• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is bombing a family planning clinic in opposition to abortion a terrorist act?

Is bombing a family planning clinic in opposition to abortion a terrorist act?


  • Total voters
    98
As for my motivation I just want to understand the motivation and reasoning of the OP. I see these kind of threads/opinions about making the punishments of certain crimes enhanced compared to similar crimes with similar outcomes based only on the thought process of the perp.
Then why didn't you ask the OP directly?
A crime is a crime, who cares what FU thoughts were in the mind of the creepy perp. By establishing different punishments for similar crimes and similar outcomes you are setting up two classes of victims...the fortunate and the unfortunate.{/quote]
That's your opinion.Terrorism bombings are terrorism bombings,regardless if they are perpetrated by Islamists,Anti-Abortionists,or the Russian mob.
All should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
That's my opinion.
All animal-victims are equal, but some are more equal then others. Is that really where you want to go?
What are you saying?
I want all terrorists either thrown in jail with the key melted and tossed into the Mariana's Trench,or executed.
 
Hopefully it'll give some of them second thoughts about bombing abortion clinics if it means they are going to end up at Gitmo with the other terrorists.
Or the death penalty.
Christians don't get a free pass on committing terrorist acts just because they worship Jesus.
I'm going on record on saying that all terrorists should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
In my opinion bombings are terrorist attacks.

What are your opinions on this?

Define terrorist act. Let's make sure we're comparing apples.
 
That's Verthaine for ya. He doesn't read books, he hates answering questions, and he has prerogative that only Bobby Brown can appreciate. ;)

You know,this looks like a personal attack and an attempt at baiting.I suggest you pm me if you want to continue this in private.


Are you still sore because I whooped your behind in our last debate?
Cry me a river,will ya.
 
Last edited:
Define terrorist act. Let's make sure we're comparing apples.

Terrorism is the use of violence or credible threat of violence in order to achieve a political goal.

Note: the U.S. legal definition includes a magical and completely unwarranted exemption for state actors (i.e. it exempts itself -- without basis or explanation -- from its definition of terrorism).

Since I look to substantive definitions, not definitions which magically make exceptions for this or that group or organization, I don't include the exemption.

This means, of course, that governments (and agents working on their behalf) constitute the world's most frequent and severe examples of terrorism and terrorists.
 
Define terrorist act. Let's make sure we're comparing apples.

According to my definition,terrorism is violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians).
Now what's yours?
 
How do you know what I do or don't do?
Isn't it obvious? You're a devout follower of Jeremiah Wright, an admirer (if not member) of the Black Panther organization, and a parroter of Bobby Brown lyrics. ;)

Are you still sore because I whooped your behind in our last debate?
Cry me a river,will ya.
What debate? Your comments had zero substance. How can we have a debate when you don't participate? Sure, you've got attitude, but that doesn't help you very much in intellectual circles. You're just too flakey, Verthaine, and I'm sorry you had to hear that from me.
 
Last edited:
You speak the truth, FreedomFromAll, IMO.
And one can say that both are acts of terrorism.
IMO, both are crimes, first and foremost....
This is the reason for the yes and no "vote".
Those who bomb clinics "think", if one can call it that, of the victims as being collateral. A terrorist similarity (anti-abortion and Islamic) is that they have no respect for others and little for themselves.
 
Last edited:
You speak the truth, IMO.
And one can say that both are acts of terrorism.
IMO, both are crimes, first and foremost....
This is the reason for the yes and no "vote".
Those who bomb clinics "think", if one can call it that, of the victims as being collateral. A terrorist similarity (anti-abortion and Islamic) is that they have no respect for others and little for themselves.
Agreed. Senseless violence, unfortunately, makes its way across the entire board.
 
Isn't it obvious? You're a devout follower of Jeremiah Wright, an admirer (if not member) of the Black Panther organization,

I'd ask you to prove it,but every one knows you can't.Stop hijacking this thread for your petty vendetta's.
and a parroter of Bobby Brown lyrics. ;)
I don't know who Bobby Brown is.I tend to listen to Miles Davis and Thelonious Monk.


But nice failed attempt at painting me a portrait.
Stop hijacking this thread for your petty vendetta's.

Like I said before,if you wish to continue this,there is PM,or do you need an audience?
What debate? Your comments had zero substance.
That's your opinion.Isn't it great that we live in a country where were can state our opinions?
Now stop hijacking this thread for your petty vendetta's.

How can we have a debate when you don't participate?
How can we have a debate if I don't automatically agree with everything you say?
Is this what this is really about?
Are you mad that I don't automatically agree with everything you say?
Stop hijacking this thread for your petty vendetta's.

Sure, you've got attitude, but that doesn't help you very much in intellectual circles. You're a flake, Verthaine, and I'm sorry you had to hear that from me.
That is your opinion.
Isn't it great we live in a country were we can state our opinions.

Yet here you are,hijacking a thread for a petty vendetta and you call me a flake?
 
Last edited:
Is bombing a family planning clinic in opposition to abortion a terrorist act? I say that it is. It's the use of violence to try to get your way politically.

I don't know about a terrorist attack but its definitely breaking the law and anyone caught doing it should be punished to the full extent of the law.
 
I'd ask you to prove it,but every one knows you can't.Stop hijacking this thread for your petty vendetta's.
It's 'Vendettas' not 'Vendetta's'.... for future reference. ;)

No hijacking here, my friend. I was just agreeing with the other poster about your 'banal' comments. You're the one who charged in with both fists swinging.
 
domestic terrorism.
 
I say no.

I would think the objection of someone bombing an abortion clinic is to destroy the abortion clinic itself and stop what happens there.

"Act of terror" would seem foremost focused on creating general terror more than a specific target for the ends of destroying that target.

Because an act causes fear does not constitute an act of terror. All violence causes fear.

Noting I am particularly pro-choice, still there are real ethical-judgment issues that do arise. If someone TRULY believed innocent "babies" were being murdered in mass numbers at a facility, wouldn't there be an ethical duty to stop it? Would it have been "immoral" for someone to have blown up a train used to transport Jews to Nazi death camps?

I would think if someone blew up an abortion clinic it certainly is illegal, but if done in a manner deliberately to try to avoid hurting someone I would think it would not fall into the "terrorism" category, but rather an act by someone zealous about their real belief that abortion is murdering a baby.
 
Last edited:
I say no.

I would think the objection of someone bombing an abortion clinic is to destroy the abortion clinic itself and stop what happens there.

(bolding mine)
That's clearly a political goal.
Violence, or credible threat of violence: check
in order to achieve a political goal: check

Terrorism.
 
I have a better idea. Have them work in abortion clinics to see what is actually done or in wards where seriously deformed or disabled babies are born because the mom was too afriad to have an abortion. Or in rape clinics which deal with the victims of rape and incest.

Under guard of course./
 
Of course it is a terrorist act.
 
Is bombing a family planning clinic in opposition to abortion a terrorist act? I say that it is. It's the use of violence to try to get your way politically.


If its a bombing to intimidate and coerce other abortion clinics to stop providing abortion then sure its legally a act of terrorism. If its just to stop that clinic then no its not a act of terrorism. Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.So basically two things have to happen in order for something to be terrorist act, the unlawful use of violence and the goal to coerce and or intimidate a group of people with that unlawful use of violence. Merely bombing a building,merely killing someone does not meet that definition of terrorism.
 
According to my definition,terrorism is violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians).
Now what's yours?

So if a prolifer bombed a clinic at midnight when there was no one there it wouldn't be terrorism?
 
I say no, only because I think we're throwing the word "terrorism" around far too easily these days. Everything is terrorism. Personally, I don't care. It's criminal. Prosecute them under the laws for destruction of property and/or murder if someone was killed in the attack. Tacking on "terrorism" doesn't really mean anything.
 
Is there some significance to it being deemed a "terrorsit act", say a longer prison sentence, as opposed to your usual, everyday bombing?

If a jury is handing down the sentence, probably.
 
I say no, only because I think we're throwing the word "terrorism" around far too easily these days. Everything is terrorism. Personally, I don't care. It's criminal. Prosecute them under the laws for destruction of property and/or murder if someone was killed in the attack. Tacking on "terrorism" doesn't really mean anything.

Agreed. I say deal with the act and the result as you would any other crime. I get concerned when we start crossing into thought crime territory and this may be an example.
 
Agreed. I say deal with the act and the result as you would any other crime. I get concerned when we start crossing into thought crime territory and this may be an example.

I say we should get rid of hate crimes for the same reason. They're already crimes, I really don't care why someone commits a crime, only that they do so and deserve to be punished.
 
yes its a terrorist act by definition :shrug:
 
Back
Top Bottom