DAOTD: Abortion Edition

[burdizzos]

NARAL Pro-Choice America Unveils Television Ad Focusing on John Roberts Record of Siding with Violent Anti-Choice Fringe Groups

 

 

NARAL Falsely Accuses Supreme Court Nominee Roberts

[lug]

This is odd to me. I seriously doubt there will be anyone nominated who is more palatable to both sides than Roberts. Unless they think they can stall a nominee until the next election, what they are doing is almost guaranteeing a MORE conservative choice if Roberts gets bumped off. Kind of a "Win the battle, lose the war" situation.

[Bonoman]

 

Originally posted by lug This is odd to me. I seriously doubt there will be anyone nominated who is more palatable to both sides than Roberts. Unless they think they can stall a nominee until the next election, what they are doing is almost guaranteeing a MORE conservative choice if Roberts gets bumped off. Kind of a "Win the battle, lose the war" situation.

 

 

I agree. Roberts may still be a little too right-wing for my tastes, but compared to the kind of person Bush could have nominated he's not that bad. He seems fair and reasonable, and I really don't think we can ask for much more at this point.

[lug]

Originally posted by Bonoman I agree. Roberts may still be a little too right-wing for my tastes, but compared to the kind of person Bush could have nominated he's not that bad. He seems fair and reasonable, and I really don't think we can ask for much more at this point.

 

Quit agreeing with me.

[Bonoman]

Originally posted by lug Quit agreeing with me.

 

It's not my fault that you occasionally make sense!

[takeout]

There is a tremor in The Suck...

[lug]

Originally posted by Bonoman It's not my fault that you occasionally make sense!

 

DO NOT!

 

 

wait.......

 

 

Uh....thanks!

[J the D]

That NARAL story is so full of intentianally misleading comments that it really is sad. Randall Terry and Operation Rescue have never, ever been linked to any violent acts taken upon an abortion provider. His tactics have exclusively been nonviolent in the fashion proven to be effective by the late Dr. Martin Luther King. Terry and other completely nonviolent groups were intentionlly linked in with the murderer Michael Bray by Reno's Justice Department in an overt attempt to paint them with the violent brush, precisely as NARAL is doing. IIRC the case was ultimately resolved against the Attorney General.

 

 

Sad that the truth has to be so far from what they present.

[Mudbass]

Sadly, the truth doesn't matter. The ads will run and the public will suck it up and it will become "fact" in the public consciousness whether there is a grain of truth to the accusations or not.

[Bonoman]

 

Originally posted by Mudbass Sadly, the truth doesn't matter. The ads will run and the public will suck it up and it will become "fact" in the public consciousness whether there is a grain of truth to the accusations or not.

 

 

What's that saying? If you repeat a lie three times it becomes the truth?

[lug]

 

Originally posted by Bonoman What's that saying? If you repeat a lie three times it becomes the truth?

 

 

Close. If you repeat a mistake 3 times, it's Jazz.

[johnny6644]

 

Originally posted by J the D That NARAL story is so full of intentianally misleading comments that it really is sad. Randall Terry and Operation Rescue have never, ever been linked to any violent acts taken upon an abortion provider. His tactics have exclusively been nonviolent in the fashion proven to be effective by the late Dr. Martin Luther King. Terry and other completely nonviolent groups were intentionlly linked in with the murderer Michael Bray by Reno's Justice Department in an overt attempt to paint them with the violent brush, precisely as NARAL is doing. IIRC the case was ultimately resolved against the Attorney General. Sad that the truth has to be so far from what they present.

 

 

Yeah, Terry sounds like a reasonable guy:

 

As the Fort Wayne (Indiana) News Sentinel reported on August 16, 1993, at an anti-abortion rally in Fort Wayne, Terry said "Our goal is a Christian nation. ... We have a biblical duty, we are called by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism. ... Theocracy means God rules. I've got a hot flash. God rules." In that same speech, Terry also stated that "If a Christian voted for [former President Bill] Clinton, he sinned against God. It's that simple."

[Bonoman]

Originally posted by lug Close. If you repeat a mistake 3 times, it's Jazz.

 

Right! I knew it was something like that!

[J the D]

 

Originally posted by johnny6644 Yeah, Terry sounds like a reasonable guy: As the Fort Wayne (Indiana) News Sentinel reported on August 16, 1993, at an anti-abortion rally in Fort Wayne, Terry said "Our goal is a Christian nation. ... We have a biblical duty, we are called by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism. ... Theocracy means God rules. I've got a hot flash. God rules." In that same speech, Terry also stated that "If a Christian voted for [former President Bill] Clinton, he sinned against God. It's that simple."

 

 

 

Whether Terry is reasonable or not completely depends upon your point if view. The thing I said was that Terry is no more violent in his fight against killing babies than Martin Luther King was in fighting segragation and that Terry should not be painted with the same brush as people who kill. Terry spends his entire life protesting against people who kill other humans, he is not one that does, supports or condones the killing. The NARAL article clearly misrepresents who he is, what he stands for and what he has done. If that is the level you have to stoop to to make your point your point probably shouldn't be made.

[johnny6644]

 

Originally posted by J the D Whether Terry is reasonable or not completely depends upon your point if view. The thing I said was that Terry is no more violent in his fight against killing babies than Martin Luther King was in fighting segragation and that Terry should not be painted with the same brush as people who kill. Terry spends his entire life protesting against people who kill other humans, he is not one that does, supports or condones the killing. The NARAL article clearly misrepresents who he is, what he stands for and what he has done. If that is the level you have to stoop to to make your point your point probably shouldn't be made.

 

 

 

 

In one speech, Terry said that abortion doctors should be executed. I don't find that reasonable or non-violent.

[Mudbass]

 

Originally posted by johnny6644 Yeah, Terry sounds like a reasonable guy: As the Fort Wayne (Indiana) News Sentinel reported on August 16, 1993, at an anti-abortion rally in Fort Wayne, Terry said "Our goal is a Christian nation. ... We have a biblical duty, we are called by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism. ... Theocracy means God rules. I've got a hot flash. God rules." In that same speech, Terry also stated that "If a Christian voted for [former President Bill] Clinton, he sinned against God. It's that simple."

 

 

You left part of it out.

 

"I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good...Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism."

 

The guy is a raging zealot no question about it, but he hasn't blown anything up nor has he killed anybody. He's been arrested for doing some pretty strange stuff, but none of it has been violent.

[bbl]

 

Originally posted by J the D Whether Terry is reasonable or not completely depends upon your point if view.

 

 

Point of view? Try "level of sanity."

[NeonVomit]

The dude seems alright. Sure he's a right winger, but he seems fair and impartial enough. They're just making a big deal out of it because GWB appointed him. Sigh.

[niomosy]

Originally posted by Mudbass You left part of it out. "I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good...Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism." The guy is a raging zealot no question about it, but he hasn't blown anything up nor has he killed anybody. He's been arrested for doing some pretty strange stuff, but none of it has been violent.

 

The guy wanting a Christian nation is reason enough for me to not really want him in office. Who they might try to get in his place scares me even more, though

[Mudbass]

Originally posted by niomosy The guy wanting a Christian nation is reason enough for me to not really want him in office. Who they might try to get in his place scares me even more, though

 

Relax, he's not going to get elected to anything important. The left-wing hates him and he's so far out on the lunatic fringe he makes mainstream conservatives way too nervous.

[Smorgasboy]

whoa...this thread got all topsy-turvy. Some of you are talking about John Roberts (who seems like a pretty sensible guy), and some of you are talking about Randall Terry (who is an extremist hate-mongering lunatic).

 

 

...but yeah, any liberal who is railing against Roberts needs a reality check--while not perfect, he's the best we can really hope for in a Bush nominee, and Bush deserves to be commended for nominating someone who is thoughtful and intelligent, and who isn't particularly political or devisive.

 

...what the libs should really be doing is saving their breath, their ammunition, and their credibility for whoever gets nominated to replace Rehnquist. Bush already picked someone palatable to both sides of the aisle--the next time around he may feel more inclined to appease his base on the conservative right. The last thing we need is another Scalia, who pretty much injects politics into every decision he makes.

[hawkhuff]

Originally posted by lug This is odd to me. I seriously doubt there will be anyone nominated who is more palatable to both sides than Roberts. Unless they think they can stall a nominee until the next election, what they are doing is almost guaranteeing a MORE conservative choice if Roberts gets bumped off. Kind of a "Win the battle, lose the war" situation.

SHHHH!

 

Lug leave the libs alone, they will screw it all up far better than anyone else will be able to do. They are getting expert at {censored} ups over the last few years. If the keep on doing what they're doing they will lose even more elections.

[Oddsock]

From the NARAL site:

 

[hawkhuff]

 

Originally posted by Oddsock From the NARAL site:

[niomosy]

 

Originally posted by Mudbass Relax, he's not going to get elected to anything important. The left-wing hates him and he's so far out on the lunatic fringe he makes mainstream conservatives way too nervous.

 

 

That seems to be the case. I'm not too concerned at this point but I'll keep an eye on things. I caught a bit of one of the commercials last night. Meh... typical political campaign type stuff.