OMG We have a martyr

[DaShi]

Not if you keep selling Taiwan weapons.

[Wiglaf]

I was thinking they'd just nuke you, claim they farted, and we could move on in peace without Taiwan. Was wrong apparently.

[Kitschum]

There's no way to eliminate the threat short of martial law.

Tangential, but so what? Let there be martial law.

Then genocide machine is already in full gear. Your idea that people are going to MANDATE ABORTIONS out of spite to the anti-abortion crowd is ludicrous.

Your claim that it is in full gear might not be shared by most of the anti-abortion crowd, that is the point you're missing. You don't think it can get 'worse'? Compare abortion rates in the US and Russia.

I never said it was out of spite, that is a mischaracterization. I said there would be UNCERTAINTY as to the kind of regime to emerge out of the chaos of the breakdown of society. It might ban anti-abortionists from expressing their opinion, and in the realm of possibility it might revive the unfairly discredited science of eugenics.

Dude, if there were three to six hundred thousand domestic antiabortion terrorists it would result in a HUGE drop in the abortion rate.

Even if a million Americans supported terrorism to end abortion, there's still not going to be that number of actual terrorists, you realize this yes? But let's reconnect with reality, and reality that there's only a handful of actual terrorists a decade. In this situation, would another terrorist or two be more likely to garner sympathy or hostility in the long run?

You're suggesting gambling with long-term success in a broader culture war, one that you have yet to acknowledge by the way, which reveals the superficiality of your entire argument.

This is ridiculous. More women would hear their arguments because news stories about how women and doctors involved in abortions had been killed by terrorists would be on the news all the time. The idea that this would encourage them is hilarious.

You are not reading properly. It wouldn't encourage them to have them. It would not discourage them. I am assuming a non-terroristic movement will have more success in American public opinion, hardly ridiculous.

Doing something political counterproductive is very different from doing something morally wrong. It's like baking a bad pizza.

When you involve morals in politics, you are practically wrong by definition. Action A brings abortion rates down. Action B brings them up. Everything else equal is A or B more moral?

[notyoueither]

Kitschum, you assume in most of your arguments that campaigns of aggitation will be unsuccessful by some sort of definition.

I do not think your view is accurate.

[Dry]

If we accept that personhood begins at conception, then abortion really is comparable to the Holocaust. I'd say terrorism to try to stop the Holocaust would have been justified even in a democratic Germany.

Some people here need to be educated in Nazi theories.
The reason the nazis killed Jews is because they found Jews to be harmful to human race.
Unlike any 'classical' racist theory, where 'the others' are just lesser humans, or animals that may be enslaved, for the nazis, jews were vermin, harmful to mankind. The justification of the murders was healing, curing, purification of mankind against something that was perceived as a disease.
Nazis recognized the difficulty for some to kill seemingly innocent jewish children, but they get over this by arguing that is was also difficult to kill baby rats for example. And that, if you don't kill them, you'll never get rid of them. Like louses, kill the eggs too.
The crime of the Holocaust does not lie only in the number of death, but in the argument behind. It is crime against humanity in the most intense meaning of the word in the sense that it describes some of us, humans, as 'harmful', needing to be exterminated (and not just enslaved) as some kind of remedy for a disease.
While in traditional racism/slavery, the other is deprived of his humanity, he at least remains 'useful' by being enslaved. Jews in Nazi Germany weren't 'useful', they weren't even useless, they were vermin, harmful, it was a moral obligation, for the sake of mankind, to exterminate them. Extermination was a duty.

This kind of argument was never used before, even by the most barbaric people. People have killed for conquest, for resources, for political or religious purposes; people have exterminated other people for their land, for their riches, for their culture, out of fear; never before had anyone exterminated others because those others were perceived as a danger, as harmful to humanity.

Tell me were pro-choicers claims that it is moral obligation to kill babies 'for the sake of mankind'.
Tell me, what makes you think that an abortionist doctor is much like an SS-officer, that he thinks he is doing his human duty by removing from mankind a dangerous, harmful vermin that would cause humanity's doom if allowed to live?
Have you ever read that in pro-choice literature?

To compare any killing, manslaughter, or even modern 'genocides' to the Holocaust is ignorance of what it really was and meant.
And it is an insult to Holocausts victims.

[Dinner]

Excellent post.

[dannubis]

Seconded

[Wiglaf]

Tell me were pro-choicers claims that it is moral obligation to kill babies 'for the sake of mankind'.

Their reasons are even worse. They do it for the mother's convenience and her (often whorish) motives.

[MRT144]

Their reasons are even worse. They do it for the mother's convenience and her (often whorish) motives. And they do it on a much larger scale.

Please, you're forgetting that they do it to spite you, personally.

[Wiglaf]

lollol

[Ben Kenobi]

The reason the nazis killed Jews is because they found Jews to be harmful to human race.

Not quite. They killed Jews because they believed them to be a different race than the rest of humanity. They believed that teh Jews were 'parasites'.

This is no different from the current rhetoric that teaches that the fetus is a parasite, and thus, there is no difference in killing a fetus as killing any other non-human parasite.

The justification of the murders was healing, curing, purification of mankind against something that was perceived as a disease.

Why do we call it 'therapeutic abortion?' To cure a disease, no?

Tell me were pro-choicers claims that it is moral obligation to kill babies 'for the sake of mankind'.

Overpopulation and Malthusian arguments.

Tell me, what makes you think that an abortionist doctor is much like an SS-officer, that he thinks he is doing his human duty by removing from mankind a dangerous, harmful vermin that would cause humanity's doom if allowed to live?

He's removing a parasite, is he not?

Have you ever read that in pro-choice literature?

Yes, I have, many times. The motivations and the rhetoric are surprisingly parallel.

To compare any killing, manslaughter, or even modern 'genocides' to the Holocaust is ignorance of what it really was and meant.
And it is an insult to Holocausts victims.

If anything it's the other way around. 40 million >>> Holocaust. One could say that the eugenics of the Holocaust were a forerunner or a harbinger of abortion.

[Kidlicious]

Ben. You are a pervert.

[Dry]

This is no different from the current rhetoric that teaches that the fetus is a parasite, and thus, there is no difference in killing a fetus as killing any other non-human parasite.

I think this is one of the most disgusting distortion of words and concepts that I have encountered until now.
When the word 'parasite' is used to describe the fetus it is in NO ONE's mind (except your's, Ben) that it is meant with any negative (and even less murderous) connotations.
It is usually used in medical or biologic context to describe the fact that the fetus feeds and lives at the expenses (no negative connotations here either) of the mother. This is biologically true. And no sane person thinks of it as negative. To even think that other could think that way betrays a sick mind.
To use a biological term (any term), to distort it and to put words, thoughts and intents in other's mind is absolute intellectual dishonesty at best and evil lies, manipulation - or should I say propaganda - at worst.

Why do we call it 'therapeutic abortion?' To cure a disease, no?

No. Nobody in his sane mind would say that. Only the sick mind of people desperately in need to portray those who disagree with them in wicked ways.
I have indeed heard some (very few) women who have that kind of language, but those are women who do not want any child at all. They either use contraceptive methods or do what it needs to be sure they won't have any.
And yes, some of them use such hard words as 'parasites' and 'disease' to emphasis their negative feelings about maternity. I consider that rhetorical or highly emotional speech. It only takes a fundamentalist to take those words to the letter.

Overpopulation and Malthusian arguments.

Surely we haven't been in contact with the same persons.
Those fearing overpopulation are pro birth control (or no-children freaks), not related with pro-choice.
I never, ever heard anyone advocating abortion as a solution for overpopulation.
I begin to suspect it might be voices inside your head, but not people in real life.

He's removing a parasite, is he not?

Noooooooooo. N.E.V.E.R.
I have never, ever heard anyone using the word 'parasite' to justify an abortion except, as I said in the mouth of pro-lifers CLAIMING they have some kind of ESP and that they know what pro-choice think.
Words, thoughts, intents put in others mouth, heads and harts.
It is as insulting - if not more - as claiming to know, the intent of those entering priesthood is to freely abuse little boys.

Curious how ESP powers, usually capture only wicked intents, no?

Yes, I have, many times. The motivations and the rhetoric are surprisingly parallel.

Did you read that, first hand, from pro-choice booklet, or did you read that from quote-mining pro-life propaganda taking sentences out of context, distorting them in order to justify what they imagine in their sick mind what other people think (see the above example with the parasite).

If anything it's the other way around. 40 million >>> Holocaust. One could say that the eugenics of the Holocaust were a forerunner or a harbinger of abortion.

Ben, you are the most offensive person here.
As most hideous religious people in history, you claim to know better than the people themselves what they think and what their intents are. You put words and thoughts in their mouth and heads. You distort their words, taking them out of context.
And all this to portray them in the most inhuman, evil way.

This is dishonest, arrogant, evil and wrong.
... and you call yourself a christian?

You are very, very close to be the second person, in whole Apolyton's history to be on my ignore list.
In your case, it will be for intellectual dishonesty and unproven use ESP powers.

[Heraclitus]

You also find black people to be disgusting, BUT you're not a racist.

Did he say that or is he your DL and you're doing a little dance with the allure of a giraffe who aspires to be a stripper?

[Heraclitus]

I haven't read anything yet but while scrolling down I see the old:
abortion thread = mention of Nazis in three pages rule still applies.