Fanatical religious terrorist incident Colorado Springs.

[Kutnupe14]

PaulF, for a moderator you can be one of the most inflammatory posters on this forum. This post is off topic, extremely inflammatory, personally vindictive, and just plain wrong.

There nothing inflammatory about his post, and I share his belief. What's "inflammatory," is that it is outside YOUR particular belief. He's, and everyone else, is entitle to their opinion.

 

[miguel]

What goes on inside a woman's body is the business of that woman...not you, not me, not the government.

Doesn't the government dropping $500M or more a year on PP affect "what goes on inside a woman's body" -- regardless of the 'health service' that is being provided by PP?

If so, then you'd support a Federal defunding of PP? I mean, because what goes on inside a woman's body is not our -- or the government's -- business, right?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Democrats pulled a helluva trick when they made it unlawful for states to NOT fund Planned Parenthood.

Alabama ends court fight over Planned Parenthood funding | Reuters

 

[Kutnupe14]

No. Polls are showing Americans are increasingly less sympathic towards abortion. If we can ever get real, Constitutional--original intent, oriented judges appointed to the SC, ones that would over turn follies such as RvW, Kelo, ObamaCare I and II, I think you'd see many states outlaw abortion. There'd be some that would keep it, so you're right -- but this is a state issue anyway.

I find that difficult to believe, at least the validity. The right to have an abortion isn't threatened at all.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Pop

Doesn't the government dropping $500M or more a year on PP affect "what goes on inside a woman's body" -- regardless of the 'health service' that is being provided by PP?

If so, then you'd support a Federal defunding of PP? I mean, because what goes on inside a woman's body is not our -- or the government's -- business, right?

This is fair. Govt should have no business being involved.

 

[hoosierdoc]

There nothing inflammatory about his post, and I share his belief. What's "inflammatory," is that it is outside YOUR particular belief. He's, and everyone else, is entitle to their opinion.

Not worth arguing to argue. What I said is true.

adding to ignore list lest I get banned. I'll wait a day and probably add PaulF. Life's too short.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

POTUS on Colorado Springs mass shooting: "This just doesn't happen in other countries."

Ironic that he said this standing in Paris, where it did just happen.

 

[hoosierdoc]

POTUS on Colorado Springs mass shooting: "This just doesn't happen in other countries."

Ironic that he said this standing in Paris, where it did just happen.

Paris was actual religious motivated killing. CO was mental illness being played off as religious killing. Obama is an idiot.

 

[churchmouse]

Abortion always brings out the emotions in people.
It is and always will be a hot button topic.
We all see this through eyes from personal feelings and life's experiences.
I would suggest that all involved in this discussion please take a deep breath and stand back for a minute.

Please take a break. Abortion will end up being Verboten if cooler heads do not prevail.

Thanks,

-CM-

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

There nothing inflammatory about his post, and I share his belief.

Funny how that works.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Paris was actual religious motivated killing. CO was mental illness being played off as religious killing. Obama is an idiot.

Ironic. You have an official diagnosis of the shooter's mental condition, or are you just "playing the odds" that you're right?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Funny how that works.

How what works?

 

[hoosierdoc]

This was not a discussion about abortion until our friendly mod made it that and attacked pro-life folks.

I seem to recall the very same individual blowing up a thread with inflammatory statements earlier in the year.

Abortion always brings out the emotions in people.
It is and always will be a hot button topic.
We all see this through eyes from personal feelings and life's experiences.
I would suggest that all involved in this discussion please take a deep breath and stand back for a minute.

Please take a break. Abortion will end up being Verboten if cooler heads do not prevail.

Thanks,

-CM-

 

[Kutnupe14]

This was not a discussion about abortion until our friendly mod made it that and attacked pro-life folks.

I seem to recall the very same individual doing something similar earlier in the year.

You can tone down the rhetoric. I'm sure your feelings weren't hurt that bad.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Abortion always brings out the emotions in people.
It is and always will be a hot button topic.
We all see this through eyes from personal feelings and life's experiences.
I would suggest that all involved in this discussion please take a deep breath and stand back for a minute.

Please take a break. Abortion will end up being Verboten if cooler heads do not prevail.

Thanks,

-CM-

As I see it, there are three basic approaches to this:

We can throw bricks.

We can explore the subject in such a way as to promote mutual understanding, which probably will not yield agreement on the subject, but can make it easier to agree to disagree while maintaining mutual respect and appreciation for each other.

Then, there is that verboten thing, which so far as I am concerned never produces good results, at least so far as intellectual honesty is concerned, with the subject of religion standing as a good example.

 

[IndyDave1776]

This was not a discussion about abortion until our friendly mod made it that and attacked pro-life folks.

I seem to recall the very same individual blowing up a thread with inflammatory statements earlier in the year.

You can tone down the rhetoric. I'm sure your feelings weren't hurt that bad.

Stop. Take a deep breath.

First, being a moderator doesn't stop a person from being the person he is. Paul is given to have strong feelings about his beliefs. If we are going to excoriate him for this, you might as well start working on me while you're at it. I can understand the feeling of playing against the other team and the referee both, but I see it as more perception than substance. I also see it as important to an honest discussion to share what one honestly feels. Let me emphasize that I find Paul's honesty and candor refreshing even when we disagree.

Second, we are all the product of our cumulative experience. This is one of those points where we really get smacked in the face with that fact regardless of the positions taken by any given individual.

Third, if a person feels offended by any given expression of thought, that is equally subject to the principle of intellectual honesty and its importance to an honest and productive discussion as the basic subject-matter itself.

Fourth, the reasons why we hold the beliefs we hold are generally at least as important as the beliefs themselves. We never see this when we kneel at the altar of political correctness and prohibit people from saying what they honestly believe and why they believe it.

 

[hoosierdoc]

"Be the man you are, and let everyone else deal with it."

it's my new motto. Trying hard to live up to it. It's beyond time to call a spade a spade (in my personal life in general, not specifically INGO). Limp wristed action in support of our beliefs is why our country is being invaded and given away. No more.

 

[Kutnupe14]

"Be the man you are, and let everyone else deal with it."

it's my new motto. Trying hard to live up to it. It's beyond time to call a spade a spade (in my personal life in general, not specifically INGO). Limp wristed action in support of our beliefs is why our country is being invaded and given away. No more.

As a courtesy, you should allow that belief to be extended to others.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

You seek to use government to force other people, primarily women, to live against their conscience to appease your own sense of morality. Think that over for a minute.

The anti-choice side of this argument is objectively not pro-life....they are merely pro-birth. These people want to use pregnancy as a bludgeon to force women to behave in ways that conform to beliefs that run counter to that woman's own beliefs. By equating abortion to murder, they hope to shame women into abstaining from sex (except in circumstances beneficial for people other than the woman), they hope to keep women servile and complacent. Limiting access to abortion is not about "saving lives", it is about controlling women...Let's face it, we have been here before. Prior to Roe V Wade abortion was illegal in the US. Oddly enough, there were no shortages of abortions and abortion attempts. Wealthy women have the option to go overseas, or to hire "discrete" medical services, while women of lesser means were often faced with a real dilemma...carry a baby they don't want, or cannot care for, or are simply not ready for...or hurt themselves in an attempt to abort. Prior to RvW it was a relatively common occurrence for women to lose their reproductive abilities or even their lives in botched abortion attempts. Obviously, the unborn died as well. Illegal abortion does not "save babies"...it kills pregnant women.

You and your ilk want to go back to these days...how very pro-life of you...?

Dave, I am a pragmatist, not an idealist.

What goes on inside a woman's body is the business of that woman...not you, not me, not the government.

As a religious person, don't you take solice in knowing that the woman will face "judgement" by your god for her decisions? If she is willing to face those risks, what difference does it make to you? Why do you need to enforce your will over her in this life? Won't your god do that for all of eternity?

I love how people on this forum are all laissez-faire until it comes to what happens inside someone else's body...then they want control.

The pro-murder side of this argument is definitely not pro-life. I am pro-life and I don't wish to force women to behave in any manner. I do believe actions have consequences those consequences can be good or bad, and can vary depending on viewpoint. By equating murder with choice they hope to shame pro-lifers into accepting murder.

With the types and amount and availability of birth control in this country there is no reason for any woman to abstain from sex if they don't wish to with no fear of getting pregnant.

How is using the govt to prevent/punish murder forcing someone to live against their conscious?

What goes on with any persons body is their own business. Until it materially effects another, you know that whole your right to swing your fist ends at my nose thing?

As a religious person no I don't, just as I take no solace that the scum bag that is the topic of this thread will have to, or the scum bags in Paris, or the scum bags that killed the preachers wife in Indy.

I don't wish to control a woman's body, no more than I wish to control any others. They have control over their body, what they don't have is a right to commit murder. Are you saying that if I shoot someone intentionally I shouldn't be charged? Or the scum that is the topic of this thread? After all by doing so you are attempting to control their body, they used their body to pull the trigger after all.

PaulF do you agree or disagree with enhanced punishments or additional charges when someone murders a pregnant woman, such as the case of the preachers wife I mentioned?

There nothing inflammatory about his post, and I share his belief. What's "inflammatory," is that it is outside YOUR particular belief. He's, and everyone else, is entitle to their opinion.

No? Please. Anti-choice? Stating that pro-life is simply about control of women and keeping them down? Jabs at religion?

I'm going to go out on a limb and just guess that you don't think the same about my post?

And how about you? Do you agree or disagree with enhanced punishments or additional charges when someone murders a pregnant woman, such as the case of the preachers wife I mentioned?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I think there are a few other threads that are more appropriate to fight about abortion and morals. You might need to request that they be unlocked though. This one, however, is about the shooting in Colorado.

Glenwood Planned Parenthood gets security review | PostIndependent.com

Now they're mad that the DHS won't call this terrorism

Anti-abortion head of Homeland Security committee: Colorado shooting was not ?domestic terrorism?