Oh gee I wonder what motive the killer had, I wonder if it had to do with his religious beliefs or propaganda he heard from Religious fanatics. Then again, I've already presented the evidence that 99% of PP attacks come from Pro-Lifers. I've already mentioned Operation Rescue, Paul Hill and Scott Roeder
In fact I looked up the motives of the killings, heres one example of Roeder's:
David Leach, publisher of Prayer & Action News, a magazine that opines that the killing of abortion providers would be justifiable homicide, told reporters that he and Roeder had met once in the late 1990s and that Roeder at that time had authored contributions to Leach's publication.[35][36][37] Leach published the Army of God manual, which advocates the killing of the providers of abortion and contains bomb-making instructions, in the January 1996 issue of his magazine.[38] A Kansas acquaintance of Roeder's, Regina Dinwiddie, told a reporter after Tiller's murder (speaking of Roeder), "I know that he believed in justifiable homicide." Dinwiddie, an anti-abortion militant featured in the 2000 HBO documentary Soldiers in the Army of God, added that she had observed Roeder in 1996 enter Kansas City Planned Parenthood's abortion clinic and ask to talk to the physician there; after staring at him for nearly a minute, Roeder said, "I've seen you now," before turning and walking away.[39]
So do I really need to know where you stand or will this be another bullshit diversionary tactic.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yup nothing has even been confirmed, yet Op and others already speculating.Funny Mike Brown got the exact same treatment. And in fact they still think he's innocent.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Aren't you guys jumping the gun a bit about implying that this tragic affair was Pro-life/anti-abortion motivated? I've checked every article (including liberal news media like huffington post) and, at this time, they don't know if the shooting even specifically targeted PP?
I'm just curious to know why this type of discretion is never anywhere to be found when it's someone with an Arabic sounding name on the shooting spree.
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]I'll remember that when I recall seeing those barrels full of baby heads. Oh I mean Clumps of Cells. [/B]
Lesse, things that have been covered- PP reduces abortion. Most abortions look nothing like that. The exceptions are almost always in cases where not doing so results in the death of the mother (one of the reasons why 'pro life' is really a misnomer). Planned parenthood reduces abortion. You're still cheering people being shot here. The reason abortion is legal is because what used to be happening when it wasn't is people still had them, just died during the process. And planned parenthood reduces abortions.
If you wanna lower the number of abortions, support Planned Parenthood.
Originally posted by Ayelewis
Oh gee I wonder what motive the killer had, I wonder if it had to do with his religious beliefs or propaganda he heard from Religious fanatics. Then again, I've already presented the evidence that 99% of PP attacks come from Pro-Lifers. I've already mentioned Operation Rescue, Paul Hill and Scott RoederIn fact I looked up the motives of the killings, heres one example of Roeder's:
David Leach, publisher of Prayer & Action News, a magazine that opines that the killing of abortion providers would be justifiable homicide, told reporters that he and Roeder had met once in the late 1990s and that Roeder at that time had authored contributions to Leach's publication.[35][36][37] Leach published the Army of God manual, which advocates the killing of the providers of abortion and contains bomb-making instructions, in the January 1996 issue of his magazine.[38] A Kansas acquaintance of Roeder's, Regina Dinwiddie, told a reporter after Tiller's murder (speaking of Roeder), "I know that he believed in justifiable homicide." Dinwiddie, an anti-abortion militant featured in the 2000 HBO documentary Soldiers in the Army of God, added that she had observed Roeder in 1996 enter Kansas City Planned Parenthood's abortion clinic and ask to talk to the physician there; after staring at him for nearly a minute, Roeder said, "I've seen you now," before turning and walking away.[39]
So do I really need to know where you stand or will this be another bullshit diversionary tactic.
Like is this contempt for Catholics in general, or just specific assholes?
Might be both. I mean, something like 1% of the world's Muslim population is militarized- with the remaining 99% never committing any form of religiously motivated crime- but that 1% is enough for many people to be distrustful of the entire 1.6 billion Muslim population.
It's certainly not out of the realm of possibility then that someone can be distrustful of Catholics as a whole because of the ass-hattery of an extremist minority within their ranks.
I'm Catholic, and I'd like to be Catholic without people assuming I'm a dumbass ******* for it. I don't try to force my religious beliefs on others, and I don't believe not being Christian is an instant ticket to hell (I believe the majority of people go to heaven, due to a rather optimistic view I have of humanity as a whole).
Thus, it legitimately pains my soul when assholes like these murderers, Star, TI, the Westboro Baptist Church, etc. make us look like a bunch of hateful pricks to the rest of the world.
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Couldn't what this guy was doing just be considred some extreme late term abortion. I mean MURDERS take place in side this clinics all the time and no one cares....on the left that is. [/B]
Originally posted by AyelewisBoth of you need to stop, now. Derogatory generalizations and inflammatory words only stir trouble. And Ayelewis, you cause a lot of problems for somebody who rarely posts in the few short months your account has been active. You'll be the first to go.
Here's something from the article: http://news.yahoo.com/police-respond-report-active-shooter-colorado-springs-192211495.htmlThe prolifers stir up hatred against abortion providers and this incitement impels certain of their number to go out and shoot some people. We'll now hear from the anti-abortion representatives how they're opposed to [b]all violence
, without precisely stating that they're against abortion clinic shootings/arson.The anti-abortion movement is crap, pure lies, and based on the premise that a soul enters a fertilized egg within minutes of ejaculation. Religious fücktards at their worst. [/B]
The GDF has become a headache for mods. I will come back here and start bans if I see any more trouble from this forum. I've held off for weeks but have gone past my patience limit with people from both sides politicizing terrible events.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
Might be both. I mean, something like 1% of the world's Muslim population is militarized- with the remaining 99% never committing any form of religiously motivated crime- but that 1% is enough for many people to be distrustful of the entire 1.6 billion Muslim population.It's certainly not out of the realm of possibility then that someone can be distrustful of Catholics as a whole because of the ass-hattery of an extremist minority within their ranks.
As long as said ppl are ok with generalizations of a certain class/race/gender being assumed as guilty of a crime because certain members of their class/race/gender have had done said crimes in the past.
Kinda like, "oh look! a crime! must be a black man that did it!" or "oh look, an act of terrorism, must be a muslim!"....
Otherwise, that would just be hypocritical. /sarcasm
Again, while I think that it is -feasible- that this might be PP-related, hell even likely. I am appalled at how readily certain people are willing to pin a specific crime to a class of ppl just because they have a negative perception of them when NO information of motive has been released by the media.
Leave it to a pro lifer to be upset over the deaths of unborn babies and show he is upset by causing the deaths of others.
Assuming it was a pro lifer. Which if that is the case we need to abort him, stat.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
As long as said ppl are ok with generalizations of a certain class/race/gender being assumed as guilty of a crime because certain members of their class/race/gender have had done said crimes in the past.Kinda like, "oh look! a crime! must be a black man that did it!" or "oh look, an act of terrorism, must be a muslim!"....
Otherwise, that would just be hypocritical. /sarcasm
Again, while I think that it is -feasible- that this might be PP-related, hell even likely. I am appalled at how readily certain people are willing to pin a specific crime to a class of ppl just because they have a negative perception of them when NO information of motive has been released by the media.
It happens a lot, not just with blacks or muslims. Cop kills a black guy? It's due to racism. It's an unfortunate reality that in this day and age when we can get information a lot quicker then before people still tend to not want to wait.
Originally posted by Surtur
It happens a lot, not just with blacks or muslims. Cop kills a black guy? It's due to racism. It's an unfortunate reality that in this day and age when we can get information a lot quicker then before people still tend to not want to wait.
Just because it is a common occurrence/reality, doesn't make it right. And if other ppl do it and a person emulates it, while knowing it is wrong, what does it make that person?
Originally posted by NibedicusThat's a fine practice and I agree with it, but as pointed out, if he had an unsafe name like "Mohammad" it would have already been labeled 'Islamic terrorism'.
More like:"His religion won't be a factor until we know it is, until then everything else is just an assumption as we don't have any clear information at this time."
Originally posted by Robtard
That's a fine practice and I agree with it, but as pointed out, if he had an unsafe name like "Mohammad" it would have already been labeled Islamic terrorism
By people with an agenda, yes. But we know better than to listen to those ppl after all. And those who fancy themselves as the "more enlightened" of us should as well, instead of sink to that level.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Just because it is a common occurrence/reality, doesn't make it right. And if other ppl do it and a person emulates it, while knowing it is wrong, what does it make that person?
But therein lies the issue, some people..especially in this country, do feel that "everybody does it" is an actual defense for any kind of shitty behavior. Or at the very least it is a worthy excuse.
Which now combine that with the strange attitude some have that is essentially "two wrongs don't make a right, but they do totally cancel each other out" and you have one big clusterf*ck.
Originally posted by Surtur
But therein lies the issue, some people..especially in this country, do feel that "everybody does it" is an actual defense for any kind of shitty behavior. Or at the very least it is a worthy excuse.Which now combine that with the strange attitude some have that is essentially "two wrongs don't make a right, but they do totally cancel each other out" and you have one big clusterf*ck.
I think the worst thing is when people first build up their opponents and convince them that they're really nasty, and then justify their wrong with 'I'm sure they did it it just has been covered up' or 'I'm sure they're going to do it so it's fair that I do it first.'
Especially when it comes to violence. "Let's get them before they get us, because we've convinced ourselves that it's going to come to killing anyway so there's no problem firing the first shot."
Originally posted by Surtur
But therein lies the issue, some people..especially in this country, do feel that "everybody does it" is an actual defense for any kind of shitty behavior. Or at the very least it is a worthy excuse.Which now combine that with the strange attitude some have that is essentially "two wrongs don't make a right, but they do totally cancel each other out" and you have one big clusterf*ck.
Which is my EXACT point. Neither is a good excuse, wrong is wrong and ppl should just cut it out. Especially when they should know better.
-_-
Basically: "Hey guys, we don't really know what the motives behind the shooting just yet, is it ok for us to wait a bit til we have more information before we start jumping onto pro-lifer's throats?"
Agreed, even news has not found out the motive. But we know everyone here likes to jump the gun..
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/28/us/colorado-planned-parenthood-shooting/index.html
Originally posted by Q99
I think the worst thing is when people first build up their opponents and convince them that they're really nasty, and then justify their wrong with 'I'm sure they did it it just has been covered up' or 'I'm sure they're going to do it so it's fair that I do it first.'Especially when it comes to violence. "Let's get them before they get us, because we've convinced ourselves that it's going to come to killing anyway so there's no problem firing the first shot."
This is also a way that crime breeds more crime. Someone see's someone else and thinks "so and so is doing it and appears to be getting away with it, so I can too" not realizing that the more crime there is the worse it is for the criminals just as much as the cops.
It's basically a circle that never ends. Everyone on both sides are paranoid and everyone has guns.