Prominent Conservative Threatens "Mass Bloodshed"

If you go to redstsate.com, it compares the Dred Scott Decision, which lead to the Civil War, to Roe v Wade. Unfortunately for redstate/Erick Erickson, the abortion debate is not drawn along clear geographical lines like slavery was, and most people do not see it as the clear cut issue slavery was and are not about to start a literal war over it. Those willing to go that far are extremists on the fringes, and an entire region's economy is not based around abortion, as slavery was.

If this is truly their take, it's no surprise that conservatives, again, stretch history to fit their most current narrative. This is simply dusting off one of their old social issue chestnuts to retain their base when their actual skill at leading proves once again to be disaster. Once these freshmen republican tea party types have proven their complete inability to deliver on their simplistic promises to "lower the deficit" or "cut spending" without gutting programs which their supporters didn't realize they actually like and depend upon ,well, then they will say,"forget all that deficit stuff, looky, looky the liberals are pro-abortion (a lie, pro-choice is not pro-abortion... I find abortion abhorrent but prohibition is a fools answer). Just like W did with gay marriage. Think about it. 9-11 happened on his watch, two wars which he and his chickenhawks had no idea how to win but endless plans to cash in, Wall Street run amok along with other unregulated industries which would come back to haunt the nation, and time and time again the argument in the 2004 election returned to gay marriage and DADT? That's called a red herring. Just wait, abortion will be back on the radar by 2012 even though I've not heard one tea party candidate mention it to this point. After they've f'd up their minimal understanding of the economy, abortion will once again be the biggest threat facing the nation.

If this is truly their take, it's no surprise that conservatives, again, stretch history to fit their most current narrative. This is simply dusting off one of their old social issue chestnuts to retain their base when their actual skill at leading proves once again to be disaster.

These pro-lifers wish to pass judgment upon others according to their moral dictates. They consider their religious convictions superior over the beliefs and convictions of others? In a diverse country of citizens as the US, catholic doctrines are neither superior, nor is this country part of Vatican City.

Who are they to pass judgment upon others, especially when they are not personally involved in the moral question(s) of rape, incest or health?

To Ron C. Baker, he may be referring to the civil war, or the war of northern aggression as some I know in the south call it. He may be on to something...it has been under Republican leadership that the military has attacked sovereign states within the Union(civil war), fired on war veterans (Herbert Hoover's qelling of WW1 vets assembling on the mall), and killed unarmed university students on a campus (Kent State). Those are just a few examples of right wing extremists in positions of leadership run amok...

He is referring to Roe v. Wade, THAT Supreme Court decision. And IF you believe that the unborn are human beings, then yes you'd believe that Roe has led to the slaughter and literal bloodshed of over 30 million Americans. It's not really THAT hard to figure out, but I gess McSpocky is as bored at work as I am and had to find SOMETHING to bitch about....

Orthodox Jews and Catholics believe that masturbation and birth control are wrong, respectively. Think about it; when you masturbate or use birth control you are killing off a potential life - those sperm cells could have become a human being, but you aren't letting them. Do you slaughter potential babies by masturbating, T Bourlon? If so, you have no right to judge.

I was in grade school when I learned about cells. I was a bit older when I learned about reproduction of cells, just a little later in life.

Definitions of life (n)
life [ līf ]
existence in physical world: the quality that makes living animals and plants different from dead organisms and inorganic matter.
living individual: a living being, especially a person, often used when referring to the number of people killed in an accident or a war
living things considered together: a group of living things, usually of a particular kind
Synonyms: existence, being, living

(before sally hits me with my first ban, I would like to point this first paragraph is from WIKI)

Fertilisation (also known as conception, fecundation and syngamy), is the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism. In animals, the process involves the fusion of an ovum with a sperm, which leads to the development of an embryo. Depending on the animal species, the process can occur within the body of the female in internal fertilisation, or outside in the case of external fertilisation

The entire process of development of new individuals is called procreation, the act of species reproduction.

Lets concentrate on not just the process, but the last word.
Lets look at specific Re-production in the Human (animal species)
If we are reproducing,

Reproduction is the biological process by which new "offspring" individual organisms are produced from their "parents". Reproduction is a fundamental feature of all known life; each individual organism exists as the result of reproduction.

Can a human reproduce anything within themselves that is not human?

The first connection between a succesful sperm and ovum create a cell that reproduces the man and the woman. WAIT, was that reproduces a (living) cell that is a reproduction of a man and woman. I want to make sure, that is correct. What is it? A cell comprised of the dna of the mother, and the father which will grow for 9 months (technically 38-40 weeks is normal)typically within the mother of the new life.

New life, a cell. Its alive, and by definition it is a reproduced human.

I know you want to believe different, and I cannot explain it with any more simplicity.

I will walk thru the steps one more time,
sperm (living cell from male host) ovum (living cell from female host)
collide and create new combined cell (life) that will gestate (living) for 9 months, then thru a process of birthing, a baby reproduced (created life) will enjoy years of posterity.

Any other belief is false. Taking a life of a human child, is MURDER. That however is something between those who choose abortion, and the creator that THEY will have to answer to.

those sperm cells could have become a human being, but you aren't letting them.

Only if you use them within about 5 weeks from entering the epididymis.

From Answers.com

Sperm can be stored for as long as five weeks in the tail of the epididyms and the vas deferens until they are released at ejaculation. In the absence of ejaculation sperm dribble into the urethra and are washed away in the urine. In men who have undergone a vasectomy, sperm build up behind the ligation, and are then removed by phagocytes in the epididymis.

So what do they call this, murder or child neglect?

So the once a month flushing of eggs, just like male masturbation is a sin in the eyes of god (not sure where nocturnal emissions fits in here, are wet dreams a sin)? Are the unused eggs destroyed in fertilization clinics a sin? According to some, everything is a sin and should be punished by their god. Is there any wonder that the world is in such a state when all believers have such religious angst about every bodily function? I tend to draw the line at post birth life. Everything before that has to do with a womans legal, personal and moral choice.

All life has a natural cycle. Birth, Life, Taxes, Death. Ok, skip the taxes. I am pretty sure most of the bloggers on here, are well educated and I do not have to use 5th -7th grade biology references here.

Sperm are part of a life and death cycle that continuously (90+ year old men still produce sperm)replaces itself.

The pms cycle is also a life and death cycle that continuosly (up until menopause which varies but has been shown to exsist in women up to 90+ also)replacing the environment that is necessary to begin human life.

The two living and seperate cells merge (within a 33 hour general life cycle after release) forming the new cell, a reproduced human.

That was the only point I made, and since it is now a lving, forming, human. It is neither sperm or an ovum anymore. It is covered by the laws, morals, and should have it's own personal voice, as your last sentence points out, for any human being.

Referencing Age Qualifications:
Khurshid Bibi, an 80-year-old woman in Multan, may be the oldest woman to ever be pregnant.

sarah listed at 65, Abham listed at 100 for the male

Indian farmer Nanu Ram Jogi, who is married to his fourth wife. He has fathered a child for at least the 21st time, at the age of 90 in Rajasthan, India

In reference to your query about Sin:

There is a warning against certain things during the unclean part of the cycle. There are many references to men who would become unclean during this time, again, not listed as Sin, but a warning for other (std,hiv,hepatitis as during that time, it is easiest to spread those virus from one partner to the other)

IT falls again under the un-clean for 7 day period.

The closest those references come to sin are in Levicticus. (since sin would be a principle and moral from GOD) I will use the Bible.

"When a woman has a discharge of blood her impurity shall last for seven days; anyone who touches her shall be unclean till evening. Everything on which she lies or sits during her impurity shall be unclean. Anyone who touches her bed shall wash his clothes, bathe in water and remain unclean till evening. If he is on the bed where she is sitting, by touching it he shall be unclean till evening. If a man goes so far as to have sexual intercourse with her and any of her discharge goes on to him, then shall he be unclean for seven days, and every bed on which he lies shall be unclean." (Leviticus 15;19;24)

The natural cycles are not listed anywhere under SIN by themselves.

Used in Un-natural ways, they are listed as Sin, and punishable by death, but that is another topic not related to Child Birth, Conception, and the Right to Life/Choice.

That is your religion and you are free to practice it. You are not free to impose it on me or anyone else. I don't care what you do in your bedroom or with your body. Stay out of mine. I don't care what you do in your church. But leave it out of our government unless you can back it up without reference to your god.

I am not asking anything more of you than I am holding myself to. I don't think that is asking too much.

If it is in the Bible it is from God. One cannot pick and choose what he wants to follow from God's word and be saved. That is the basis of Jesus teachings and Mohammad's and God's.

I do agree that religion has no place in government so please keep it out of ours.

Personally, I think that viability outside the womb should be the gauge by which to define "life" as it relates to the abortion issue. Since modern medicine has made enormous advances in the survival rates of premies, abortion should be off the table as an option after the 2nd trimester of a pregnancy.

Oh, and for Mr. R, has it occurred to you that, by your definition of life posted above, cancer cells created within a human being are living human cells as well? Food for thought.

My two cents.

If it is in the Bible it is from God. One cannot pick and choose what he wants to follow from God's word and be saved. That is the basis of Jesus teachings and Mohammad's and God's.

That's not how things were in early Christianity. Very early on the Christian leaders recognized that the Bible was full of contradictions so the common man was not allowed to read the Bible. The Christian leaders quickly realized that the Bible could be interpreted in a lot of ways. So they insisted it be interpreted by scholars. Now granted that caused problems because the scholars interpreted the Bible the way they wanted, but the bottom line is the Bible was never meant to be taken literally.

Jesus replaced the Old Testament with the New Testament. The Old Testament was now antiquated document and only there as a historical reference. The old law was replaced with the law of empathy. When I grew up there was no conflict between evolution and creationism because creationism was considered to be a parable, not a fact. Most Christians today have no idea what’s in the Bible and assume that what their preacher says is God’s truth. In fact, Jesus said the Pope was his only representative. Since other religions have rejected the Pope they have no “legal” connection to God. The Catholic Religion is the only Religion that has a semi-credible link. That link can be easily disputed though, but that’s a topic for another thread.

Bonos, you asked:

"Orthodox Jews and Catholics believe that masturbation and birth control are wrong, respectively. Think about it; when you masturbate or use birth control you are killing off a potential life - those sperm cells could have become a human being, but you aren't letting them. Do you slaughter potential babies by masturbating, T Bourlon? If so, you have no right to judge."

First, do you REALLY want to know if I masturbate? I didn't think so. (btw, I'm FEMALE, as you well know, since we've had this discussion before.) Second, it just BLOWS ME AWAY that people would ask what I see as a stupid question. A sperm cell by itself is a sperm cell, with a limited amount of "life" in it. Same with an egg, by itself it is an egg with a limited amount of life in it. But when they "collide," as described above, they become something else: a new being with it's very own DNA, separate from the mother's DNA. And it's life potential, assuming it successfully attaches to the womb and it's mother doesn't choose to kill it, is unknown but far greater than the lifespan of either the sperm or egg. Further, unlike a blood drop from my finger it will separate from the womb, cry, eat, breath, and maybe eventally say "Mama." A blood drop will NEVER do this. So, there is in fact a difference, and you are wasting your breath trying to convince me that an embryo, fetus, or whatever is nothing more than a sperm, egg or blood drop. I've had 2 babies myself, I've seen the ultrasounds, felt the kicks, and know that the "lump of cells" does not magically form into a baby minutes before birth. You are being highly dishonest if you say otherwise.

Besides, this article is NOT about whether life begins at conception or whether masturbation is a sin. It is about McSpocky claiming that someone was calling for bloodshed when he in fact was not. Can we stay on topic, and not get derailed in an endless and unwinnable arguement about when life begins?

@jim Yes by definition cancer cells are alive. They however are living invasive destructive cell that destroy healthy cells within the immune system. Not quite the same thing as a healthy baby fetus developing, that shares with the host, which is not destroying it.

@Tim S. reference to sin, It can only be found in religion or religious text format. I used the old testament from the bible, (also the TORAH-Jewish) as It is the most published reference to religion, referencing the point that this act/process is not sinful by itself.

@stally

That's not how things were in early Christianity. Very early on the Christian leaders recognized that the Bible was full of contradictions so the common man was not allowed to read the Bible.

In your statement, Christians would read that actual reference from the New Testament.
Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
The law is not gone, it is not past. The ritual of blood have been the only things replaced, that was by the blood of JESUS sacrifice on the cross, that atones for those prior and future sin.

@T bourlon sorry for the sidetrack(s)responding to others. The topic is actually right on pace.

The reason for this is simple:

once before, our nation was forced to repudiate the Supreme Court with mass bloodshed. We remain steadfast in our belief that this will not be necessary again, but only if those committed to justice do not waiver or compromise, and send a clear and unmistakable signal to their elected officials of what must be necessary to earn our support.

They want to talk about what is the death of many unborn children, equating it to mass bloodshed that we as a NATION voted into law ROE v WADE. From the original copy that was referenced,

The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument. . . . The Constitution does not define "person" in so many words.

The author of the intial article is trying to make it threatning sensationalism with his exuberant headline.

Prominent Conservative Threatens "Mass Bloodshed"

Root article (we have drawn the line)Speaks of the premise that Abortion is murder. The seeded quote on this blog argues against the root articles premise: That if you don't believe abortion is wrong, we dont want you blogging on our site, and we will not use our funds, and our manpower to promote your political aspirations. In relative words, they will not be your special interest group, unless you are ANTI Roe V Wade.

Roe V Wade is all about women's right to choose and abortion.

www.redstate.com/the_directors/2011/01/22/we-have-drawn-a-line/

Actually I have called for liberal/progressive militia's, survivalists and 2nd amendment solutions (sarc - I'm a progressive, I own guns and I know how to use them) to keep the gov in it's rightful role of protector of their citizens not the corporate whore it has become or the 1800th century (or worse) the right wing radicals want it to go back to.

My Dad who would be over 100 used to stress there were no "good old days" just the visions of people who didn't want to remember what it was really like or those protected from reality.

I believe in efficient, effective, balanced government. We don't need 7 agencies to do X and no agency to do Y. I believe we could run on 2/3rd of the gov, provide better services/information etc. than we do. I don't want government to be small and impotent, I want it to be smaller and more effective, efficient and protect us from corporate abuse from either the right or insane regulations that don't help from the left.

we are left wing on some stuff, but switched to bows, they are more fun. NY has just legalized crossbows as well, Wow. the enemies are at the gate!!! (kidding kidding) but we do have some pretty heavy pull compound bows for real. Just add flaming oil soaked rags. (kidding kidding) Poison tips?? (kidding)

waukone,

While I agree with you on most of your points, there are just way too many people to be dealt with by a single agency. A single agency dealing with all of us could become way too large and ineffective, as well as being way too powerful. That hypothetical agency could easily lead to a police state. As a progressive, liberal gun owner, I am also very afraid of the corporate takeover of our country. We can fight against a repressive government but how does one fight against a multinational corporate entity? The teabaggers are wrong. It's the multinationals we have to worry about, not our own government. We can vote them out.

cjcold,

I don't think waukone was advocating one agency in all cases. I know I wasn't. But there are many cases where fewer would be more efficient and clearer lines between jurisdiction would be helpful. Wall Street should not have several agencies to play against one another for the most lax regulatory oversight as they do now. Or fall between the cracks and wind up not regulated at all.

Tim - you are right I'm not advocating 1 agency just that to solve one problem you don't have competing regulations with 7 different agencies. I believe the confusion is on purpose to let those who rip us off (corporations/multi-international corporations/ etc.).

Effeciency and effectiveness need to be the watch word.

waukone, I agree with your assessment of the creation of these overlaps and turf fights. It is to create confusion and cracks through which the unscrupulous can slip. I wish there was a way of enforcing the spirit of a law and not just the letter.

Well said! They are no better than an islamic terrorist group....

If that crap and crud is christianity then it needs to be regulated, if not outlawed, as the poisonous brew of ignorance and lies that it is.

The only difference between our right wing social conservative christian fundies and the Islamic fundies is the beheading and strapping bombs to women and children in the name of their fantasy of a christian nation or their god.

But then give them time, they are training themselves up for god knows what kind of horrors in poor Christs name as we speak.

With leadership like this though, I have to ask, what did anyone expect?

Reason?

The far, far christian right wing have militia training camps all over this country. All to the left of Attila the Hun should be very worried about this. Even centrists with a foot on each side of the fence are considered enemies by these fanatics.

Trickledown, (These semi-geriatric un-hooded klansmen "Wrapped in the flag and holding a Bible" who want to take "thier" country back are Amerikas "White Shirts") you couldn't have said it better!!!

I doubt this bloodshed will be prevented unless we who believe in human rights for every one can stand strong as one and say no more and mean it. Presonally I will never choose bloodshed over peace...Period.

Thank you Julie, 2 votes up.

who was it that said, you will know fascist when it comes, it will be wrapped in a flag, holding the bible.? My mind has gone blank as the the author of the quote, but it is great.

The only thing I see coming down is ignorance.

And it ain't no trickle.

julie,

Thomas Jefferson believed in a populace able to physically rebel against the excesses of the government. Unfortunately, it's not the government that is the problem. He couldn't foresee that the government could be taken over by the multinational corporate entities.

Thanks to the repulican SCOTUS, we no longer have any control of our own elections. The multinationals can now spend billions in unregulated and untraceable money to buy our elections. I used to love this country, but it might be time to learn a new language and imigrate to a free democratic country. This one is no longer free, it's bought and sold to the right wing corporate republicans. I will no longer live in a country where the only thing that matters is multinational corporate interest.

cjcold, #5.6 I wholeheartedly agree with you. We The People have been sold out! The worst part is that so many people choose to vote against their best interest. I see the Multi Nat. Corps. as a giant blackwidow sitting on top of the world and defying anyone to do anything to change the situation.

I suspect that powers that be are planning an uprising of the people just so they can have a reason (on the surface) to crush the populace and impose corporate/ military control.

((((((Julie))))))

Well said.

THe GOP also doesn't want to recognize that the only... and forgive me, ONLY way of keeping families off of welfare, keeping prison populations down and creating a better America is through education. They don't want to pay for that either.

E

ERich, I couldn't agree with you more about education! I am absolutely sure that the more people know and understand the less they are manipulated and the more intelligent choices will be made.

I don't like abortion to be used for birthcontrol but I believe that every soul has to learn their own lessons in life. Who has the right to take that from anyone else? I know I don't.

Julie, while my daughter was a student she used planned parenthood as her medical facility. One day, as she was about to enter the clinic a protestor grabbed her arm and begged her to stop doing this horrible deed and told her that she was going to pray for her. My daughter turned to her and sweetly said, "Thank you for your prayers as I definitely need them, The terrible deed I am about to do also needs your prayers. You see, I have strep throat and I am coming here for medical treatment. I sure hope your prayers and the medicine they give me will wipe away this terrible deed that has befallen me." The woman backed away and none of the protestors ever bothered her again.

Huskergal,

You raised one awesome daughter! Love what she did!!! I would have loved to see the look on that protestors face!

I know a few nurse practitioners that work there, and yeah, they provide medical care for those who can't afford it... they aren't about abortions 24/7.

Huskergal, Thats Beautiful! The future belongs to our children and I hope their days ahead will be filled with light and love. It just takes one to start a movement.

Julie years ago I was part of a fund raising event that was contributing money to Planned Parenthood. I was sitting in a coffee shop with a friend when this young mother, baby in arms runs up to me and screams at me "why do you want to kill my baby" I just stared at her astonished and then the management asked her to leave. She ranted all the way out the door, that poor baby she was holding was being used as a prop. She look the fool, she was the fool. Planned Parenthood was at the time and still provides needed medical care and assistance.

I was an escort in Kansas keeping women from being harassed while going into a planned parenthood office. Those fanatics assumed that every women was going in for an abortion and screamed some serious vitriol against them (most were just coming in for other reasons). Funny how the fanatical religious right/wrong can't think rationally. They abused all women equally, pregnant or not. If I hadn't been an atheist before those experiences, I would have been after. We're in a war folks. We have to stand up to the fanatics. We can't let them beat us down with their uncompromising fanaticism.

Us rational folk will lose against the fanatics unless we're willing to stand up against them. Unfortunately, reasonable and rational folk tend not to be low IQ, loud, obnoxious radicals like the religious far-right fanatics are.

itstoolate, Its funny how people can prove themselves the fool because of their willful ignorance. These kind of people are used as pawns all the time and can't see the forest for the trees. I like the story thanks for sharing it.

Miss_Diagnosed, AS far as I can assertain there is no plan to disarm America!

I do believe in cause and effect though, so I figure that the hate-monger B/S that is happening is geared to bringing down on us all just what they say they want to prevent;gun control. This is clearly double speak!

The point of my post was not pro abortion/anti abortion, nor pro gun control/anti gun control...

The point is... politicians will continue to use devisive subjects such as these (where there is no "black and white, everyone can agree" answer) to keep us all hopping away from the subjects that the government was created for, and is supposed to be, handling.

Miss_diagnose, Sorry I missed your point. I do agree with what you have said here. We all saw this tactic during O.J. Simpson trial and the Clinton scandal didn't we? There is a military strategy that employs the distraction technique. I always try to see behind the veil, thats where the heart is seen.

Miss_Diagnosed - excellent observation. Its really not much more than a con-artist saying to his mark "LOOK!! A CLEVERLY PLACED DISTRACTION!!!" as he's emptying your wallet.

Mis_Diagnosed,

I totally agree with you. Every election the right jumps on the abortion/gun control wagon to rally the troops, and distract from any real dialog, or legitimate discourse. The new House of Republicans who were to create jobs, and reduce the budget by 1 billion? wasted time with their symbolic "repeal Obamacare" vote that they knew wouldn't have that result, except to please the Tea Party, now they've started after Roe vs Wade.....how quickly they've lost their focus

Yep rescue dogs62... its easier to get reelected on a hot-button "personal" issue like abortion rights repeal than it is saying that you raised taxes and cut spending on the elderly... but balanced the budget doing so...

People vote with their gut... and gut reactions are based on crazed topics. Politicians have known this since the dawn of politics... there are whole organizations built on gut reactions (lobbyists)...

No substance in this argument, just the same divide and conquer the voter base mantra. I do enjoy the fireworks... I cant say that I dont.... I'm weak :)

Bubba, the "clinic" in PA is EXACTLY what happens when women are denied affordable, safe reproductive care. When money is the only objective of a fake "doctor", the lives of children mean nothing. That "clinic" had been reported to the State of Pennsylvania Health Department multiple times and had NEVER been inspected or the staff credentials investigated until someone reported that they were illegally distributing drugs. That certainly says a great deal about how much PA (one of the most restrictive states in the US on abortion) really cares about babies and their mothers. When the anti-choice movement ACTS like they are pro-life, they are likely to draw a more receptive audience.

I won't back anybody who is pro Roe either.

Certainly your prerogative.

But the more pressing question is: will you condemn Erickson's statement?

I'm sure I've heard you say that all Muslims are guilty of terrorism until they condemn the extremists, so here's your opportunity to live up to your own standards.

Boomer54, There is no greater manipulater than FEAR. Of course those who have to resort to such Fear Mongering only do so because they are basically FEARFUL themselves.

Well, we'll have to start beating some happiness into people. Uh Oh...I think I'm catching it...

Boomer54, There is a cure for that... take a trip to the wilderness and stay there till you can hear nothing but quiteness. It will surely open ones eyes to the illusion of hate.

julie,

I live in the mountains of Tennessee. You are right, they are my respite.

Why is it that every time something comes down the pike a Conservative doesn't like...the answer is violence?

Because violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.

Mahatma Gandi

Where has all the wisdom gone?

OMG! This just happened... A purveyer was just here. A remark about the dow being up elicited this response from him. Thank God things are better for business...but there is no way I will give Obama any credit. The next thing out of his mouth...Tellin' my wife last night in front of the T.V. watchin' the SOTU...what a great time to get rid of them all..sacrifice some but the rest would be gone.

Now I know he reeaallly didn't mean it. But he thought that remark cute. I guess our time for playing nice is over?

While I agree with some of your points, I have to disagree that overturning Roe vs Wade is the Republican leadership's main goal. If they did not have this issue to rally their extremist base around they would lose much of their membership as they have little substance or concern for anything other than campaign contributions from the special interests they serve.

Are you saying that Media Matters hacked redstate.com?

http://www.redstate.com/the_directors/2011/01/22/we-have-drawn-a-line/

More importantly, will you condemn this call to violence? I'm sure I've heard you say that all Muslims are guilty of terrorism until they condemn the extemists. Here's your opportunity to live up to your principles.

The directors name is Erick Erickson. He began working at CNN, March 16, 2010. Odd thing is that around that point in time, CNN started leaning heavier and heavier towards the right. By mid-October 2010, I quit CNN after being a loyal viewer for over 20 years. My reason for leaving CNN is that they have been hi-jacked by the right-wing extremists. Note as well, many of their politic writters, producers and director type personel have right-wing roots as well. I observed the hi-jacking process evolve and unfold.

I stopped watching CNN oddly because of the left wing bias. I got to the point it was all babble. Rick Sanchez was my favorite. He was a complete fool and it was comical. Fox to me appears middle of the road. Michael Savage on talk radio is more to my taste as he really calls it as it is and after you experience him and his brutal honesty everything else looks like bubble gum pop.

Did you read this line in the Alternet article?

so this charming passage posted by "The Directors" is presumably his doing:

http://www.redstate.com/lex1120/2011/01/25/is-redstate-suggesting-mass-bloodshed-may-be-necessary-to-stop-abortion/

Does anyone here honestly believe a dog whistle is not being blown in this post by “The Directors?”

Speaking of “The Directors,” I don’t know if “The Directors” is merely diarist here like me, or someone involved in the day to day operation of this site. The profile for this person or persons is blank. On the other hand, the “Help” page, which sets out the rules and instructions for posting, is also written by “The Directors.” Either way, by allowing this post to remain on the site, I think RedState is passively condoning this kind of tripe, and it should be condemned

Michael Salvage considers his views to be 'conservative nationalism'. Figures that he's more towards your taste. He's one those whom I consider an 'apocryphalic conservative'. Myself, I'm a centrist. I judge issue by issue AND character by character, well beyond the words spoken.

http://www.redstate.com/scipio62/2011/01/25/stupid-is-as-stupid-does/

The pro-abortion zealots reach to great lengths to justify the barbarity they support. Thers at Whiskey Fire put up a snark-filled “rebuttal” to this RedState post from the Directors, replete with the typical dehumanization of the unborn, as if the unborn were somehow a different species, and an inane accusation that the RedState post might incite violence. But Thers isn’t alone; Media Matters also makes the same accusation. Go ahead and read them.

The key question I had after reading them, did these people get an education or were they simply passed from grade to grade to get them though and out of the education system?

Thers’ post includes this portion of the RedState post:

Fox to me appears middle of the road

Wow - what road is that?

Tea Party Road

And it's the red brick road.

Certainly a one-way road.

Yes, anti-choice people killing doctors at planned parenthood clinics.

Prolife bumper sticker: Life begins at Conception and Ends at Birth

Prolife bumper sticker: Life begins at Conception and Ends at Birth

LOL I like this one. We're gonna take care of you for the first 9 months of your existence, but the next 78.4 years ... your on your own.

Our family has 3 adopted children, one in progress and we have foster children. How about you concerned67?

Tyler-1708225

My family has adopted several children over the last 30 years and these children have always had loving care, even to adulthood. I am sure that there are lots of loving families who have and are adopting children as of this very date.

However,

to have a woman face a gauntlet of meddlers who are sticking their noses where it is not wanted is the same thing as men being put on the tv for public viewing when they choose to have a vasectomy. Both of these issues are private healthcare matters for the individuals who seek medical care. It is nobody's business but them and their healthcare provider. Period.

I will never understand why the law of the land allows a woman to have a personal, private choice, and then make no effort towards the medical community keeping it private by publicly show where her business is being handled.

I need to contact my congressman and find out if something can be done to insure the woman's privacy. This offensive nonsense of public exposure has gone on long enough. Something needs to done to insure privacy for women, especially for a woman who probably going through a vey traumatic time in her life. The world does not need to able to judge her. She has enough to deal with already.

Tyler 1708225

get this straight. ADOPTION IS NOT THE OPPOSITE OF ABORTION. PERIOD.

Keeping your child is the opposite of abortion. You are very lucky that someone decided to give you their child to adopt or foster. You still were not forced to be pregnant.

Being pregnant and giving birth are the opposite of abortion. No one should be FORCED to be pregnant or give birth. Ever.

This comparison is really galling and misinformed as no one who has been pregnant would ever confuse it with adoption.

No one should be FORCED to be pregnant or give birth.

I think pretty much anyone with agree with this, but I'm confused. Are you saying that abortion should only be permitted in cases where a woman was forced to be pregnant?

This is my view on Abortion.. Abortion is taking a life, but a mother does have the right to decide if she wants to support that life. This is where it gets interesting. If the mother decides that she doesn't want to support that life and that decision results in the baby's death then that is an unfortunate and sad consequence of the action. If however the mother decides that she doesn't want to support that life and the baby is viable outside of the womb and the fetus is destroyed then it is murder.

What the abortion foes should put their money in is trying to develop ways to make the fetus viable at younger and younger age and technology to extract the fetus safely. Then help to fund the cost of the premature delivery and get these children adopted. It's a much more effective, constructive and humanitarian solution then bombing clinics.

Anyone got an answer?

I didn't think so.

I did and don't see any "prominent" conservative.

wjm5-0

EXCELLENT post, thanks

concerned, why do those favoring abortion not just call it that. Why has the terminology been changed to "right to choose." To pretty it up?. To make it sound different than it is? If you think a woman has the right to do with her body as she wishes, try soliticiting for prostitution. And why has the reason for it changed to a "women's health" issue, it is elective surgery.

Because there is a difference between favoring a persons sovereignty over their own body and favoring abortion.

You will find that even liberals are conflicted over this choice. We for the most part think that abortion is a horrible choice, maybe the worst possible choice as a solution. At the same time we firmly believe that a woman should have the choice as to whether or not she will reproduce.

It's a hard thing. I don't favor abortion at all, I hate it. But I cannot bring myself to favor the legal obligation for a woman to reproduce if she doesn't want to. There's nothing else like that.

Exactly.