Page 43 of 61 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 608

Thread: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

  1. #421
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    12-14-09 @ 06:19 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,772

    Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    It is truly fascinating to watch people wail and gnash their teeth thinking I would not make the same remark in public.

    Entertaining, too!
    And I bet ud be pissed off if u got shot next.

  2. #422
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
    Because it's largely irrelevant to this particular thread.
    It most certainly is not, as evidenced by the ongoing and illuminating conversation I am having with jallman.

  3. #423
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Arrow Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
    The governor vetoed such questions. They are essentially un-askable.
    So you don't have any proof, right ?

  4. #424
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    12-14-09 @ 06:19 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,772

    Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    You know, it's funny how often people accuse me of this because of the unusual and harsh nature of my views, and my open support of Fascist political thought.

    Do you realize that I censor myself far more here than I do at any public place except for my job?
    Do ur ealise we only tolerate it because its here, and everywhere else other than in the company of biggots (maybe with individual exceptions, but broadly speaking) it would make u a pariah?

  5. #425
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tiamat's better half
    Last Seen
    10-28-11 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,998

    Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Talk View Post
    And I bet ud be pissed off if u got shot next.
    Moderator's Warning:
    Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal' We're not going down this path. Anymore of anything even remotely in the same vein as this and you get a thread ban.

  6. #426
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    You are not getting it.

    The value is zero until its a baby.
    I get it just fine, thankyouverymuch. You are the one failing to recognize the development of that fetus and how morally consequential the developed ability to suffer is to our dispensation of human rights. Your entire argument at this point is whether it is on one side or the other of the birth canal. That's just stupid and lacking any form of compassion or depth of analysis.

    Wow, now we don't care how inaccurate our terminology is as long as it will be inflammatory eh ?
    My terminology is perfectly accurate. You are advocating the murder of a baby when you advocate unfettered abortion past 22 weeks.

    You are talking about what you consider a baby.
    Yes, I like staying grounded in reality.

    I not only don't have to agree with you, I don't even need to consider your rigamarole of comparison. I am at liberty to make my own decision in the matter, and I say it's a baby once its born.
    Yes. You say, you say, you say. Your whole argument is based on nothing more than what you say. I am not interested in your opining about how to disregard the rights of babies because it might be inconvenient for the woman. You can say until you are blue in the face, but that doesn't change the fact that the law does not agree with you because the majority of the country aren't base, depraved baby killing barbarians.

    None of your science arguments gain any traction here,
    I wouldn't imagine science would gain any traction with someone deluded enough to convince his own conscience that killing a baby is acceptable...

    as my personal decision on the point at which to start valuing that Human is mine alone, and I do not have to base it off of your parallels or your opinions.
    I seem to recall hearing the same argument spouted off about other human beings prior to January 1, 1863...

    I am not doing any somersaults, I just disagree with you about something unprovable.
    It has been proven. The structural components are all there. But you have already stated that it is irrelevant as your whole argument hinges on your personal opinion to devalue a human life, most abhorrently using your own hypothetical baby as an example of your lack of empathy for your own offspring. Your argument lacks any form of logic or foundation in Constitutional support. You hinge it on one word, with emphasis on that word speciously placed by you and your proud chest thumping about how you don't have to value a baby if it is on the wrong side of the tracks.

    You feel awfully powerful being able to thrust your will onto that little baby, huh?

    Citizens are born. Womb contents are not citizens.
    That has not been fully decided. What has, however, been decided, is that "womb contents" past a certain stage of development are granted a right to live provided the baby's existence is not threatening the life or health of the mother. Murdering the baby...err...womb contents is punishable under the law.

    Sorry pal, the Constitution states that persons born are citizens.
    Sorry pal, that emphasis is yours and not the constitution's. It is simply stating that those naturalized here have the same rights as those born here. It in no way speaks to the topic of abortion.


    Society's business is much better handled by staying the hell out of family decisions and squabbles.
    Except where your family decisions and squabbles result in a stronger family member stripping other family members of their basic human rights. That is society' business and will ever remain that way as long as we consider ourselves an civilized society of equality. You're just gonna have to learn to deal with that, chuckles.

    Heres the big point that I have not even gotten out yet.
    Is it more "I say, I say, I say" because if it is, you can keep it back.

    Consider this jallman:

    Society is having its town hall meeting. You decry abortion. I stand up and ask if the Town Hall will fall down if we ignore abortions. Since it won't, why don't we just ignore tham, rather than try to get violence on a large portion of our already existant citizens ?
    For the same reason we did not ignore the holocaust. For the same reason we did not ignore slavery. For the same reason we do not ignore exploitation of children or the AIDS crisis in Africa or the genocides in Darfur. Citizenship is not what grants human rights. Being a human is what grants human rights. Hell, if a guy wants to kill his neighbor and that's it, will the Town Hall fall down if we ignore it? Since it won't, why don't we just ignore him rather than try to bring him to justice (which does not imply doing violence against him despite your attempt to throw that red herring in)?

    I simply reject your interference in the reproductive cycle of other citizens as rude and unwarranted. Attack already existant citizens over a potential citizen ?
    Your reproductive rights are yours until they begin inflicting harm on another sentient, sapient human being without provocation. And again, citizenship is not the issue at stake here. Human rights is the issue. And no one is advocating attacking anyone (except those advocating the free practice of dismembering babies in utero). I am proposing placing legal implications for doing so. Oh wait...nevermind, that's already been done for the most part.

    Are you Nuts ?
    I think that is a much more appropriate and poignant question when directed at the one who has no issue with the dismemberment of babies just because they are on the wrong side of the tracks...

  7. #427
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    That is not the only difference, and we have been over the fact already.
    Funny you say that yet it remains your standby argument in the face of any opposition to your barbaric advocations.

    It is not obfuscation. It is me, destroying your fallacious appeal to universality.
    No. Not at all.

    You want the "cache" of the word life, without paying attention to the totality of that word's meaning. I eat life everyday.
    Oh, oh, oh...I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about human rights here and not some hippy notion of all life being the same. When you wanna rejoin us in the discussion about your advocacy of dismembering babies in utero, let us know. Until then, we're gonna move right along talking about the issue of human abortion. kthanxbi.

    Got any proof ? Did he do this after his shift as an abortion provider ?
    It is an accepted fact that he performed late term abortions. Obtuse is not an attractive color on you.


    Very, very false. You think it is what you think it is.
    Very very true. It is what it is. And what it is is the advocacy of killing babies in utero...a very barbaric and inhumane practice deserving of the stiffest criminal penalties for its performance.

    Do you think I would allow this ? you are being duplicitous if you think that gets you out of anything. I will defend my wife's liberty, and we are right back to you using force on me, and my wife.
    Well then you have an entirely different set of criminal issues to deal with including resisting arrest, contempt of court, obstruction of justice, etc. And yes, force would then be used as it would be in any criminal offense. I have no problem with that.

    If you are rational enough to now to use the term "late term abortion" perhaps you are rational enough to realize that all are performed with cause.
    If you are so certain that all are done with cause, then you should have no issue providing me with statistics that prove such a thing.

  8. #428
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by B L Zeebub View Post
    if the next poster had not exposed your unforced error would you have changed your post.

    If it is doesnt that go to your credibility
    No it doesn't. It means she made a mistake and her credibility is only bolstered by the fact that she was willing to correct her mistake when it was brought to her attention. If she continued to deny it, then there would be a credibility issue. Right now, we have a "humans make mistakes" issue and even it has been resolved.

  9. #429
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Arrow Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I get it just fine, thankyouverymuch.
    No you didn't. I have no need to "devalue" something that already has a value of zero.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    You are the one failing to recognize the development of that fetus and how morally consequential the developed ability to suffer is to our dispensation of human rights.
    You mean like the suffering you would inflict on me and my wife to subdue me (that will require lethal force) and to abduct her against here will ?

    If human rights matter, respect those of my wife and I.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Your entire argument at this point is whether it is on one side or the other of the birth canal.
    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    That is not the only difference, and we have been over the fact already.
    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    That's just stupid and lacking any form of compassion or depth of analysis.
    Simply false. My compassion is used on my wife.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    My terminology is perfectly accurate. You are advocating the murder of a baby when you advocate unfettered abortion past 22 weeks.
    Terminology fudging again. It ain't a baby, its a fetus. If you want to treat a fetus as such, I won't stop you. Now how bout you showing that same courtesy to other citizens. If they decide differently on this very personal question, respect thier right to.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Yes, I like staying grounded in reality.
    Your Opinion does not define reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Yes. You say, you say, you say. Your whole argument is based on nothing more than what you say.
    And so is yours. Any textbook science that you dig out to support you, it says in the same textbook that it is a fetus, not a baby. Why should I look at your selective science quotes, and ignore that science calls it a fetus ?

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I am not interested in your opining about how to disregard the rights of babies because it might be inconvenient for the woman. You can say until you are blue in the face, but that doesn't change the fact that the law does not agree with you because the majority of the country aren't base, depraved baby killing barbarians.
    Smearing and appeal to emotion in addition to terminology fudging.

    This is disappointing jallman.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I wouldn't imagine science would gain any traction with someone deluded enough to convince his own conscience that killing a baby is acceptable...
    Terminology fudging, and more attempts to apply science books to a personal and unprovable question.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I seem to recall hearing the same argument spouted off about other human beings prior to January 1, 1863...
    OH puh leeeze.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    It has been proven. The structural components are all there.
    You mean like the amnoitic fluid in the lungs or the umbilical cord and placenta ?

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    But you have already stated that it is irrelevant as your whole argument hinges on your personal opinion to devalue
    I have already explained to you why "devalue" is inapplicable.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Your argument lacks any form of logic or foundation in Constitutional support.
    Simply false, as the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment clearly shows.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    You feel awfully powerful being able to thrust your will onto that little baby, huh?
    How powerful do you feel when thrusting your morals onto other citizens ?

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    That has not been fully decided.
    Constitution has spoken, and is the supremem Law of the Land.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Sorry pal, that emphasis is yours and not the constitution's. It is simply stating that those naturalized here have the same rights as those born here. It in no way speaks to the topic of abortion.
    It doesn't need to. It's relevance to this discussion is who is and who isn't a citizen.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Except where your family decisions and squabbles result in a stronger family member stripping other family members of their basic human rights.
    False. If a parent grounds their kid, kid's liberty is violated. Society has no dog in this race. Staying the hell out of the area between parents and offspring is my point. I would defund the entire CPS apparatus if I could.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    For the same reason we did not ignore the holocaust. For the same reason we did not ignore slavery.
    Those happened to born persons, and thus are very different kettles of fish.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Your reproductive rights are yours until they begin inflicting harm on another sentient, sapient human being
    Not what we are talking about. It aint a human being.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    And no one is advocating attacking anyone
    Just because the thugs you send to abduct my wife wear badges, doesn't mean they aren't attacking me. If someone hires men to attack me, and I successfully defend myself, it behooves me to execute thier boss before he hires another crew, does it not ?

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I think that is a much more appropriate and poignant question when directed at the one who has no issue with the dismemberment of babies just because they are on the wrong side of the tracks...
    More terminology fudging in an attempt to appeal to emotion.

  10. #430
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Arrow Re: Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    If you are so certain that all are done with cause, then you should have no issue providing me with statistics that prove such a thing.
    Provide statistics that prove they weren't. I will stick with the fact that Tiller was a doctor and you are not. His judgment = cause.

Page 43 of 61 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •