- Joined
- May 12, 2009
- Messages
- 5,289
- Reaction score
- 2,294
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
you get a lable on yoursYou are a speed reader then.
you get a lable on yoursYou are a speed reader then.
de burgh, there are some quality posters here on both sides, with entreched views, the rhetoric of some, about this emotive topic really does not offend or shock me in the cloister of this fantasy world.You are a speed reader then.
Only the first two really are much in the way of proof for your point. The others are way too ambiguous.
But they are silly remarks, you are correct there.
That you choose to ignore the fact that an unborn infant's body produces a chemical that keeps the air sacs of the lungs open (necessary for gas exchange within the lungs to oxygenate the blood, which allows the child to survive independent of its mother), plus makes breathing motions while still within the womb (an indication that, if outside the womb, it would still make those same breathing motions, only the baby would be inhaling air instead of amniotic fluid) allows me to believe that you prefer to live in denial.
It looks like that to me. Only a couple of those were reasonably clear.There's NO ambiguity at all where those people stand on the murder of Dr. Tiller.
Actually it isn't contradictory. They're saying he was an evil man who got his dues but they cannot support murder. I consider many such but I don't want them murdered.Also, I left out a handful where people said, "I condemn the shooting, but Tiller got what he deserved.", which is a self-contradictory statement, you can't condemn an act but then be glad it was committed or believe that it was well-deserved.
He should be treated like the terrorist he is and shipped off to gitmo. :2wave:
you can't condemn an act but then be glad it was committed or believe that it was well-deserved.
....and why not???? I condemn the murder...but I also condem the MURDERS Tiller committed.
as far as getting what he deserved....thats for G-D to decide.
(of which neither you or I are)
And how does Scott Roeder keep getting statements to the press? Will someone put a gag order on that jerk already!
No one cares what he has to say. If he's got info about other crimes in the works, tell it to the FBI. But ST*U about your 'victory'.
Maybe for you.It's a slippery slope when we start making up mental lists of people we think deserve to die.
He should be treated like the terrorist he is and shipped off to gitmo. :2wave:
So? that does not mean he wasn't a monster.Tiller didn't commit any murders. That's the point. You may not be comfortable (I am not) with the way he pushed the legal, ethical boundary. But in this country, and more importantly, in his state, Tiller did nothing illegal.
.
Anything to make Pro-Life look bad.
You guys had a tendency to do that before Roeder ever came along. Just sayin'.
Anything to make Pro-Life look bad.
I think you've confused us with the pro-choice guys.:2razz:
However an animal is not a human.So does that mean if a PETA member killed a worker at a Slaughter house that killed animals you would be supportive?
Or is it YOUR morals tell you that killing animals is ok?
Both a SLAUGHTER HOUSE and ABORTION CLINIC are LEGAL.
Yet you claim that legal doesn't mean it is moral or right.
So what makes a PETA member wrong for killing a worker at a slaughter house wrong, and killing an abortion doctor right? Could it be your MORALS?
What makes your MORALS right to do such a thing?
We have our crazies, too, I confess.
Anything to make Pro-Life look bad.
However an animal is not a human.
Have you ever had a human fetus with potatoes?
I don't give a hoot that someones wanton killing happens to be sanctioned by the government. Evil is evil; legal or not.
I might be one of them seeing as I would not ban abortion until the second trimester, although I'd probably keep the restrictions that we have in Britain such as a doctor's permission and such, even if my mentality is pro-life.