL ABORTIONS. There is no overlap or double figuring involved.
Do all abortion deaths go reported as such? This could certainly effect the accuracy of the reporting.
Who reports them? The clinic? The doctor who cares for woman’s complications? The coroner? I have cared for women with abortion complications and as far as I know they were treated and discharged, we filed no reports.
During an undercover abortion clinic investigation in the late 70’s it was discovered that many abortion related deaths had not been reported as such. Could this happen more often than is known?
Again, just asking.
Hi Randy Crawford,
A word of caution concerning any statements about a breast cancer abortion link. Until my daughter became a published researcher I, like everyone, fell into the trap of pointing to a study and saying “see, it proves I’m /we’re right”.
No responsible researcher ever says any such thing, No study is ever final, settles an issue, gives a final answer or “proves” anything, it only provides evidence support or disproving.
There will always be other researchers ready to criticize a study, find evidence to the contrary, and conduct another study.
Yes we can and should make people aware of studies. We should encourage them to do their own research of these studies, pro and con, and draw their own conlusions. But we have to be very careful of falling into the trap of claiming a study “proves” something. It never “proves” anything.
BTW this advice goes for both sides of this debate as people are as inclined to point to studies they claim “disprove” any ABC link.
The ABC link remains neither proven or disproven.
Cranium,
Even if abortion is not thrown in the mix, Elisabeth points out other factors that may be wrongly listed as maternal deaths and effect the statistics. I pointed out that abortion deaths may not always be reported as such. Could these be factors effecting the statistics?
This line of discussion is hard to follow. The death rate for abortion is very close to 50%. Occasionally, the mom dies, and occasionally, the baby lives. Overall, though, two go in the clinic alive and one comes out alive. What am I missing?
Exihibit Z: pro choice vandalism in Seattle:
http://stmaryvalleybloom.org/prochoicevandalism.html
I posted the link to the exact documentation from the CDC that I cited. Anyone who cares to see can go look, rather than simply take Cranium’s word as to what it does or does not say (or my word for that matter, but I didn’t expect it to be taken as the be all and end all, which is why I posted the link).
I am not a scientist, but I read that women who die in childbirth are generally high risk in the first place. Wouldn’t that have to be taken into account in comparing morality rates between women who die from abortions and women who die in childbirth?
WOW lol did I miss the part where it said this was done by a Pro-Choice Supporter? It couldn’t be just punks who happen to own a knife huh? Ok let’s assume it was a Pro-Choicer I would want to know where this sign was placed. Right outside a clinic? There is almost no info on this incident but you guys have already figured out who did it and why… I sure hope you people don’t actually turn up for jury duty where someone life hangs in the balance.
As far as Pro-Choice harassment… How many Pro-Choice Protesters have there been out in front of your house? It happens all the time to people who work for PP and Pro-Choice politicians. How many “Pro-Lifers” are in prison due to violence and murder? Your Husband was afraid? How do you think the families of any abortion doctor feel every single day waiting to lose a mother, father, or even an innocent by stander to “Pro-Life violence” When it comes to violence the “Pro-Life” teams score far more points….
Tiller claimed to have killed 60,000 in abortion. That is quite a record of violence I would say. Unless you know of an abortionist, Biggz that killed more humans than that??
Wise words Mary. And I do take your point about the data not being perfect.I very much doubt that there would be a significant change in the ratio however. Maternal delivery death rates would still be vastly higher than abortion death rates. There are probably women who die in abortion who would also die in childbirth.
And perhaps you should take a close look at the links I provided Elisabeth. To save people seeking out the old thread, here they are again:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5202a1.htm#fig1
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5511a1.htm#tab19
What you are missing row1 is the actual point being discussed.
Carla, emotive statements don’t win the argument. Biggz is talking about activist activities.
Actually, those are links that you posted to Sydney before I even entered the discussion. Don’t let little details like facts get in your way, though.
Bravo Biggz!!! Thank you for pointing out the obvious. It seems most people here need a refresher course on which group engages in intimidation and violence. Pro-lifers are some of the most hateful people I know.
Nice dodge Carla…
The country is split down the middle about the question if abortion is murder, however there is no dispute at all about the number of doctors that have been murdered. I’m sure Dr. Tiller aborted more than 60,000 fetuses which is legal in the USA but killing 7 doctors in cold blood is murder and illegal in the USA…
HUGE DISTINCTIONS!
Also, it is exactly that type of statement that shows support for the murderers of doctors and clinic employees. You are aiding Terrorism Carla.
Elisabeth, your picture paints a very false impression of your proclaimed innocence. The ‘discussion’ referred to those links and where I had posted them. You are too coy!
I think it’s very obvious as to who doesn’t let facts get in the way.
Yea Anti-Choicers get so emotionally charged into their “Defending of Life” that actual medical facts “not based on political ideology” are sort of pushed to the side by the emotional tidal wave.
Pro-Choice emotions are centered on defending freedom not “stopping murder” which is an obvious emotional response to poorly framed and cherry picked medical facts.
Carla, your deflecting comments and refusal to denounce the murder of doctors promotes the use of violence against American Citizens. Just an FYI.
Upon rereading a post I made on another topic I realized how perfectly it made my point here as well so repost it here as well. This is from the “Fake” bomb scare article…
The clinic, which was bombed twice in 1997, and an adjacent building were evacuated, but a bomb technician determined that a suspicious box in the trash can was not an explosive.
Yea I can’t believe a 63 year old woman would be a little nervous about a strange package in the trash when that clinic had ALREADY BEEN BOMBED TWICE!!!! There is no way they will get those charges to stick to anything since she has already lived through 2 BOMBINGS at this location… These charges are an attempt to recover city funds spent on a false alarm. Had the building not already been BOMBED TWICE by “Pro-Lifers” maybe she wouldn’t have been as nervous at 63 years of age…
By all means do go on telling everyone about the Pro-Choice violence you must cope with….
Try again you stated that you had provided those links FOR ME. I had not yet entered the discussion… you provided them to Sydney.
How precisely am I avoiding the facts by pointing out… the facts?
And what does innocence have to do with anything?
Hi cranium,
Thank you. I’ve reviewed the studies you linked and have found some interesting factors.
The death rate from cardiomyopathy has increased while the death rates from embolism and hemorrhage have decreased. As Elisabeth pointed out there were pre-existing medical conditions and these included respiratory(11%), cardiovascular(34%) and neurovascular (7%). Some of these women did not die until a year or longer after giving birth. 17% of women who died in childbirth suffered from medical conditions. Most hemorrhagic deaths were from ectopic pregnancy.
I don’t pretend to be any statistician but this does not appear to be clear cut that these women died because of pregnancy and childbirth but rather there seems to be any number of factors involved. Perhaps they were willing to take greater risks despite their pre-existing medical proglems. Perhaps their conditions were undiagnosed or they lacked proper prenatal care.
I also found the “limitations” section quite informative.
Where did I state that I provided those links ‘FOR YOU’? The nearest thing I can find is where I said ‘And perhaps you should take a close look at the links I provided Elisabeth’, as in ‘HEY! Elisabeth, have a look at the links I provided’. It does not say ‘FOR Elisabeth’.
Innocence has absolutely nothing to do with it when you are involved :-)
From what you are telling me Mary, it would appear that abortion has the potential to save even more lives than it already does. It would have been less risky. If they died a year after birth then they weren’t recorded as ‘maternal mortality’.
Oh, I like the easy questions:
cranium
September 7th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
And perhaps you should take a close look at the links I provided Elisabeth.
You couldn’t have provided them to me, as I had not yet entered the conversation. You very clearly provided them for Sydney.
For now I will ignore the personal slam.
Read my post above Elisabeth. That’s “HEY! Elisabeth, read my post above’, not ‘Read my post which is “hovering in the air over” Elisabeth’. Read it. I did not provide them for you, they were for Sydney, as is quite clear to those who can discern English correctly.
“Slam’? ‘Slam’? – that was barely a tickle.
cranium,
I would think that is speculation. Perhaps the woman who is being aborted would have done very well with her pregnancy. Perhaps the healthy active woman will develop a complication in her pregnancy. Who knows??
Hi Biggz,
Already denounced the killing of Tiller right after it happened and several times on several different threads since then. Pay attention.
I think your comments are hilarious. FYI
I thought they were all pretty hilarious Carla! I’m so glad our pro-abort friends come here! It makes me feel special!
:)
Let’s see. What were we talking about? Violence against prolifers? Yeah.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/sep/10090701.html
Wise words again Mary. It still wouldn’t impact to any extent on the comparative mortality rates though.
Yes Sydney M., I think you are so very ‘special’. In a number of ways. I’m sure the kiddies in special ed classes are are happy their teachers are there too ;-)
Do you think it wise to start an activists ‘body-count’ Carla?
I think that I am free to comment in any way I see fit. As you do, Cran.
I don’t know why but I picture you and Biggz with red faces and steam coming out of your ears. But then again you just might be the same person. I can check.
Done with trolls for the night.
Yes Sydney M., I think you are so very ‘special’. In a number of ways. I’m sure the kiddies in special ed classes are are happy their teachers are there too
Aaaand this will be your first warning, Cranium. Post without the snarky insults or be banned. Thank you.
Oh, and btw, nice insult to those with special needs. But then, we all know how very sensitive you are to the needs of others…
Point taken Kel, apologies to Sydney M. and those with special needs.
You have absolutely no idea of my sensitivities to the needs of others. You cannot even guess at the forms of assistance I have and do provide to a number of groups in the community. It is your ‘team’ who persist in foisting your beliefs onto others – where’s the sensitivity in that?
It is your ‘team’ who persist in foisting your beliefs onto others – where’s the sensitivity in that?
If it’s about “beliefs”, I’d like to see the information and data that shows that abortion doesn’t kill a unique human being with individual DNA and a beating heart, please.
And you cannot guess, Cranium, at the forms of assistance we in the pro-life movement actually offer to women who experience unplanned pregnancies. We are of the scientific and moral opinion that there are TWO lives in such situations which are both of value.
If that’s “foisting” my beliefs on others, then I’m happy to do it.
Let’s see the help we pro-lifers offer women and pregnant women in need.
Just to name a few of the services:
Foundation For Life — offers classes, help with getting things for the baby, help for the mother, counseling, free services done by an OB-GYN, ultrasounds, et cetera.
Catholic Charities — adoption services, counseling, et cetera. (I know someone who was adopted through them)
The Gabriel Project — offers baby items for mothers among other help. (This is just one Arch-Diocese I found that offers this program, I’m sure there’s others).
Rachel’s Vineyard — For those who regret their abortions.
Many of these places offer counseling or, if a woman decides to keep her baby, baby items, and some offer adoption services.
If it were just a matter of “beliefs” we would be forcing our beliefs on others, but it’s not just a matter of beliefs.
egg + sperm = baby (conception)
If what a woman is pregnant with is just a mass of tissues then what do women give birth to?
Wanted to add that my last little one and I received help through Catholic Charities. We did not have insurance and they charged us minimally for all prenatal care and a water birth! Such a blessing!!
Also, I am proud to be a Rachel’s Vineyard facilitator. :)
Thank you for the list Mother in Texas. By no means exhaustive of course as our love, care, concern and compassion for women in unplanned pregnancies knows no bounds.
Foisting our beliefs on others? Oh, yeah, cuz like this isn’t a pro-life blog or anything, nor do they find themselves commenting here voluntarily…that must mean…We are forcing the abortion advocates to comment, oh, the horror! Must..stop..forcing..them..to..type….urgh!! Someone…light Dian’s superhero beacon…only projectile condoms can save us now!
LOL knows no bounds…. I can think of one or two…… Abortion & Contraception.
Once again Catholic Charities, Rachel’s Vineyard, and the Gabriel Project are all Catholic Backed Pro-Life groups. I personally can’t stand Rachel’s Vineyard. It’s an imposed Christian guilt retreat. Come let us help you with the nonsensical guilt Christians imposed on you in the first place…
But, back to violence… So how many CPC’s have been bombed to date? How many Anti-choice supporters murdered in cold blood? I would like to point out that all of the men and women who are in PRISON for acts of violence and murder in the name of the “Pro-Life” movement were doing what god told them to do… One of the most violent “Pro-Life” groups is called The Army of God and they actually celebrate and promote the killing of American citizens. Scott Roeder is a member of this group and he is touted as a hero of the “Pro-Life” movement by this group and others.
You see the more you demonize something with right-wing rhetoric the sooner one of your followers will decide that violence is a valid solution to the demonic scourge and they become “Holy Warriors” in the name of god. You know like 9/11… I find it ironic that before anti-choice protesters were called “Sidewalk Councilors” they were called “Prayer Warriors”…
I’m sure you offer much assistance Kel. The only difference is probably that I have helped in a very broad range of areas. When I think about it, I don’t think any of them would be for causes that you would have the slightest problem with, isn’t that funny.
Well perhaps it’s time I started ‘foisting’ my beliefs on others. Such as faith being dangerous and unwarranted.
It’s still predicated on your beliefs Mother In Texas. It’s just your beliefs.
How droll ninek. You are quite entitled to have blogs etc where you expound on your beliefs. And because they are in the public domain, I am entitled to proffer an alternative opinion and to call you out on inaccuracies. It’s the public displays and political lobbying that I have a strong disagreement with.
Seems fitting that they would take a knife to the sign just as they do to the babies.
Libs are all for Free Speech, unless that Free Speech speaks the truth.
If people want to see how wrong abortion is, they should try explaining it to a child. See the shock and horror in their face.
Cranium,
There are also FACTS to back up my stance, and I have YET to see YOU post ANYTHING with real facts to back up your position. In fact, I’ve asked you on another post!
So astound me. Back up YOUR claims with FACTS.
All I’ve really seen you put is: ”that’s just your opinion” or “that’s just your religious beliefs” but you don’t back up ANY of your claims with facts.
Not so “Cranium” says, ”where’s the sensitivity in that?”
So, let me get this straight, you would have been one of those lovely KKK people who would have been offended by someone defending the civil liberties of black people during the civil rights movement! lol… You do not even understand how twisted your mindset is!
If defending civil liberties of those who are not capable of doing so for themselves, offends you, then perhaps you need counseling – there is no one here who can help a mind like yours!
Personally, I could care less about those who are offended. I was given life by a woman who chose life, and by your standards, she should have killed me… And in your mind – this is sensitive, to kill, to choose death? You are warped! That is the kind of sensitive made for Sharia Law, babe.
Don’t you feel dirty? Don’t you feel in your conscience that to kill a child is wrong? Don’t you see that you do a disservice to women to say that they are nothing more than whores who cannot control their sexual parts, as if they are animals without a thought process? Do you not see the damage you cause to society as a whole?
I would say you need to do some deep, deep, reflection. You may not have to favor overturning laws, but you do need to check your conscience for the difference between right and wrong.
You have ‘the wrong end of the stick’ or ‘the wrong side of the coin’ FreeWeThePeople.
I believe in society advancing. Things like the end of miscegenation laws, the right of women and black people to vote and become politicians, equal pay for women, women’s right to choose, gay marriage and adoption.
Whereas you seem to hark back to an age where many of these inequalities were predicated on a patriarchal society.
‘to say they are nothing more than whores who cannot control their sexual parts, as if they are animals without a thought process?’ – again, you have a skewed viewpoint. It is your insistence that women conform to some sort of arbitrary behavior predicated on your beliefs which spawns words such as this. Women CAN control their ‘sexual parts’, they also own those ‘sexual parts’ – and no-one has the right to tell them what they can and cannot do with them, including you.
I do favor overturning laws – the ones which persist with inequality and are based on faith and hypocrisy.
I’ve reflected on life, people and the universe for decades, thus my conscience is well-formed, well-INformed and, also, clear.
So if you believe women, blacks, and gays are a minority, then why do you feel them deserving of equal pay? I personally do see them as a minority, so you will need to explain that one.
Why would someone who is less than; in your mind, deserve the same? Makes no sense.
Your thought processes are all jacked up.
I believe women, blacks and gays, are beautiful people; each capable of anything they choose, especially when they do have not have people like you in their lives! I believe each of them to be people of strong mind, body and spirit. I do not se a woman, black, gay, or lesbian as less than anyone… But you do! Interesting that you think you “like” them… Weird.
You make excuses for people based on gender, color, creed, and sexual preference… Your world is a box and everyone has a category. You do not see people as human beings; but rather as things that without the likes of you and your oppression, would never be able to find a place in the world. When in fact, it is people like you who has created the very fckd-up-ed-ness we all live in today.
You and yours have created these policies and thus a society that no longer sees the need to accept self responsibility; thus everyone walks about loathing oneself and wondering why emptiness resides in their heart… Natural Law has been robbed from them!
You cannot be the savior of the very mess you and yours created. You see people as less than and therefore can never see them as your equal. You said as much in your above quote, but then I doubt you are intelligent to understand any of it; thus, you will keep perpetrating a fraud in the name of saving those who cannot save themselves all the while being the racist, sexist, homophobe, bigot, that you are… Good luck with that.
“Women CAN control their ‘sexual parts’, they also own those ‘sexual parts’ – and no-one has the right to tell them what they can and cannot do with them, including you.”
Your right. But you forget men. Women AND men CAN and SHOULD be taught and held accountable for controlling their ‘sexual parts’.
Once they create a fetus using their ‘sexual parts’ their decisions have been made.
After all, a fetus is not a ‘sexual part’.
Keep working at it Cranium. You’ll get there.
Tut tut FreeWeThePeople – you totally misrepresent what I say and then attempt to build a case on it.
I do not believe those groups to be minorities – women comprise roughly 50% of the opoulation and black people certainly aren’t a small percentage of the population. If anything, it’s those who wish to impose their beliefs and behaviors on others who are the minority!
And even if they were in small numbers, how does that equate to ‘someone who is less’ in your mind? I believe that they are equal. I’m not seeing that in your words.
‘capable of anything they choose, especially when they do have not have people like you in their lives’ – excuse me, who’s the one attempting to limit people’s choice here?
‘I do not see a woman, black, gay, or lesbian as less than anyone…’ – yet you would restrict their choices to marry or have abortions.
‘You make excuses for people based on gender, color, creed, and sexual preference…’ – what excuses? Equality? The right to wed or choose?
‘your oppression, would never be able to find a place in the world’ – and again, who is it that is placing limits on people?
‘the racist, sexist, homophobe, bigot, that you are…’ – wow! What sort of thought processes does it take for you to reach such a ludicrous accusation? Gob-smacking!
You condemn yourself on your own evidence. Absolutely amazing.