Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
note to ami
Hi Ami,
I asked you a simple question
//do you believe Roeder [or the correctly identified murderer of Tiller] committed a crime? would a Freedom Medal be more appropriate?//
i ask again, did Roeder commit a crime?
based on your non answer and your earlier post reproduced below, with its holocaust talk, i think the paras below (##), to which you object, are accurate.
since you have difficulty reading, the point is that you and oreilly incite violence, and apparently, approve it [failure to condemn speaks volumes] after the fact. your claim [reproduced at end] that i characterize you as 'advocating' violence is incorrect; you incite and supply the rationale and leave the scut work to others.
if i see a direct answer, i will modify my characterization as to your apparent approval of the murder of Tiller.
======
pure said,
##The far right ideologues, some of them quite secular, like amicus, routinely incite violence against those on their 'kill lists.' the rationale, of course, would be the alleged 'holocaust,' [Clinton and Obama being compared to Nazis], which would justify illegal acts against those disapproved of.
Bill Oreilly, of catholic background, asserted Tiller's "nazi" acts and similarly aimed to encourage the killing of those on his 'list.'
What Oreilly, representing religious right and amicus, representing the secular far right have in common is this: The issue of 'taking a life' becomes simply a question of effectiveness, instrumentality; they take a life, as necessary, to get an end.
===
6-01 [ami] The allusion to world war two Nazi Death Camps and abortion has been made, and could any nation have prevented that holocaust, they had the moral right to do so.
Those who believe that life begins at conception and that to take that life without cause, is comparable to what the Nazi's did and they feel an obligation to take measures to protect that life.
Had there been no abortion violence to respond to, the laundry list provided by the Threadstarter, would not exist as all attempts to stop abortions are caused by the fact that abortions are being performed daily.
If you want to stop the violence; Stop the Violence. A prudent man does not risk committing a moral violation when the premise of life is unclear or uncertain.
Abortion, like the Holocaust, is a dark chapter in the history of man.
==
6-02
ami I would have preferred the baby killing Doctor to have faced trial and been judged by a jury and sentenced to the appropriate punishment for his evil and inhuman deeds.
pure: 'would have preferred'; but since there was no law breaking, and no trial in the forseeable future, i'd venture to suggest that you, like o'reilly, are content with your 'next best' preference.
incidentally, do you believe Roeder [or the correctly identified murderer of Tiller] committed a crime? would a Freedom Medal be more appropriate.
====
ami, most recently
That (##)amounts to fallacious slander, in both cases concerning a media personality and yours truly.
It is a matter of law that the 'death penalty' for Capital Crimes, is a legal reality as is the taking of human life during a declared war or conflict. Neither O'Reilly nor myself have ever advocated vigilante actions taken by any party for any reason.
I formally request that you remove your accusation from public view, and an apology would be in order and civil. I will hold off informing the other injured party by email until I hear from you.
Hi Ami,
I asked you a simple question
//do you believe Roeder [or the correctly identified murderer of Tiller] committed a crime? would a Freedom Medal be more appropriate?//
i ask again, did Roeder commit a crime?
based on your non answer and your earlier post reproduced below, with its holocaust talk, i think the paras below (##), to which you object, are accurate.
since you have difficulty reading, the point is that you and oreilly incite violence, and apparently, approve it [failure to condemn speaks volumes] after the fact. your claim [reproduced at end] that i characterize you as 'advocating' violence is incorrect; you incite and supply the rationale and leave the scut work to others.
if i see a direct answer, i will modify my characterization as to your apparent approval of the murder of Tiller.
======
pure said,
##The far right ideologues, some of them quite secular, like amicus, routinely incite violence against those on their 'kill lists.' the rationale, of course, would be the alleged 'holocaust,' [Clinton and Obama being compared to Nazis], which would justify illegal acts against those disapproved of.
Bill Oreilly, of catholic background, asserted Tiller's "nazi" acts and similarly aimed to encourage the killing of those on his 'list.'
What Oreilly, representing religious right and amicus, representing the secular far right have in common is this: The issue of 'taking a life' becomes simply a question of effectiveness, instrumentality; they take a life, as necessary, to get an end.
===
6-01 [ami] The allusion to world war two Nazi Death Camps and abortion has been made, and could any nation have prevented that holocaust, they had the moral right to do so.
Those who believe that life begins at conception and that to take that life without cause, is comparable to what the Nazi's did and they feel an obligation to take measures to protect that life.
Had there been no abortion violence to respond to, the laundry list provided by the Threadstarter, would not exist as all attempts to stop abortions are caused by the fact that abortions are being performed daily.
If you want to stop the violence; Stop the Violence. A prudent man does not risk committing a moral violation when the premise of life is unclear or uncertain.
Abortion, like the Holocaust, is a dark chapter in the history of man.
==
6-02
ami I would have preferred the baby killing Doctor to have faced trial and been judged by a jury and sentenced to the appropriate punishment for his evil and inhuman deeds.
pure: 'would have preferred'; but since there was no law breaking, and no trial in the forseeable future, i'd venture to suggest that you, like o'reilly, are content with your 'next best' preference.
incidentally, do you believe Roeder [or the correctly identified murderer of Tiller] committed a crime? would a Freedom Medal be more appropriate.
====
ami, most recently
That (##)amounts to fallacious slander, in both cases concerning a media personality and yours truly.
It is a matter of law that the 'death penalty' for Capital Crimes, is a legal reality as is the taking of human life during a declared war or conflict. Neither O'Reilly nor myself have ever advocated vigilante actions taken by any party for any reason.
I formally request that you remove your accusation from public view, and an apology would be in order and civil. I will hold off informing the other injured party by email until I hear from you.
Last edited:
