You can be anti-abortion. This, however, makes you overbearing, dishonest fucks.

The BBQ Pit
1

As part of my job the other day, I was trying to find out some information from and contact somebody involved with The Brookings Institution. You are probably familiar with this organization. It’s a Washington D.C.-based, non-partisan thinktank group, maybe slightly left-of-center, that does research and offers opinions and presentations on a wide variety of public policy issues.

I am not aware that it has ever delved into the issue of abortion.

I didn’t know the web address for their site, so in an attempt to save time, I typed in http://www.brookingsinstitution.com, assuming that, even if that wasn’t their standard addy, they probably owned it and used it to re-direct to their correct one.

I was instead re-directed to a site called abortionismurder.org. They were kind enough to show close-ups of aborted fetuses across my screen before I had even figured out that I’d been bamboozled.

Here’s a little memo to you anti-choice folks - we’ve seen what an aborted fetus looks like, m’kay? You’re not accomplishing anything by continuing to show me. It’s not adding anything new to the debate, or changing millions of people’s views on abortion. You’re not proving when viable human life begins, or that a woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy within a legally allowed timeframe is commiting murder. You’re just grossing me out.

And don’t you folks oppose women being able to use R.U. 486? Why? Because the end result of that wouldn’t look humanoid enough on a poster or web page?

Anyway, I’m not here to criticize anti-choice people for their view. They have a right to their view. I’m here to call them lying assholes for their misrepresentation of the Brookings Institution name.

Also, when you hit the ‘back’ button or click off their web page, they pop up another page under the heading of ‘not convinced,’ and again show you aborted fetuses. Hey, thanks for the second look! Now I get it! Let’s go bomb some clinics!

Life begins when you stop being such dishonest, over-bearing, self-righteous pricks.

2

I’m too repulsed to examine the sight in detail. The misdirection of the ISP is intolerable. Showing that on a front page without warning is intolerable. Spamming your browser by reloading when you try to turn it off is intolerable.

These PETA type shock tactics do nothing to garner my sympathy, and I doubt they’ll save many lives, as few women contemplating an abortion and looking for information would be able to tolerate that enough to read whatever it is they have to say.

Like PETA I suspect that their interest lies in activism for its ownself, and feeling self-righteous and holier-than-thou, and in creating mean-spirited shocking scenarios. In short they like to hurt people, and ease their conscience in doing so by adopting a cause.

Fanatics.

I hate abortion. For at least the first several months I have to concede that it’s a woman’s choice, not mine or anyone else’s.

Still, I’d beg anybody contmplating an abortion not to listen to idiots like that on either side of the fence. There’s lots of good advice and counseling out there. In my opinion adoption is a real, generous, and courageous alternative. It’s an opportunity to turn a misfortune into a real blessing.

3

Just FYI Milo…here’s the registration. Maybe you could make your contact aware of this:

From Network Solutions:

That is pretty fucked up…I hate when people use names to deceive people…

4

I wonder if the real Brookings Institution is aware of this misdirection, and if they have said or did anything about it…

5

If any of you really wnated to you would find the real Brookings Inst and tell them. They could file a complaint with WIPO (like Madonna, Sting, and Bruce Springsteen have, but then again they all lost) and if their compaint has merit WIPO can pull their the name.

I’d do it, but I’m anti-abortion/anti-choice.

Sorry.

6

How fucked up was that?!

That’s all I have to say. I’m too nauseated to say anything else.

7

Re-reading my OP, I want to make sure I’m clear. I’m not castigating any and all people who don’t believe in abortion. Indeed, although I am pro-choice, I think I am more understanding of the opposing viewpoint than many who share my viewpoint on the subject may be.

My comments are directed at the people behind the dishonesty, poor taste and self-righteousness of the web site (particularly with the pop-up message after you decide you want to leave).

8

I don’t know about elsewhere but my hospital does not even have a separate “Abortion” section in it. Which hospital were they at for that first series of pics?

9

Oh, and before I let this go, did you actually try a search engine to find The Brookings Institute or did you quit as soon as you found something to be offended about.

As for misnomers, how did a liberal thinktank get a .edu domain that is reserved for EDUCATIONAL sites (ie schools), whereas the Heritage Foundation (a conservative thinktank) get stuck with a .org.

The difference? Anyone can register a .org, but .edu’s must be approved. I could not register JamesCarroll.edu, for instance, unless I was a certified educational institution. Apparently, that which is ‘left’ is educational, and that which is ‘right’ is not. Hmmm… me smells a little preference goin’ on…

As for the pop-up, I guess you never landed at a porn site.

Or you’re just willing to admit it. :wink:

10

**
Uh … yes. I was able to find the Brookings Institution site, subsequent to being offended by the clearly-designed-to-offend abortionismurder site, James. Thanks for caring.

**
Those are irritating too, in their own special way. Not quite as pompous as this, however. “Not convinced?” Says who? Just because I decide to leave? What the fuck is it, the Hotel California of anti-abortion web sites?

11

now they simply copied the site and then made abortion is murder pop up after you close it. Luckily my browser is messed up so the window is too small to see anything I dont want.

12

You ever been to a warez site? Popup Hell. :smiley:

13

Better than that fucking goatsex crap.

Good lord, what if some small CHILD saw that, searching for the brooks institute for a school project. Whatever. That’s just evil.

14

Nasty hijacking on their part. I wrote to their admin email address and copied the Federal Trade Commission. We’ll see what happens, if anything. At least it’ll make a point of some kind to someone.

15

The people at the institute would almost certainly have a case. While something like a persons name can be arguably up for grabs, intentionally misrepresenting yourself (by registering the name of an organization) is a violation of…some law. Yeah.

16

James Carroll: *As for misnomers, how did a liberal thinktank get a .edu domain that is reserved for EDUCATIONAL sites (ie schools), whereas the Heritage Foundation (a conservative thinktank) get stuck with a .org. *

snort The Brookings Institution, a “liberal” thinktank? Guess again. As for its “.edu” domain name, I’d guess it has something to do with the fact that Brookings incorporated the Robert Brookings Graduate School and has always plumed itself on being an educational institution as well as a policy center.

17

Besides which, all those lovely photos are of later-term abortions. Is that when most people have abortions? I have no statistics, but anecdotal knowledge plus the way state laws are structured suggest that’s simply not true. The crap on that website suggests that all abortionists and women who seek abortions have the procedure during the 6th month of pregnancy–and that pro-choicers are all for it.

18

It doesn’t really mean anything, but they’re using a font by Chank in their logo. I don’t know if Mr. Diesel would appreciate it.

19

It’s a good thing I haven’t had any breakfast or it would be spewed all over the place. As it is I feel nauseous.

There’s nothing wrong with expressing your opinion, misleading people and forcing it upon them in such a graphic manner is way out of fucking line.

The sad thing is that even if they get shut down they’ll just pop up somewhere else.

Sick fucking bastards.

20

Apparently the term “counterproductive” has never occurred to the proprietors of that site (I’ll take your word for it on the content Milo, as I’m not in the mood for Fractured Fetuses right now).

Most probably they picked on the Brookings Institution’s potential audience because they perceive it as liberal, and no doubt also pro-choice and devil-worshipping.

Although as Kimstu has shown us, Brookings is actually conservative and perhaps even neo-fascist in tone, at least according to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, which itself is so far right that it…well…it must be to the right of something. :slight_smile: