Pro-Lifers cannot think a fetus is a "person"

[Munch]

This is where I’m going to start disagreeing with you.

@Whack-a-Mole

Would a sit-in be sufficient in your view to convey the level of opposition you feel to such a thing?

Yes. Terry evokes the spirit of the Civil Rights Movement - and not the violent side of it. Engaging in a massively coordinated effort of civil disobedience is exactly what I think the “abortion=murder” crowd should be resorting to, if they believe their own rhetoric.

Of course Mr. Terry carefully advocates for peaceful opposition in his screed, he is no dummy to jeopardize his position by inciting violence yet implicitly that is exactly what he is doing.

Sorry, but I think you’re trying to shoehorn violence into his call to action where there is none.

I submit that if Mr. Terry truly believed his own rhetoric we’d see a good deal more than a press release from him.

You honestly don’t think that Terry believes “abortion=murder”? He’s one of the few that really has dedicated his entire life to this cause. That is an absurd conclusion to reach. Making a far-reaching call for civil disobedience and dialing up the public discourse and outrage is an extremely appropriate response, and, IMO, commensurate with the degree of severity abortion is (according to their beliefs).

The point of the thread is to highlight the actual damage caused by the rhetoric. There are always some wingnuts out there who will latch on to these words and murdering a doctor becomes a perfectly reasonable action to them. They are not a murderer, they are a hero in their own head. If you believe this stuff than how can anything less than exceptionally vigorous opposition be in order?

And now I’m seeing why many in this thread are reading your statements to be of the “murdering the murdering murderers is the only justifiable conclusion to their beliefs” ilk.

[Contrapuntal]

@Mr.Moto

I do not need to hold that unborn children have the full rights due a newborn baby or a child or an adult - we recognize in our law that certain rights accrue to a person at various stages of their development.

This would fully permit many customary practices in our society and in our law - like not generally having funerals for miscarriages and the like.

What laws require funerals? You’re conflating legislation with religious doctrine, which raises the question : Why don’t religions require funerals for miscarriages? Or even acknowledge the fact that they have occurred? As many as 30% of all conceptions end in spontaneous abortion, yet these fully human spiritual beings with souls provided by their loving Creator are allowed to disappear onto a toilet without even a passing mention by His subjects, whereas if even only a legbone of a human who died violently is recovered, it is awarded full rites and passages. It’s really a bit of a curious thing.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Here’s a question for the Lifers, What if abortion was no longer legal? Picture this – you’re walking down the hallway of a hospital after having had minor hemorrhoid surgery. You, of course, are strapped, since you live in a state which allows open carry in hospitals. You are ambling along, whistling happily, and twirling your Jericho 941 “Baby Eagle” on one finger. You happen to look in a door and see a doctor about to perform what you know from your med school training is an illegal Intact Dilation and Extraction (aka “partial-birth abortion”) on a woman who your expert eye tells you is approximately 22 weeks pregnant. You can tell that the illegal abortionist has already partially drawn the fetus feet first into the birth canal, and is just about to perform the procedure to evacuate the brain case so the skull can be more easily passed through the cervix. You do not have time to call security or law enforcement. The fetus will die within seconds.

You scream for the abortionist to stop. He ignores you. He is just starting to go in with a scalpel to make the necessary incision in the skull of the fetus. You consider running to tackle him, but you would not have time to get to him before he killed the fetus. The only way you can stop him from killing the fetus is by shooting him with your Israeli semi-automatic assault pistol. Is it ethical to kill the doctor to stop the abortion?

Remeber, in this scenario the doctor is performing an illegal operation. What he’s doing is defined statutorally as no different than killing a toddler. Do you shot him or not? If not, why not?

[Contrapuntal]

@Contrapuntal

What laws require funerals? You’re conflating legislation with religious doctrine, which raises the question : Why don’t religions require funerals for miscarriages? Or even acknowledge the fact that they have occurred? As many as 30% of all conceptions end in spontaneous abortion, yet these fully human spiritual beings with souls provided by their loving Creator are allowed to disappear onto a toilet without even a passing mention by His subjects, whereas if even only a legbone of a human who died violently is recovered, it is awarded full rites and passages. It’s really a bit of a curious thing.

Edit : into a toilet.

[Sinaijon]

@Annie-Xmas

That is their whole agenda–to stop abortions.

Yes, and the whole point of the pro-choice is to have abortions.

Seriously, try google. It’s free.

[Sinaijon]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Do you shot him or not? If not, why not?

I’d expertly shoot the scalpel out of his hand. The baby would be born, and the hot new mom would thank me gratuitously for saving her baby from the evil doctor who had drugged her in order to steal her baby for stem cell research.

Then I’d be awarded a Presidential Medal of Freedom and be proclaimed a hero above all others.

[kevlaw]

@Malthus

I never thought I’d end up arguing on the side of “pro-lifers”.

Me neither! If we could recruit some moderate pro-lifers to argue against the extremists on their side, we might make some progress.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Sinaijon

Yes, and the whole point of the pro-choice is to have abortions.

No, the goal of the pro-choice movement is to keep it legal. The vast majority of pro-choicers never have an abortion in their lives, nor do most of them (I am an exception) have any desire to see the number of abortions increased.

[mswas]

@Whack-a-Mole

Pot, meet kettle. :rolleyes:

Darfur is not our society. It is not relevant to this discussion at all which is about our laws and morals.

Then you must not have been really against the Iraq war. :rolleyes:

[Sinaijon]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

No, the goal of the pro-choice movement is to keep it legal. The vast majority of pro-choicers never have an abortion in their lives, nor do most of them (I am an exception) have any desire to see the number of abortions increased.

Duh. I was simply turning her same absurd assertion around.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@Munch

This is where I’m going to start disagreeing with you.
Yes. Terry evokes the spirit of the Civil Rights Movement - and not the violent side of it. Engaging in a massively coordinated effort of civil disobedience is exactly what I think the “abortion=murder” crowd should be resorting to, if they believe their own rhetoric.

A guy in your neighborhood is decapitating little boys and girls. The police cannot stop him (for whatever reason). How do you and your neighbors respond? March in front of his house on occasion sufficient for you?

Sorry, but I think you’re trying to shoehorn violence into his call to action where there is none.

Clearly this kind of rhetoric has inflamed some to murder abortion doctors. I am unaware of any rhetoric from the pro-choice side inflaming someone to kill a pro-lifer. Calling abortion doctors murderers who decapitate little kids and carve up women’s wombs is trying to evoke a far more visceral hatred of these doctors than merely saying, “We believe these people are misguided and hope to convince them of the error of their ways.”

[Whack-a-Mole]

@mswas

Then you must not have been really against the Iraq war. :rolleyes:

Huh?

[Huerta88]

@Annie-Xmas

No, that was worded wrong. In My Opinion, anti-abortionists should work within the system at changing the laws, and stop killing doctors, picketing clinics, and harassing women. It would improve their image

They have been doing so for almost 40 years. The unelected jackasses on First Street, who started this all by short-circuiting the political process in their role as Platonic Guardians, have thwarted their every (and there have been many) attempts at “changing the laws.” They’re still trying, but it’s kind of hard when Ruth Bader Ginsburg is leering on the sidelines with her thumb on the scales of justice ready to yell VETO at any given moment.

[mswas]

@Whack-a-Mole

Huh?

You must not really have opposed the Iraq war if you were unwilling to stop the mass slaughter by violence yourself.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@mswas

You must not really have opposed the Iraq war if you were unwilling to stop the mass slaughter by violence yourself.

And this is equivalent to someone murdering little kids in my neighborhood how?

[crazyjoe]

@Whack-a-Mole

A guy in your neighborhood is decapitating little boys and girls. The police cannot stop him (for whatever reason). How do you and your neighbors respond? March in front of his house on occasion sufficient for you?

Let’s change that from “The police cannot stop him” to “The police, state government, and federal government all devote massive amounts of resources to insuring he remains capable of continuing his killing spree. Not only that, but so do most other world governments, so you can’t POSSIBLY hope to win simply by placing yourself in front of the clinic. You will be forcibly removed, as will the next person, and the next, until the resources brought to bear by the government are focused in another way, or the law is changed.”

There, now you have a nearly-equivalent analogy.

[mswas]

@Whack-a-Mole

And this is equivalent to someone murdering little kids in my neighborhood how?

It’s your society sponsoring murder. If you don’t kill to stop it then you are some kind of hypocrite. At least according to the logic laid out in the OP.

[Sinaijon]

@Whack-a-Mole

And this is equivalent to someone murdering little kids in my neighborhood how?

Are you amending your original assertion? So I only have to kill abortionists if they are in my neighborhood? That’s nice to know, cause I’d rather not kill them, and the nearest clinic, much less abortion clinic is about 25 miles away.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@crazyjoe

Let’s change that from “The police cannot stop him” to “The police, state government, and federal government all devote massive amounts of resources to insuring he remains capable of continuing his killing spree. Not only that, but so do most other world governments, so you can’t POSSIBLY hope to win simply by placing yourself in front of the clinic. You will be forcibly removed, as will the next person, and the next, until the resources brought to bear by the government are focused in another way, or the law is changed.”

There, now you have a nearly-equivalent analogy.

Fine.

You still have a guy in your neighborhood decapitating little kids and throwing their bodies in a dumpster. Remember, this is a mass murderer of helpless children.

Is marching in front of his house on occasion sufficient for you to express your feelings on the matter?

[Annie-Xmas]

@crazyjoe

Let’s change that from “The police cannot stop him” to “The police, state government, and federal government all devote massive amounts of resources to insuring he remains capable of continuing his killing spree. Not only that, but so do most other world governments, so you can’t POSSIBLY hope to win simply by placing yourself in front of the clinic. You will be forcibly removed, as will the next person, and the next, until the resources brought to bear by the government are focused in another way, or the law is changed.”

There, now you have a nearly-equivalent analogy.

No, change that to “decapitating little boys and girls who have attached themselves to your body because they cannot survive on their own and removing them will result in their death so some people think you should be forced to carry them around” and you have a nearly-equivalent analogy.