Pro-lifers push back against intimidation attempts

Well, well. With a unified voice pro-lifers are condolent but refusing to cower and accept blame for the murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller by a noncompliant schizophrenic.

This is such a surprise it's newsworthy. According to The Washington Independent yesterday, which apparently reads this blog:

... [A]nti-abortion activists have begun to push back against the news that Department of Justice dispatched federal marshals to protect abortion clinics that requested extra, temporary security....

washington independent logo.gif

And the murder of a military recruiter in Little Rock - Muslim convert Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad is the suspect - has prodded activists to portray coverage of Tiller's murder as unfairly slanted and overblown. Jill Stanek, an anti-abortion blogger and activist ... responded... with a simple, unsubtle question: "Where are Obama and Holder?" Gary Bauer... told TWI that the "benefit of the doubt" was given to Islamic terrorists but not to anti-abortion extremists....

By the close of Tuesday, anti-abortion activists had moved from messages of condolence for Tiller to aggressive pushback on any use of the murder as a political issue....

Pro-lifers are also refusing to sidestep who Tiller was, what he did. Ann Coulter's column yesterday on Tiller was quite the back-atcha...

ann coulter 7.jpg

...Tiller was protected not only by a praetorian guard of elected Democrats, but also by the protective coloration of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America - coincidentally, the same church belonged to by Tiller's fellow Wichita executioner, the BTK killer....

I wouldn't kill an abortionist myself, but I wouldn't want to impose my moral values on others. No one is for shooting abortionists. But how will criminalizing men making difficult, often tragic, decisions be an effective means of achieving the goal of reducing the shootings of abortionists?

Following the moral precepts of liberals, I believe the correct position is: If you don't believe in shooting abortionists, then don't shoot one.

Shock, even the Los Angeles Times editorial board stood up for pro-lifers...

It's unfair to ask antiabortion activists to muffle their message because it might inspire an unbalanced individual to commit an atrocity.

.... as did Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz:

We need to be really, really careful about blaming people for murder.

The reprehensible slaying of George Tiller, because he performed abortions, shocks the conscience. The man who pulled the trigger - a suspect is already in custody - is responsible.

Pro-aborts did not expect this sort of response. Their usual attacks aren't sticking. Frustrated, they're becoming even more frenetic, to the point of counterproductivity. Couldn't believe Feministe blogger Emily Douglas was willing to link to the photos I posted yesterday of partial birth aficionado LeRoy Carhart's ramshackle and filthy mill in order to accuse me of trying to "aid and abet the crazy ones who will resort to violence"...

rh reality check aid and abet.jpg

Emily wrote, "She wants to prove her point that it's a dingy building? Over Carhart's safety, and the safety of his staff and patients?"

I'm confused why Emily isn't concerned about keeping Carhart's patients safe from him. Are we to blame her if and when Carhart kills one of them?

When Feministe blogger Jill reposted Emily's piece, she ratcheted up the title a bit. You know Feministe, the blog with the logo of the little girl holding a gun.

feministeaid and abet.jpg

Emily and Jill need to also accuse Carhart of publicizing his own whereabouts with a 6x10' billboard, including a huge arrow pointing to the entrance of his mill, as well as a webpage that includes a map to the clinic and directions.

carhart clinic 3.jpg

They're blaming OR for not knowing Tiller shooter Scott Roeder's diagnosis when he called for information on Tiller's appearance in court earlier this year and because he left 1 comment on OR's blog in 2007.

I guess that means we're to request psychological evaluations as a prerequisite for commenting... although I must give credit to this blog's moderators for picking up on a pro-abort nutcase, researching him, and reporting him to the FBI last year.

[HT for RH Reality Check/Feministe posts: Steve Ertelt of LifeNews.com; LAT and WE pieces: Kristina]


Comments:

If that "clinic" was another medical clinic, for example, a Dentist's office, it would have been shut down for the safety of the patients.

But because he provides ABORTIONS, he's ABOVE the law. NO one is ABOVE the LAW. How can women trust this man with a dilapidated building is beyond me.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 4, 2009 8:16 AM


Ann Coulter was spot on.

We are under no obligation to act as bodyguards for abortionists. Sometimes those who live by causing violent deaths die that way, too.

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at June 4, 2009 8:19 AM


Hey Liz, Wait until I take a few pics of the abortion clinic I go to. This gave me a great idea. The "Center For Women's Health" in Ohio put the D in DUMP!....holes in the windows. It's disgusting. Trust me. I wouldn't take a dying dog there!

Posted by: heather at June 4, 2009 8:24 AM


Doyle, I agree.

Posted by: heather at June 4, 2009 8:25 AM


To anybody who would label me a terrorist, I say, How dare you? I may be a vocal and opinionated gal, but I would never murder anyone. I'd never harm anyone. If you want to fear someone, fear the pro-death crowd!!!

Posted by: heather at June 4, 2009 8:30 AM


I am in the middle on this one.

I agree with the Los Angeles times that you can't expect anti-choicers to stop equating abortion to murder when that is the whole justification for their position.

On the other hand, it is disingenuous for anti-choicers to portray Mr. Roeder's act as entirely disconnected from the pro-life movement. While Mr. Roeder may be mentally ill, his act was not random. The man actually subscribed to a newsletter called Prayer and Action news, which advocated the use of violence to stop abortion! He listened to people comparing Dr. Tiller to Hitler and, based on that, reached the conclusion that Dr. Tiller should be killed. Mr. Roeder is also one of many who have reached the same conclusion. There is even a terrorist organization called the Army of God that advocates the use of violence to stop abortion. There is a reason that Dr. Tiller routinely wore a bullet-proof vest and it wasn't because he thought might attract random violence by an isolated mentally-ill individual.

I would not tar all of you with the same brush. I would stand up for your right to say that abortion is murder and, even to use the word "baby killer", but I also believe that you all have (and had before Dr. Tiller's murder a moral obligation to make it clear that you do not support, condone, or cheer violence against abortion providers. I also believe that this obligation applied before Some of you have met this obligation. Others like O'Reilly, Randall Terry, and Anne Coulter have not.

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 8:36 AM


I have NEVER supported, condoned or cheered violence against abortion providers!! Name some names on this board that have, Prochoicer.

On the other hand, don't prochoicers support, condone and cheer violence against the unborn in the womb?

Posted by: Carla at June 4, 2009 8:41 AM


So, you're saying that just because he subscribed to a newsletter which said to use violence that pro lifers are responsible? Yet again, you're profiling.

Pro Lifers do NOT subscribe to using violence. We have nothing to do with any groups that say to use force or violence. Please stop profiling. We really want to help women who are in crisis pregnancies. We want to offer them love and help - financial and spiritual. We do this through CPC that offer FREE ultrasounds, baby clothes, maternity clothes, diapers, financial support, referrals to organizations that help them get housing and jobs.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 4, 2009 8:42 AM


Prochoicer, we had ALL said repeatedly that we do not condone violence long before Tiller was killed. Everytime you volunteer to do something within the pro-life movment, you sign a statement of nonviolence that says that you will not *duh* do anything violent. The official pro-life position is very obvious to anyone within the movement. It always have been.

I saw someone else use the argument that by comparing Tiller to Hitler we are somehow responsible for a lunitic's actions. If this is the case, would you hold the entire left wing media and citizenry responsible if a nutcase killed Frm. Pres. Bush? He was compared to Hilter constantly.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=george+bush+hitler+comparison&aq=0&oq=george+bush+hitler+com&aqi=g1

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 8:49 AM


Carla,

I know you don't. Also, my point isn't so much about posters here. I am refuting the claim that Jill is making that this is just an isolated act by a mentally ill person.

I note however that in this very thread, Mr. Chadwick upthread said: "Sometimes those who live by causing violent deaths die that way, too." It is hard not to read that as "He had it coming."


Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 8:50 AM


Ah, but Lauren! The proaborts all have selective memories when it comes to what they have called others.... surely you won't hold them responsible for their own actions, will you?

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at June 4, 2009 8:52 AM


More women died under Tillers "care" than died under BTK. Tiller's funeral is at the church that fired Tillers chaplain Gardner. Tat is another mess. Gardner even offered funerals for the aborted body parts and blessing. Tiller was full service, don'cha know.
The dishonest pro choicers seem to accuse us of reaishing the death of Tiller or the women under the hand of BTK. Muslims are famous for false accusations.

Posted by: xppc at June 4, 2009 8:53 AM


Read it however you want to, Prochoicer. It is a simple fact of life. I believe it's a very old saying, too: "Those who live by the sword die by the sword". Remember that one?

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at June 4, 2009 8:54 AM


It's also clear that you don't have a real understanding of the mind of a schizophrenic. My family has been deeply and profoundly touched by schizophrenia. My uncle was a schizophrenic who killed himself inside a mental institution because the voices told him to. My mom's cousin literally thought that President Clinton was telling her to come see him in order to figure out her disability payments.

You can not apply logic to the mind of a schizophrenic. They opperate outside of logic. If someone said "We do not condone violence" they might interpret that as a coded message to kill. It's very tragic, but honestly no one can be held responsible for the actions of a schizophrenic.

All we can do is try our hardest to get them treatment.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 8:59 AM


ProChoicerForKilling,

Gee, Prochoicer is "in the middle on this one", how very thoughtful and balanced of you. So you are in the part of the "middle" that continues to try to tie peaceful, loving pro-life people to killers and violent groups. Then you go like some elite gestapo speech-police telling us which words we can and cannnot use, and telling us we have to state the obvious again and again regarding our lack of support for violence.

Well, sorry prochoicerforDeath, we don't take our speech instructions from you and no one is buying your lame, hateful attempts to tie loving, peaceful pro-lifers to the fringe groups you mention.

For example, you disingenuously attempt the to link the killer to pro-life groups because he "subscribed to a newsletter".

But remember when the FBI searched Unabomber Ted Kaczinski's shack, after his brother turned him in? They found only a handful of personal items and just a single, well-read book: Earth in the Balance, by Al Gore.

ProchoicerforKilling, does that mean Al Gore's political party, the Democrats, and his global warming hoax should be discredited on that basis alone?

ProchoicerforKilling, please show us your intellectual honesty and consistency by providing links to blogs where you tried to link Al Gore and Democrats to the Unibomber.

Of course Democrats and Al Gore are not linked to the Unibomber any more than pro-lifers are linked to this crazed loner that killed the abortionist.

Al Gore is refuted by science, logic and common sense, not by the fact that the Unibomber read his book. Any one of us can read the peer-reviewed scientific research paper describing how global warming is not caused by human activity, that is signed by over 31,000 scientists, at http://www.oism.org/pproject/

And the Democrats are refuted by history -- their big government, socialist schemes have hurt millions around the world every time they are tried, and they won't work here. But we don't need to tie the Democrats failed policies to Ted Kaczinski to prove they are worthless.

ProChoicerForDeath and the liberal drive-by media should not jump to the conclusion that peaceful, loving pro-life people somehow drove a madman to kill a doctor in Kansas.

Posted by: GodsImage at June 4, 2009 9:01 AM


"Well, well. With a unified voice pro-lifers are condolent but refusing to cower and accept blame for the murder of late-term abortionist George TIller by a noncompliant schizophrenic."

Do you mean Tiller or Roeder was non compliant schizophrenic?

The blame game is for the pro deathers. They blame the pregnancy on the environment, the boyfriend and everything but their own deeds.

You reap what you sow. Abortion kids people into believing you will not reap what you sow. (std's)

Posted by: xppc at June 4, 2009 9:03 AM


xppc, Roeder was a non compliant schizophrenic.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:06 AM


But don't you see the difference between saying "President Bush's use of propaganda or willingness to ignore the rule of law is similar to Hitler" and saying "Dr. Tiller was a mass murderer like Hitler?" The left's Hitler comparisons seem to relate more to George Bush's political tactics rather than implying that President Bush was literally a mass murderer.

The more apt comparison you may want to make is to violent leftist radicals in the 60s. They did take some leftist beliefs to their logical conclusion -- if the war in Vietnam was tantamount to murder, then it would make sense that some people would conclude it is acceptable to use violence to try to stop the war. I DO think 60s leftists had similar obligations to what I am arguing antichoicers have now.


Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 9:07 AM


Mr. Image,

Al Gore's book does not advocate violence as a solution to environmental problems. The Prayer and Action Newsletter advocated violence as a solution to abortion.

Lauren,

I understand that Mr. Roeder was not mentally stable. But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target abortion providers?

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 9:12 AM


No, pro-choicer. We're talking about rhetoric inspiring crazy people to kill. Do you really think an unmedicated schizophrenic is going to gauge comparrisons effectively? They hear "Bush=Hilter" and act.

Futhermore, people called Bush "Hitler" because of the number of people killed in the war in Iraq. They said he was directly responsible for their deaths just as Hitler was responsible for the deaths of the holocaust victims.

The fact that George Tiller was directly responsible for the deaths of 60,000 doesn't change the level of culpability of those screaming "Hitler!"

Either they're all guilty, or they're all innocent. You can't have it both ways.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:13 AM


Pro-choicer, um I hate to break this to you but shizohprenics are everywhere. The pro-life movement has no more or less than any other movement. They're attracted to movements in general because they feed their parinoia. Again, the actual movement may do nothing dierctly to support these dillusions, or even speak directly contrary to them. It doesn't matter. In a schizophrenic's mind ANYTHING someone says can be twisted into meaning that they should carry out a specific action.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:16 AM


Sorry for all the typos I am nursing while typing.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:17 AM


http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=By_Illness&Template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay.cfm&TPLID=54&ContentID=23036

Here's a good thing to read before going any further in the conversation. You have to understand that a schizophrenic does not have the same types of thought processes as a neuro-typical individual.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:19 AM


A classy medical establishment might put out brochures and ads showing pics of their fine, respectable facilities.

The pro-aborts are mad about pics of Carhart' nastaaaay place. It's not a big puzzle to determine the reason.

It IS very odd to feature a single message in the categories of 'abortion', 'assholes', and 'reproductive rights'. With respect to anatomy, I find that the middle term has zero relation to the other two terms. With respect to ethics, I find that the first term has zero relation to the last term.

So.......instruction in both anatomy and ethics is recommended to the featured feminazis.

Posted by: pharmer at June 4, 2009 9:22 AM


Lauren,

I would agree with you that comparing Bush to Hitler in the sense you describe is something that would trigger the speaker's obligation to make clear that murdering Bush is unacceptable. (I note that the first few hits on the link you provided do not describe Bush as a mass murderer.) A belief that Bush was a mass murderer is not the centerpiece of the left's opposition to Bush, nor am I am aware of any mainstream media figures calling Bush a mass murderer. I opposed Bush but I don't think he is a mass murderer.

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 9:23 AM


The photos of Dr. Carhart's clinic made me angry too:

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_real_estate_of_abortion_politics

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 9:32 AM


Pro-choicer. You are a presumably mentally stable person who understands the concept of hyperbole. A schizophrenic is not. They hear "George Bush is just like Hitler!" and think "OH NO I have to kill him, he's a horrible person!"

Think about Kieth Olberman's "Worst Person in the World" segment. A normal person can sort through things logically and realize that Carrie Prejean is not, in fact, the worst person in the world. A schizophrenic hears the same thing and takes its meaning completely literally and begins to build a world around the statement.

It doesn't matter *why* someone makes a comparrision between X person and Y person. It doesn't matter if the comparrison is valid. The only thing that matters is the comparrison is made. If you are going to hold the pro-life movement responsible for the actions of a unmedicated schizophrenic, be prepared for a lot of blame to come around to your side as well.

The bottom line is that political rhetoric exists all over the political spectrum. A mentally healthy person can sort through the rhetoric. A mentally ill person can not.

OF course, this is all rather moot. A schizophrenic can also completely fabricate a situation from thin air and act on those delusions. Apart from doing all we can to get these people help, general society can not be held accountble for their actions.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:35 AM


Oh, and just in case you don't believe that people accused George Bush of murder...

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=george+bush+is+a+murderer&fr=yfp-t-501&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:39 AM


Point taken Lauren. I totally agree that some mentally unstable people can see an excuse to kill in almost anything.

But here is where I get stuck: The allegation that Dr. Tiller is a mass murderer is NOT hyperbole. It is literally what you mean, isn't it? The whole point of your opposition to abortion is that you believe it is literally murder. Therefore under your logic, George Tiller is literally a mass murderer.

So it is not that much of a leap for someone to conclude that it would be acceptable to kill Dr. Tiller to prevent further killing. That's why more mentally ill (and sane) peopple target abortion providers than, for example, short people (A crazy person could take Randy Newman's song about hating short people as inspiration to kill but it wouldn't make as much sense as killing abortion providers because you believe they are mass murderers.)

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 9:50 AM


Feministe, please explain the reason for the little girl holding a gun on your blog's logo. (See above)

Posted by: Janet at June 4, 2009 9:53 AM


Yes, Tiller was literally a mass murderer. That doesn't meant it's justifiable to kill him.

We live in a society of laws. Every one of us is entitled to a fair, just trial. I don't believe that anyone but God has the right to take a life. That includes the state or a lone vigilante.

I just read an article talking about Pres. Bush's responsibility to those who died in Irag. It ended with " "If he was walking across the street and I was driving my car…I just don’t know if he would make it."

The man was agreeing with another who literally feels that Pres. Bush is guilty of war crimes and is a mass murderer.

Does the validity of a statment matter if someone chooses to act on it? I really don't think so.

Posted by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 9:56 AM


Prochoicer, 9:32a: You wrote that article? If so, I appreciate your honesty on the looks of the Carhart clinic.

But for posting that photo you may now be in trouble with RH Reality Check and Feministe along with me.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at June 4, 2009 9:59 AM


Does that mean that Prochoicer is Ann Friedman? Sorry, I'm a slow old man who needs everything spelled out for me.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 10:05 AM


Pro-choicer,

"I am refuting the claim that Jill is making that this is just an isolated act by a mentally ill person."

The last such instance of an abortionist being murdered was eleven years ago. I'd call Tiller's incident an isolated act too.

From New York Times.com
Dr. Tiller’s death is the first such killing of an abortion provider in this country since 1998, when Dr. Barnett Slepian was shot by a sniper in his home in the Buffalo area. Dr. Tiller was the fourth doctor in the United States who performed abortions to be killed in such circumstances since 1993, statistics from abortion rights’ groups show.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/us/01tiller.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2

Posted by: Janet at June 4, 2009 10:12 AM


ProChoicerForKilling,
I finally found something I agree with you on. And you said we would never agree! ;-)

I agree that "The allegation that Dr. Tiller is a mass murderer is NOT hyperbole. George Tiller is literally a mass murderer.

Yes, this is true but somehow you want to restrict our free speech rights to point out this fact, because some crazy might hear it and do something crazy about it.

But our point in stating the truth about Dr. Tiller's role as a mass murderer was to bring him to justice in a legal way. We have to state what he is doing and then move forward in a legal way to stop him.

We can't limit our free speech because of the fact that someone might do something crazy. For example we will keep pointing out that Al Gore is leading a global warming hoax that is harming many people in the world. We don't wish violence on him, we just want to expose him and let more people understand the truth.

So, I'm glad we finally agreed that George Tiller is literally a mass murderer, maybe we can build on that good start and move on from there.

Posted by: GodsImage at June 4, 2009 10:20 AM


I love Ann Coulter.

Posted by: Jasper at June 4, 2009 10:24 AM


Excellent article:

Let's Get our Facts Straight about Tiller and Anti-Abortion Violence
Commentary
by Brian Clowes, PhD
Human Life International, Research Manager
June 3, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -
http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=10574


Posted by: Janet at June 4, 2009 10:28 AM


Oh dear me, no. I am not Ann Friedman. I just meant that I was angry about the looks of the clinic. Just that I am angry about it for the reasons outlined in Ann Friedman's post!

And Mr. Image, I usually try to be polite, but you are an idiot. I clearly said that based on YOUR logic, George Tiller is a mass murderer. Didn't say I accepted your logic.

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 10:30 AM


Pro-choicer,

"So it is not that much of a leap for someone to conclude that it would be acceptable to kill Dr. Tiller to prevent further killing."

I suppose it depends on the crowd you hand around with. Pro-lifers never condone violence.

"That's why more mentally ill (and sane) peopple target abortion providers than, for example, short people."

I doubt that is true. Please define "short" and I'd be happy to check the statistics for you.

Posted by: Janet at June 4, 2009 10:37 AM


ProChoicer,
You are barking up the wrong tree. The people you want to have this conversation with are from the Army of God. Give them a piece of your mind.

Posted by: Carla at June 4, 2009 10:45 AM


Janet,

Let's say under 5'4". :) (I am sure there are many short victims of violence -- but I don't think they are targeted for being short.)

Lauren,

I think you are quite right that the incidence of violence against abortion providers has gone down since the 1990s, though there have been vandalisms, threats, and arsons. I am worried that violence will be an upswing again, now that we have another pro-choice president.

Posted by: Pro-choicer at June 4, 2009 10:49 AM


Carla,

As I said above, I am NOT saying you guys are the same as the Army of God. I agree you should have the right to argue that abortion is murder.

I think Feministe is overstating the case and RH Reality Check are overstating the case -- but I think this blog is also overstating the case. This wasn't a random act and it isn't silly for abortion providers to be frightened of more violence.

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 10:52 AM


I think the pro aborts are reacting the way they are because the pro life side is winning and they know it.

Hearts and minds are changing and they are changing for life instead of abortion.

Posted by: Joanne at June 4, 2009 10:57 AM


Famous Atheist Comes Back to the Faith
Teresa Neumann (June 4, 2009)
"How did materialism [secularism] account for music, or human language, or love? Such mysteries finally convinced Wilson that we are spiritual beings."

Janie B. Cheaney, writing for World Magazine, asks, "Why is religious conviction, which secularists have always advised should be a private matter, such public news? Hardly a week goes by," she notes, "without some screaming headline about major shifts in personal belief."

Case in point? Cheaney points to the recent conversion of renowned author and former atheist A. N. Wilson, a journalist famous for his novels, children's books, biographies and histories.

"Wilson noticed a difference between the skeptical and the devout," writes Cheaney. "The perception of his atheist friends seemed rather parochial and flat. And phenomena lurking outside a strict materialist system gave him pause: How did materialism account for music, or human language, or love? Such mysteries finally convinced Wilson that we are spiritual beings, and that the religion of the incarnation, asserting that God made humanity in His image, and continually restores humanity in His image, is simply true. As a working blueprint for life, as a template against which to measure experience, it fits."

Find out more about Wilson's journey from Anglicanism to atheism and back to Christianity by following the link provided.

Source: Janie B. Cheaney - World Magazine/Christianity Today

Posted by: HisMan at June 4, 2009 11:10 AM


HisMan,
Very interesting. Praise God!

Posted by: Janet at June 4, 2009 11:13 AM


I understand that Mr. Roeder was not mentally stable. But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target abortion providers?

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 9:12 AM
_______________________________

What a prfoundly prejudiced, bigoted, closeminded and over generalized statement.

For pro-choicers, who think they have a market on IQ, to say these kinds of things, perhaps in a polished sort of way (listick on a pig), sounds like the George Wallace pronouncements of the 1960's.

I mean c'mon PC, your statement can be used on any group.

For example:

"But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target minorities?"

"But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target Christians?"

"But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target women?"

"But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target white males?"

"But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target military recruiters?"

"But isn't it funny how all sorts of mentally unstable people organize and target (insert name here)?"

Posted by: HisMan at June 4, 2009 11:38 AM


That author that came back to Christianity reminds me of how C.S. Lewis came back......he was a Christian but then his mother died and he became an atheist. Then through the influence and friendship with LOTR writer J.R.R. Tolkien, he came back to Christianity.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 4, 2009 11:45 AM


His Man,

All of the hypothetical questions you have posted seem reasonable to me -- so I am not sure what you are getting at.

All sorts of mentally unstable people (and sane people) DO violently target women, minorities, Christians, and military recruiters. Certain groups get targeted as a result of ideologies promoting hatred and condemnation of these groups.

So, yeah, I think it would be disingenuous for, say, David Duke, to claim that a crime of race hatred against a black person is completely random and has no relation to an ideology of racism he promotes.

Posted by: Prochoicer at June 4, 2009 12:06 PM


Prochoicer, do you need to borrow my broad brush, to paint us with? Can't you find enough to slime us with in the MSM? Doesn't your microscope show you any blemishes in the entire prolife movement that you can attack?

Hey, there are tens of millions of us out there, so surely you can find some dirt somewhere!

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at June 4, 2009 12:47 PM


I'm not very good at math, could someone crunch the numbers for me? What is 4% of 1.3 million?
Rachael C.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 4, 2009 1:27 PM


By your logic then, Prochoicer, should no one say anything about anything? I mean, some unreasonable person might commit murder?

Or, how about we all act like grown-ups, state our viewpoints to the best of our ability and recognize that Roeder's actions, like the actions of other schizophrenics (I had one as a patient once who had slit his mother's throat, sat naked on a hot stove, jumped out of a second story window, run across the street and got hit by a car. When we got him back on his meds and he found out he'd hurt his mother, who luckily survived, he bawled like a baby. He LOVED his mother.) are nearly impossible to predict and might be triggered by anyone (or no one) to do just about anything.

We need to be more proactive about mental health advocacy, not limit free speech.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 1:28 PM


"What is 4% of 1.3 million?"

52000

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 1:31 PM


Thanks Bobby, that's the number of late term abortions (greater than 16 weeks) each year, I needed it for an entry I wrote on my blog debunking pro-choice myths on late term abortions
Rachael C.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 4, 2009 1:53 PM


Always a pleasure to help debunk a myth :)

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 1:57 PM


Oh and any other stats question, let me know. I taught stats at the college this term and had a blast. The kids take their final tomorrow... I hope to CRUSH them! hehe...

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 2:00 PM


Ah, Bobby, you shouldn't have let me know... I have to take stats in the next semester or two to move on to my more advanced degrees... now I know whose brain to pick!

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 2:34 PM


Beautiful, beautiful Elisabeth. Let me know which text you're using. Should be fun!

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 2:36 PM


If you don't mind me asking, what is your major, Elisabeth, and what do you plan on doing with it?

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 2:38 PM


I am an RN who has delayed getting my RN-BSN for family reasons, but I need to get it done (I say as I look at my enrollment papers for this semester sitting, blank, on my desk, LOL!)so that I go on for my doctorate as a pediatric nurse practitioner specializing in developmental disorders.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 2:50 PM


OK, so since you're going to get your doctorate, I wanted to tell you this: maybe you know this already, but it is so important to be able to read, communicate, and critique statistical methods if you will be studying research papers, which you will be. Proper methodology and careful analysis of your data is important, and a solid understanding of descriptive an inferential statistics is essential for that. Otherwise, it is so easy to engage in sloppy thinking and sloppy use of data if one is not well trained in common statistical methods.

So my point is that this class will be great; it's something you should look forward to because if you master the material, you will be SO far ahead of a large portion of your field. I know most people are scared of math, but these are words of encouragement :)

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 2:57 PM


Actually, I am somewhat looking forward to the statistics class. (I am a total math geek) I'm just hoping to get a good instructor! I started a statistics class last year and dropped it because it was like eating pablum. I'm really torn because I am finding that most of the "statistics for nurses" classes dumb the material down below what I want to get out of it and then draw the discussions out in ways that are very frustrating for me. (Do we really need two weeks of discussion to understand what mean, median and mode are? We covered that in high school economics!)

Maybe you could recommend some good books that I could get to study on my own (I think statistics is something I'll start in September in the program I'm looking at) because I have to do statistics for nurses... but what I would love to take is some nebulous class I would title "statistics for really anal/mildly OCD people who think numbers rock". Can you find me that?

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 3:20 PM


Hmmm well, I don't know if such a class like that exists, but my guess is that this is a general trend; where a statistics class for nurses is dumbed down, which is an extreme disservice to our future nurses. Couldn't you opt to take the generic intro to statistics course that your college offers? I would have to believe that a class like that could fill your stats requirement for your major. Or perhaps do both; suffer through the class that spends 10 weeks on computing mode and take the general stats course for your own benefit.

As far as a book goes, I'm actually not farmiliar with too many. I'm not sure about the one I used this term, and would like to try several others in the future, so I'm not too confident in my ability to recommend a good book for you.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at June 4, 2009 3:30 PM


Yeah, I'm going to have to suffer through the "for nurses" classes to get through the BSN... I'm going through an online program, not too many options outside of that. Once I get to the state university to pursue my MSN/PhD I'll take a more advanced stats class, and in the meantime I might meander down to their bookstore just to see what book they're reading and maybe treat myself to it.

Although I don't have enough bookshelves NOW for all the books I have.... LOL

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 4:02 PM


I saw fair media coverage. I did not see Keith Olberman or anyone on NBC call for the terrorism or harassment of military recruiters. I did hear and see O'Reiley suggest it about Tiller(and other abortion providers).
Sorry, there IS a difference.
Also, what makes this a left wing crime? Both were acts of terrorism/violence based on religion. Religous zealotry is more in your court than in ours.

Mr. Okie Liberal (Gregory)

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 6:04 PM


I wish to hear someone's response to what I see is the practical problems associated with a world where there is ZERO abortion.
Just using some of the numbers that I read from the various articles regarding Tiller. First, there is a common theme with women choosing to have an abortion, the child is NOT wanted. At this point, the womans reasoning is irrelevant. We are talking about the child now. So, giving that most of the abortions that Tiller performed were unwanted, what do we do with 60,000 unwanted children? How do we house them? Feed them? Educate them?
Let me clarify. Having a good (even decent) life is by NO MEANS gauranteed! However, a majority of these kids would already be starting off in a miserable existence. Some would be born with horrific defects causing them to live (if they do live) an ostricized possibly painfull existence. A lot would be abused and know nothing but heartache and pain from day one. Some would literally die of malnutrition.(yes, even in our country. It happens now to children where the mother made the RIGHT choice) A lot would be abandoned and thrown in a orphan system where they are likely to abused and passed from home to home..etc..etc.
Have you guys seen what the world is like for children in 3rd world countries where abortion is not even an option? In my opinion, this is what would happen here. That is why I am pro-choice. I recognize what evil lies in the hearts of man. I recognize that God created a universe of free-will and, even under his nose, far worse things than abortion happen to children everyday (even in our country.) I recognize that no matter what I do, I cannot save or care for them all. So, yes, in my opinion, killing the baby before it is born is far better than the fate that they are destined to suffer. Would there be exceptions you bet? Of course, there would and that would be great. However, if 10,000 kids had a great life. Is it worth it for 50,000 to suffer for it?

Mr. Okie Liberal (Gregory)

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 6:37 PM


As a pediatric RN at an inner city county hospital, I see children every day who are born with the very medical problems you would issue a death warrant for, Mr. Soonerman. None of them are ostracized. They are all very much loved and well-cared for. In addition to family and friends, the nursing staff becomes an additional family to the little ones with the most severe medical problems. Yes, some of them die during childhood, some during infancy. We mourn for them and we celebrate their lives, no matter how brief.

You're spouting off all the right talking points, but you don't point to anything specific for substantiation of their claims. As a friend to many wonderful fost/adopt families who have taken children with severe medical needs and made them loved, cherished parts of their own families, I see a whole different world. A world of possibilities... not a world where being murdered in a "medical facility" that risks the health and life of their mothers as well is the best choice or option.

Yes, the poor we will always have with us. You would murder someone rather than allow them to be born poor? Then it is the world who would suffer with no Abraham Lincoln, no Frederick Douglass, no Benjamin Franklin, no Rousseau, no Emerson... none of a million of brilliant minds that have enriched the universe. You're right... rather than suffer on behalf of the poor, Gandhi should have just murdered them in their mother's wombs.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 7:02 PM


Hi Soonerman, thanks for your comment.

The point of view I take is that it is presumptuous and heinous to take the life of an innocent child under the assumption that his/her life "may" not have a "decent" quality of life (whatever that means, since it's very subjective). Many of us were born into not-so-ideal circumstances, were raised by single parents, never knew our fathers, had very little money, and barely got by. Some had lives that were far worse and filled with abuses of different sorts. I am one of those children, now grown.

However, many of us have also grown past our circumstances and look back knowing there is, and always has been, a purpose for our lives--whether we were "wanted" or not. Being unwanted by a parent in a real or perceived crisis situation should not give that parent the right to terminate the life of another human being. Adoption is available. Education is available. Help IS available!

If God is indeed the giver of Life, then He has a purpose for each life that is created, whether or not that life is "wanted" by the individual to whom that life was entrusted. I don't feel that ending those lives is ever warranted. We would learn so much if we would learn to take what we are given, whether in perfect circumstances or not (and I don't know of ANY perfect circumstances).

I have known heartache and pain in my own life, from day one. I now have three children (one yet to be born). I have not lived a charmed life, and I frankly wouldn't have it any other way... the things I have been through have made me who I am and have made me stronger. I am an overcomer. I am happy to be alive, because I know that there are other little souls on this earth because I was allowed to live. I know that there are people whose lives I have touched, simply because I am alive and because of the pain I've been through.

Abortion means we do not trust that God knows what He's doing. I'm thankful that my mother, even in painful circumstances, chose to believe that my life was worth something.

I would hope that all mothers would give their children that same chance.

Posted by: Kel at June 4, 2009 7:10 PM


Elisabeth 7:02, thanks for that post. :)

Posted by: Kel at June 4, 2009 7:12 PM


Soonerman:

Have you ever heard of God's grace?

Posted by: HisMan at June 4, 2009 7:19 PM


The point of view I take is that it is presumptuous and heinous to take the life of an innocent child under the assumption that his/her life "may" not have a "decent" quality of life.................
Posted by: Kel at June 4, 2009 7:10 PM
________________________________

Not only that Kel but Soonerman fails to realize that assumption is the lowest form of knowledge.

She/He assumes that because the baby is unwanted and handicapped that it has absolutely no purpose and no chance at a good life, at a purposeful life.

Would any intelligent person buy a car using the same thought process? Would you not ask, what color is the car, how much does it cost, which company made it and what's their quality record? Or, would you just blindfold yourself, cover your ears and close your mouth, walk into a dealership and say, "Hmmmm, I'll take that one".

I don't think so.

My goodness, the Father let His own Son be born just to be crucified. God's purposes are always higher than our proposes and we can't pretend to know what His purposes are for each conception are no matter the "assumed", less-than-ideal circumstances behind each difficult pregnancy.

Posted by: HisMan at June 4, 2009 7:31 PM


Thanks for your post Kel.

Elisabeth, it was a honest question. A dilema I struggle with on this issue. I appreciate your candor but, the tone....? Is it really needed? "...I would murder this person and that person...etc"

So, the answer to my last question is: "Yes, Elisabeth would rather 50,000 suffer so 10,000 can live"

You call me a murderer. I believe in mercy. I believe that the 60,000 get a straight shot into the bosom of Abraham. What do you believe? Is that not God's plan?

You are the exception Elisabeth, not the rule. I'm sorry! You can bash me, call me a murderer..whatever you want but, you two are the EXCEPTION. You are not the rule and that's the real tragedy. If you could convince, even 10% of hardcore pro-life groups to be BB/BS's or foster parents or adopt or do anything to ease the suffering in their own communities, abortion would disappear on it's own. You would change the hearts and minds of the next generation, who would then change the hearts and minds of the following generation. However, what you find is self righteous bunch. They want to change the law, then go back to the couch and their comfy church pews; all the while, nothing would have changed. The majority of the 50,000 just get aborted post birth but, hey, at least you feel good about the world right?

I mean look at your websites. From Focus on the Family, to Operation Rescue, you find no links to adoption assistance. You find no links to programs like BB/BS. You find no links to resources about being a foster parent. You know what you do find? Bash and trash of people/politicians. Bash and trash of those who have a different opinion of the issue than you. Name calling (like in Elisabeth's post). Grotesque pictures of aborted fetuses. Do you honestly think that 'shock and awe' stuff works?

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:00 PM


I believe third trimester abortionists like, the now deceased Tiller, and the still living and taking care of business Carhart and Hern, to name of few of the proud and the brazen, and their aiders and abettors, ought to be charged with crimes against humanity, and if a jury of sane, impartial, and intellectually honest people find them guilty as charged, then they ought to receive the same sentences as Hans Frank, Wilhelm Frick, Alfred Jodl, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, Wilhelm Keitel, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Alfred Rosenberg, Fritz Sauckel, Arthur Seyss-Inquart and Julius Streicher who were found guilty of crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg International Military Tribuals.

yor bro ken


Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 8:07 PM


"She/He assumes that because the baby is unwanted and handicapped that it has absolutely no purpose and no chance at a good life, at a purposeful life."

Again, Hisman, I'm being practical. You're talking about 60,000 "unwanted" people, not just one. I said there would be exceptions yes, but do we know in which case out of the 60,000 the exceptions would be? Again, so you would basically, codemn 50,000 for the sake of 10,000? It's a serious question. Again, go to web sites like Feed the Children..etc. This would be a serious consequence in a post Roe world.

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:15 PM


No, Soonerman. I would rather that people work together to improve the lives of all people rather than to murder some of them in utero simply because they "might" not have a "good enough" life by somebody else's standards.

And precisely what "name calling" was in my post?? And how are those "my" websites? I happen to have some websites... I don't own any of the ones you cited.

You keep talking about destroying 60,000 when only 10,000 would have a good life. What statistics are you basing that on? Citations, please.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 8:21 PM


Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:00 PM

"I believe that the 60,000 get a straight shot into the bosom of Abraham."
--------------------------------------------------
Soonerman,

Using your line of reasoning abortion is the greatest evangelical method ever conceived.

Shoot we don't even have to babtize them.

I once heard a fellow joke that we ought to just hold baptizees under til they drown thereby ensuring they do not lose their salvation.

Sooner, you should set the example and 'choice' yourself and shoot right into Abrahams bosom.

Then be good enough to transmit a text message back from the other side and let us know how that worked out for you.

Forgive me if I do not find what you 'believe' to be too reassuring when you have no proof to support your death defying declaration of faith.

("I know full well that some of you may lose your life in this noble quest, but that is a sacrifice Soonerman is willing for you to make on his behalf.")

In the mean time we will keep trying to save them all and trust God to sort them out according to HIS grace and wisdom.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 8:29 PM



Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:15 PM

"Again, Hisman, I'm being practical."

------------------------------------------------------
Soonerman,

[sooner what than what?]

These ten fellows were just being 'practical'.

Their pragmatism got them all hanged.

Hans Frank, Wilhelm Frick, Alfred Jodl, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, Wilhelm Keitel, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Alfred Rosenberg, Fritz Sauckel, Arthur Seyss-Inquart and Julius Streicher.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 8:34 PM


My statistics are based on articles about Tiller. The real number of abortions are actually much higher. My percentages are based on my opinion of the world and the people in it.

How about this? You give me your stats? What percentage of children in the post Roe world would suffer (albeit die, even) post birth? Is it zero? What's an acceptable number to you? What are you willing to do to minimize that number?

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:38 PM


Soonerman,

Every person ever conceived has 'suffered'.

You show me someone who has never 'suffered' and I will show someone who was never alive or has never lived.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 8:42 PM


All you folks out there who have never suffered, or know someone who has never suffered, or heard of someone who has never suffered feel free to jump in here.

Soonerman is waiting.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 8:44 PM


Cute post! Kbhvac.

Full of that radical muster that I've come to expect from people like you.

Who brazenly say they are pro-life, but won't volunteer 5 mins for any organization that ACTUALLY benefits the living. Of course, you'll say that you do but, I'm sure you don't.

Also, your the type that once you do not have Roe any more to satisfy your rage/hatred, it'll probably be something else, not so disimilar than the criminals you mention in your post.

You talk of trials and such. Did Tiller not have a trial? What was the verdict? Just curious...

Oh, I know, it was Obama and the "Librul"(sic) media that tainted the jury wasn't it?

AB&C...figure it out.

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:46 PM


"Sooner, you should set the example and 'choice' yourself and shoot right into Abrahams bosom."

I tell you what Kbh. You go adopt one kid and I'll think about it....

*crickets....crickets.....crickets...

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:50 PM


As I am not advocating taking anyone's life away from them, it is not my responsibility to come up with those statistics. You keep bandying your admittedly made up numbers as facts.

Once again, where did I call anyone names?

And I don't understand the "you two are exceptions" in your previous response to me. What two? I know dozens and dozens of medical fost/adopt families. As a pediatric RN, you get to know these families very well. And that's just in one city in one state... families across the country are doing the same thing.

How are we the exception? How do you *know* that? Based upon what statistics.

If you are going to advocate for the death of a human being, at least use real statistics and not your opinion as a basis.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 8:51 PM


We could always try mr. Tiller in absentia.

I do not believe his own testimony would be any more benefit to him than those ten fellows testimony was to them.

Just for the record I believe what mr. Roeder did was wrong. I believe in the rule of law.
But just because something is 'lawful' does not make it right. A painful lesson those ten fellows learned the hard way.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 8:52 PM


Well, Soonerman, at least we aren't advocating just giving up. I mean, that's your point... you don't have to actually FIX the world, as long as you kill anyone who might suffer in it. End of your responsibility... hey, I don't have to help that starving child, I made sure his mom had the right to kill him! It's not MY fault she didn't take advantage of it!

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 8:53 PM


Yes, Ken, as an oft repeated speech of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. states: Everything Hitler did was legal. Everything the founding fathers of the USA did was illegal.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 8:55 PM


Soonerman,

I have five surviving children and have 'fostered' children that were not my own.

Keep shooting wildly you may hit something, but it may be your own foot.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 8:55 PM


"Well, Soonerman, at least we aren't advocating just giving up. I mean, that's your point... you don't have to actually FIX the world, as long as you kill anyone who might suffer in it. End of your responsibility... hey, I don't have to help that starving child, I made sure his mom had the right to kill him! It's not MY fault she didn't take advantage of it!"

Yeah, at least I'm honest about it. Most of you on the otherhand...? Take kbh for example.

You two being Elisabeth and Kel. You are the exeption. Most pro-lifers are just "pro-life" in belief only. They ignore even the kids suffering in their own communities. That's my point.

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:58 PM


What do you base that statement on? How do you know what "most" pro-lifers do? Citations please.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 8:59 PM


"'fostered' children that were not my own."

Sure, you have....kbh...sure you have...

ADOPT ONE...just ONE!!! lol


Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 9:01 PM


Soonerman

Tiller is guilty. He confessed. It is on tape. It is written down. It is even on video.

That is why we do not need his testimony at trial. He incriminated himself, repeatedly, in front of many witnesses.

He kept records of what he did, though he did fudge on some details and legal requirements.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 9:03 PM


Soonerman,

Do you know how an okie knows when it it time to get new tires for his truck?

When the dog pees on one and it goes flat.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 9:05 PM


Not all children are available for adoption. Sometimes the best thing for them is for them to be fostered until their biological parents are equipped to care for them.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 9:06 PM


This is not about adoption.

It is about Soonerman fishing for a shred of evidence to support his bigoted stereotypes that he has erected in his own mind.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 9:09 PM


Soonerman,

Stereotypes and strawmen are fun, aren't they?

You can fabricate them anyway you want. They don't have to resemble reality at all. They would not be stereotypes and strawmen if they did resemble reality.

You do not want to deal with truth so you create your own fantasy world.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 9:16 PM


Of course, because if he can blame the evils of the world on prolifers he relieves himself of responsibility.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 9:20 PM


Well, thank you for the healthy debate. I have no citations. However, Elisabeth, like I tell my daughter...you know...you know. (KBH is a perfect example. The person has ADOPTED not one single kid..not ONE!)

Finally, since I want to offer some solutions to you guys and not just argue until it degrades down to people wanted people to go shoot themselves.....too late.

Some examples of how the pro-life movement can succeed.

1. Offer alternatives. (full birthing centers with medical care) and link that on your websites.

2. Heavily promote adoption and link it on your websites. Set-up adoption funds to aide people financially in the adoptoin process and link it on your websites.

3. Get involved in community organizations like BB/BS and link it on your websites.

Make alternatives as easily accessible as abortion. It can be done. Do you people have what it takes to get it done?

Imagine, I'm a young woman struggling with this decision now. I come here. Do I find any information on alternatives? I click on the links listed on the right. Do I find just ONE website with links to alternatives to abortion? JUST ONE? Nope, just a bunch of political mumbo jumbo. What do I care about Obama right now? What do I care about Tiller right now? I need help!
Maybe I should just post in the blog and get "stoned" by people like kbh for even considering it? They seem to think that comparing people to Nazis stops them from having abortions. Go figure.

Hopefully, someone full of love and compassion, can point me to an alternative so that I make the right choice.

Don't let the devil (continue) to hi-jack your movement! Think about it.

The Okie Liberal(Gregory)

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 9:24 PM


Soonerman, if you hung out here for more than a few hours you would have seen all of those things discussed in great detail. Please do not lecture us on what you think we should do.... the prolife posters on this site already participate in all of those things.

And amazingly "you know" is not a cogent argument. Citations or admit you're just making it up.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 9:31 PM


Oh, and by the way, how much of that do YOU do? Or do you consider the end of your responsibility to be making sure that these children are capable of being murdered in utero?

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 9:33 PM


"Of course, because if he can blame the evils of the world on prolifers he relieves himself of responsibility."

I blamed you guys for the worlds ills...where...?

"Oh, and by the way, how much of that do YOU do? Or do you consider the end of your responsibility to be making sure that these children are capable of being murdered in utero?"

Nope! I do nothing. I'm just a hypocrit.....


....however, I admit it.

Again, think of the pregnant young woman in my post. What if she were here right now? Links...Links...Links..

Change hearts, change minds = win

Chastise, insult, name call = lose.

Your CHOICE?


Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 9:43 PM


You keep saying I call names. You keep refusing to show where I did so.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 9:44 PM


Soonerman,

You have no citations. (Aha)

But you do have your 'feelings'.

How do you feel about 2+2=4?

How do you feel about 2+2=5?

Does how you 'feel' change the fact that one is correct and one is not?

You want to come around here an project your 'guilt' on us because we have not complied with how you 'feel' we should have gone about advocating for prenatal children.

You did not stop mr. Roeder from killing mr. Tiller therefore you have no moral authority to tell us how to go about keeping men like mr. Tiller from killing prenatal children.

Oklahoma borders Kansas. You should have done something to stop the killing. You were probably too busy posting or texting or poaching deer or gambling at a casino on the reservation.

When you have saved an abortionist, just one abortionist, then you can come back here and tell us how to save prenatal children.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 9:48 PM


You claimed that I wanted to ruin the lives of 50,000 children. (A number you admitted to making up and having no basis in fact other than "you know"). That's a pretty harsh accusation.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 9:50 PM


...I'm generally speaking Elisabeth...generally speaking...

read kbh and get back with me. If you feel, kbh is an appropriate response to my inquires then.....what can I say? I'll shut-up.

Say, you are trying to convince me to join your cause. I asked legitimate questions originally. I bought up legitmate issues, albeit hypothetical. Does KBH's first response or subsequent responses aid you in your cause?

When an 'outsider' reads those responses who will they agree with more? The pro-choice side that labels, you guys, radical/terrorists, now. Or, your side?

What do you think? Shall I post some of his remarks?

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 9:55 PM


Soonerman, you accused me of namecalling. You used my name specifically. Cite where that happened.

You accused me of wanting to ruin the lives of 50000 children. You used my name specifically. Cite your source for that. (Hint, you can't, because you admitted to making it up.)

Either start saying something of substance or go the way of other trolls on this site. The posters here already work hard in their communities while you admit to doing nothing other than making sure babies are murdered, just in case they might have a crappy life. I don't think you have room to speak.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 10:00 PM


KBH, why must you continue to insult my state? It's a beautiful state full of awesome people!

However, your comments are the pyschological proof of what I said before...

"Also, your the type that once you do not have Roe any more to satisfy your rage/hatred, it'll probably be something else, not so disimilar than the criminals you mention in your post."

The only guilt I feel is about the coke I just drank. How about you? You seem awfully angry. Is there some unresolved issues in your life?

(Message intended for kbh not Elisabeth)

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 10:02 PM


You call me a murderer. I believe in mercy. I believe that the 60,000 get a straight shot into the bosom of Abraham. What do you believe? Is that not God's plan?...............

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 8:00 PM
--------------------------------------

Soonerman:

No, abortion is not God's plan.

He commands us not to murder.

Abortion is not an act of mercy it is pure judgment. Judgment that the mother can not succeed in the raising of the child and judgment that the child has no purpose.

Jesus said that if we hurt a child it would be better that a millstone be tied around our necks and thrown into the sea.

Posted by: HisMan at June 4, 2009 10:07 PM


Okay Elisabeth. I'll play along.

Let's say that no abortions happened in the US starting today, as you want, an admirable goal.

How many kids would be saved?

Would any of those kids be killed either through abuse/neglect, lack of medical care..etc?

Would any of those kids be institutionalized until the age of 18?

Would any of those kids be sold into the human trafficing?

Speculate, give me percantages...

I'm a realist.

Once Roe is gone. Do you foresee the major players in the pro-life movement becoming active in resolving the issues above? (For example, would the proprietor of this website, set up another web-site to fund scholarships for oprhans?) Would James Dobson advocate free medical care for all children in the US? (Does he now?)

There's no evidence of it from viewing the various websites. My speculation is: other than you and a few others that you work with, most of these people would go the way of the dodo bird.
Why do I speculate about that?

Well, it's a logic thing to me really. I don't see any interest in that stuff now (from viewing the websites) so why would it change post Roe?

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 10:11 PM


Please cite where I name called or advocated for harm to children.

What you think "might" happen is irrelevant.

I have no way of knowing what any individual poster here would do. I do know that individuals on your side of the spectrum would be called to do more than just advocate murder (probably why it discomfits you).

I will continue as I have always continued... to work hard for children. To advocate for children... from conception on. That is really all I am responsible to do. As I know that I am not in a minority (most people just need to know what needs doing and are happy to help) I have no fear. Perfect love casts out fear.

The answer to social evils is never murder.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 10:17 PM


Hisman..you're back..good.

Jesus also said "He w/o sin cast the first stone."

He never sought to change laws but to change peoples hearts and minds.

He did not report the prostitute to church authorities did he? He sought to change her heart with a few non-judgemental words. Wow! CAn that really work? Surely, not.

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 10:20 PM


...her EYES OPEN!!!

" (most people just need to know what needs doing and are happy to help) "

Now, show me a link that tells me what to do? Can I get it through this website?

Are you catching on? REally?

You are a wonderful person Elisabeth..you truely are. However, I'm talking about your movement here, not just you...

Again, alternatives...alternatives...

Or, shall we continue to scream at each other? (Generally speaking...)

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 10:25 PM


"What you think "might" happen is irrelevant."

You're right. There are no kids starving to death in this country.

There are no kids dying from lack of medical care?

There are no kids sold into human trafficing?

There are no kids in slavery?

You add however, many millions of kids (unwanted by their birthing mothers) to the mix and, that definitely, will not happen to any of them.

You're right! I'm just pulling that stuff out of the air somewhere.

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 10:29 PM


Ah, then your plan of murdering them doesn't seem to be working so well. Why don't we stop that and work on improving social conditions for all children?

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 10:31 PM


Soonerman, Jesus is still seeking to change hearts and minds today, as well.

Many of us on this site are actively involved with pregnancy resource centers, which get little to no government funding (though Planned Parenthood, as a "non-profit" profit center gets millions per year from the gov't), and help pregnant women and women with children who are in need. They offer free pregnancy tests, counseling, adoption info, info on possible abortion risks, info on fetal development, baby clothing, diapers, parental education classes, optional Bible studies, formula, information on community resources, even post-abortion counseling, and the list goes on.

They are compassionate and caring individuals.

However, the battle must be fought on many fields. Even if the laws are never changed, women have a right to see their ultrasounds and hear their child's heartbeat before they make a choice. And you know something? Most of them, after seeing their babies on ultrasound, change their minds. Not all of them do, but most do.

One thing I really despise about abortion profiteers is that they do not fully inform women about what abortion entails. The whole "clump of cells" argument isn't biologically factual. So many of these women go through these procedures with little to no knowledge of what is really occurring, and later, when they discover that the 11-week-old unborn child wasn't just a clump of cells, pregnancy resource centers are there to offer counseling to help with their grief at this realization.

We believe abortion not only takes the child's life, but harms the mother. Childbirth is a normal, natural process. Abortion is not. If you believe at all in God's processes, I don't understand how you can think He is "ok" with us terminating life at will. Yes, we have free will... but we can choose life or death. Blessing or cursing. It is OUR choice.

Would Christ be ok with aborting children? He said "Let the little children come unto Me, and do not hinder them, for of such is the kingdom of God." These aborted children... they are our offspring, gifts of God to us. Evidence of life and hope in a world that offers so little life or hope.

I want to err on the side of life. I want to give these children a chance to love and be loved. If we say we know best, I don't feel we really trust God's wisdom at all.

Just my thoughts.

Posted by: Kel at June 4, 2009 10:33 PM


Wow!

Soonerman has made himself both sheriff and shrink.

For the record I was not insulting the great state of Oklahomoa, I was insulting you.

You should apologize to your fellow okies for associating them with your folly.

yor bro ken

You kicked down the door, threw in a pipe bomb, and started takin pot shots at any survivor who dared raise his/her head.

You indulged in stereotype. I just returned the friendly fire.

I do not hold the state of Oklahoma accountable for you.

You don't puport to speak for the whole state do you? Have you now made yourself governor?

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 10:50 PM


That is beautiful Kel, honestly. However, I look at this website, Operation Rescue, Focus on the family, Oreily, Faux News, Hannity..

There's no links! There's no information about alternatives. How do you get your message (Kel's message) to people?

These are the groups that represent your point of view that are at the spear head of your movement. In my opinion, Kel, people like you should demand that the leaders of these groups start making those alternatives that you talked about as much a priority as the legistlation side. In my opinion, they use you guys and your sincere beliefs in life, as a political tool to get certain parties elected into office and that's all.


Elisabeth:

You did not call me a name! If I wrote it that way, I apologize and ask for forgiveness. However, I remained firm in my speculations.

Elisabeth said: "..and work on improving social conditions for all children?"

..and that should be the thrusts of the Pro-Life movement.. More than just changing law but, changing lives, hearts and minds.

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 10:53 PM


Soonerman... we all have our roles to play. That IS the thrust of the prolife movement. The fact that you are unaware of it is not anyone's fault but your own. Possibly it is because the people who are busy DOING things don't necessarily have time to create websites?

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 10:58 PM


ah...KBH...So witty, so cute...like my 10 year old Godson.

That wit of yours saves any babies, lately?

Is that all you are? A simpleton, packed full of childish insults? Really?
I expect more from someone who claims to be part of something, supposedly so spiritually in tune, so close to God's heart.

Then again, you are the epitome of what I was talking about. A radical (a devil really) that has hi-jacked the efforts of REAL pro-lifers like Kel and Elisabeth. You need justification for your rage/hatred bought about by your shortcomings in life so, you latch on to the "pro-life" movement..I mean afterall, I can assail those pro-aborts at will and no one will care (Note the responders in my defence here..../crickets). Again, I stand by my assessment of your sorry existence. Once we reach post-Roe, I fully expect you to participate in movements that are not at all disimilar to the movements that the men you mentioned in your previous post were hung for.

Babies be damned! I gots me someone to hate on! When's the next rally!

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 11:06 PM


Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 10:20 PM

Hisman..you're back..good.

Jesus also said "He w/o sin cast the first stone."

He never sought to change laws but to change peoples hearts and minds.


-------------------------------------------------------

Soonerman,

You may be an okie, but you are not an Oral Roberts University okie.

The passage you cite (good attempt at a citation) did not refer to the woman in question as a 'prosititute' but rather an adultress.

Jesus scratched some grafitti in the sand and then asked the pointed question. When he got no response he looked up to discover all the accusers had left. (It says they went away from the oldest to the youngest. Even on old fool has more wisdom than a young one.)

Then the only one who was qualified to 'judge' the women chose to overlook her present'sin' and told her to go and 'sin' no more. That implies that she had been sinning, so she knew that he knew.

Now I am going to speculate just a litte bit. 'You know' like you have been doing.

I believe Jesus wrote the times and the places those men with stones in their hands had been plowing with the heifer they wanted to stone for promiscuous plowing.

That is why they slinked away empty handed, with their tales tween their legs.

Jesus was even discreet with them.

HE did not treat religious hypocrits the same way.

"He [Jesus] never sought to change laws but to change peoples hearts and minds."

Jesus said he did come abolish the 'law' but to fulfill it. HE honored the 'spirit' of the law above the letter.

Soonerman, you must have gone to the Obama Theological Seminary, where your idelogy informs your theology.

You will pardon me if I do not take your attempts at exegesis seriously.

Suggest you stick to spekuhlatin', citin' ain't workin to good fer yah.

Have you know made yourself the professor of from the Obama school of theology?

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 11:13 PM


Elisabeth says: "Possibly it is because the people who are busy DOING things don't necessarily have time to create websites?"

I clicked on 3 links to different websites listed to the right.

You click on them and tell me if you see anything about alternatives?

If they have time to create a website to bash and trash, where are the alternatives. If they really cared about life/kids, in my opinon, you would see the links to the alternatibves. You would see links to adoption resources. You would see links on mentoring and being active in your community. You would see links to daycare service providers, Medical information...the works. Click on them! What do you see?
"Stop Obama abortions judge" Ok, so you stop him, abortion is made illegal. Now, what?

You yourself said: "work on improving social conditions for all children?"

Do you feel that is the goal of Operation Rescue, of Ms. Stanek herself?
Sorry, your movement has been hijacked by people like KBH, James Dobson..Coulter and radicalized.

When I go to an Greenpeace website, I don't just see links that deal with changing laws or rhetoric bashing certain political parties based on their environmental policies, I actually see a link at the bottom right on how I myself can be more "Green". On what I can do to have more of a positive impact on the environment.
Not on this sight, NOt on any of the sites listed on the right. Not on any of the so-called Pro-Life websites do I see a link on how I can be an more of an asset in the lifes of children? Not a one! And, that to me speaks VOLUMES about the true nature of some of those people who CLAIM to be Pro-"LIFE".

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 11:26 PM


Soonerman,

You are starting to sound like Screwtape in C.S. Lewis's, 'The Screwtape Letters' when he gets upset and begins to devolve into the hideous demon that he is. Lots of involuntary screaming and hissing and uncontrollable squirming on the ground and frothing at the mouth.

Be of good cheer, this too will pass.

I make no claims to be a 'real pro-lifer' according to your arbitrary and capricious definition.

By what authority do you judge me?

The power of the non-existent rays of your own intellect?

The potentency of the moon goddess.

In the name of the great nothingness that never was and never is and never will be?

Come on grand inquisitor, where's your stinkin' badge?

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 11:35 PM


KBH..is a perfect example Elisabeth. A perfect example!

He thinks he's the messiah. Since, he believes he has the right to pass judgement like Jesus but, notice, doesn't mention (or really, he doesn't notice), that Jesus actually forgave the woman.

Unlike KBH, he did not assail her with insults and chastisements. He simply said..well, you can read his post. An "alternative" to stoning to death. Who knows if she did stop sinning? Somehow, I doubt it but, someone out of love, did give her an "alternative". No hatefull rhetoric, no yelling. Change a heart, change a mind. Wow! What a concept!

KBH, your much more of a christian than me. I'm sure that makes you proud. Then again, satan knows the bible well too. I'm sure he could quote it word for exact word. However, actions/attitudes speak VOLUMES about a persons heart. What does your attitude say about you?

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 11:39 PM


KBH says: "I make no claims to be a 'real pro-lifer' according to your arbitrary and capricious definition."

Hi-Jacked...by his own admission.

Capricious, oh come now, should I subscribe to your world view? "Hey, kid, as a fetus, you meant the world to me (or, at least gave me a cover for my rage & hatred), now that your born, it's every infant for himself, go get a job if you want to eat..I'm outta here."


Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 11:45 PM


Soonerman,

Have you considered recycling yourself?

I mean if death is the answer you apply to other people, maybe you should practice the gospel you preach and set the example by putting yourself out of our misery.

Do unto yourself what you advocate doing unto others. Right?

If humans are just bag of biomass just waiting to die then be re-absorbed into mother earth, then why prolong the inevitable. Why endure all the suffering around you much less other folks misery.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 4, 2009 11:45 PM


KBH,

You adopt ONE child and I'll fullfill your request.


I'm not worried! I know your heart. lol!

So, hi-jacked....lol

good night!

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 11:47 PM


Soonerman, nice try at turning us against each other but again, pointless.

This is an informational site for the legal and political goings on in the battle against the murder of unborn children. It serves its purpose.

My role is different. I serve my purpose. I do find information here, however. (As it is an informational site, that makes sense.)

You can stop tell us how to run OUR movement... since you admit that all you care about is making sure that these children are murdered "just in case"....

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 4, 2009 11:49 PM


Oh, KBH, I'll even increase your odds!

How about if one of those 5 kids of yours adopts..just ONE child. Any of them...just ONE!!

I'll fullfill your requests!

Again, I'm not worried!

I know your heart and I know the heart of MOST people who claim to be PRO-LIFE. lol.

Good night...again!

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 11:50 PM


...well, Elisabeth, since you have subscribed to that worldview of Us vs. them. You'll lose.

Sorry, you're trying to fight a spiritual war using weapons of the flesh. It won't work. But, it will make us hate each other!(Look how many times kbh has wanted me to kill myself) I guess he is too much of a coward to do it himself or try to do it! And, you support him? Yes, you do. You support a guy that tells me to go kill myself. Yeah, you guys are truely pro-life and non-violent. Inspiring...


Ta Ta...

Posted by: Soonerman at June 4, 2009 11:57 PM


Attention pro-life movement.

I have you surrounded.

I have hi-jacked the movement.

I am in complete control.

Resistance is futile.

Everyone will think, speak, act, dress exactly like I do.

No diversity will be tolerated.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 5, 2009 12:16 AM


Soonerman,

You are advocating death as solution to possible social problems, but you are not willing to apply that solution to yourself.

I do not want you die. I want you to see how ridiculous your proposed solution is.

That is the point. The glaring double standard.

At the same time you pass judgement on us because we do not submit to your view of how 'real pro-lifers' should conduct themselves.

Why should anyone here take you seriously?

You are all hat and no horse.

Ross Perot once tried the same approach with pro-lifers in Dallas. He invited himself to one of their gatherings and then proceeded to tell them how to be pro-life without ever acknowledging what it was that made them pro-life. It was comical. Perot really believed that he could solve this problem if people would just do like he said. It did not help that Perot was contributing to the local PP. That little fact made people question Ross's sincerity.

Kind of like the way we question your sincerity.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at June 5, 2009 12:52 AM


Soonerman, you do not know me or my activities and have no basis whatsoever to tell me what I do or do not support or subscribe to.

I work hard every day to better the world for children.

You want to murder them.

It's really as simple as that.

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 5, 2009 8:23 PM


Posted by: Elisabeth at June 5, 2009 8:23 PM

See this is what I mean - the giant leaps off the cliffs of conclusion without so much as an umbrella, let alone a parachute. Where do you get off calling someone a murderer? Someone you only know on the internet, and not even by their real name. It's kinda sad. Now I don't know you very well either, but your posts portray you as a very angry and sad person, which is a horrible combination.

You might enjoy yoga... it really relaxes the mind. Really, its just a message board - no need to get worked up about it. Even the postings of doctors addresses, when seen from a disinterested light seem funny in their pathetic nature. Really, its okay to turn off the computer, take a breath and walk away.

Posted by: Yo La Tengo at June 5, 2009 9:25 PM


ProChoicerForKilling,

You call me an "idiot" (more name calling instead of addressing the issues...what are you afraid of?) but you somehow you want to restrict our free speech rights to point out that Tiller is a murderer, because some crazy might hear it and do something crazy about it.

But our point in stating the truth about Dr. Tiller's role as a mass murderer was to bring him to justice in a legal way. We have to state what he is doing and then move forward in a legal way to stop him.

We can't limit our free speech because of the fact that someone might do something crazy. For example we will keep pointing out that Al Gore is leading a global warming hoax that is harming many people in the world. We don't wish violence on him, we just want to expose him and let more people understand the truth.

Please stop the silly name calling and address the real issues, ProChoicerforDeath.

Posted by: GodsImage at June 6, 2009 8:30 PM


Yeah, whatever YLT. I believe sad and angry are your descriptors, not having any reference to do with my life (which is incredibly blessed).

As for Soonerman, he actually admitted that his only stake in things was to ensure that abortions happened, that he wanted nothing more to do with unplanned pregnancies than ensure the legality of abortion. Perhaps when you learn to actually follow an entire thread of conversation you'll figure this out....

Posted by: Elisabeth at June 9, 2009 5:48 AM


Posted by: Elisabeth at June 9, 2009 5:48 AM

I have no problem with abortion... none. Abortion is not murder. an unviable pregnancy cannot be murdered, because it is not alive, and can never be alive.
It's funny that you draw such stark lines for what is "murder" but your movment celebrates military "heroes" who murder people for a living simply because the president or their commander tells them to. That is murder!

Posted by: Yo La Tengo at June 9, 2009 6:33 PM


I've noticed this recent change to the rules of the poor-choice handbook lately. The rhetoric is changing (again). They've recently taken to not even addressing the being within the pregnancy, but just calling it "a non-viable pregnancy", as if the only thing about being pregnant is the condition of the woman. Like, a woman gets sick for 9 months in a totally unrelated illness, then they go to the hospital to get better, and POOF, a baby is there. It's disturbing.

Posted by: xalisae at June 11, 2009 1:58 AM