What crazy as organization are these people with? Im all for freedom of speech but the photos they are using are outlandish, I don't have kids but this would be totally wrong for them to see.

Maybe you godless liberals enjoy killing babies a little too much. The left has no moral compass. Anything goes for them.

I am opposed to these terrible pictures as well. When I pass them I tell my kids not to look and continue playing Call of Duty.

its all about the kids, huh?

please.

You don't care about the kids seeing it.

You dont want it said, and so much for free speech

it's all about the children..............

pic unrelated
Attachments:

@Gorgon Blvd.

please. . its what the OP started the thread with--that he didn't want "the kids" to see the fetus pictures.

give it a rest. . .broadcast tv is wall to wall soft core porn, and as the above poster pointed out, "the kids" regularly play videogames simulating torture and mutilation.

Plus this an sentimentalization of child hood--before the only thing with thought it was appropriate for kids to see was porn, kids saw plenty of death and gore.

And they were probably the better for it

Too many idiots. Not enough abortions.

@Ito,
have you thought about starting the ball rolling. . . maybe with a retroactive self-abortion?

I'm afraid my body is too large for the hose.

Is that demonstration taken place in front of the abortion clinic?

I am woman and for pro life, but I don't blame those who choose an abortion.

I have seen my friend going through the abortion when I was a college student.
It was horrible to see as a friend.

Her boyfriend didn't want to accompany her to the clinic.
Her boyfriend didn't have (or didn't want to pay) money to cover the expense.
Her boyfriend was not happy that he couldn't have a sex with her after the operation.
Her boyfriend still refused to use a condom, but forced her to take pills.
Her boyfriend dumped her for his guilty feeling.

I hate to listening the preaching like "Don't kill our babies" to women.
Don't blame women who are physically and emotionally suffered.
So many blames go to men who cannot handle their wives/girlfriends' unwanted pregnancy.

To make it short, the demonstration in front of the clinic won't change anything.
We have got to educate kids - show them shocking pictures at a sex education class.
They need to learn consequences of unprotected sex. No sex before marriage is better.

haniel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is that demonstration taken place in front of the
> abortion clinic?
>
> I am woman and for pro life, but I don't blame
> those who choose an abortion.
>
> I have seen my friend going through the abortion
> when I was a college student.
> It was horrible to see as a friend.
>
> Her boyfriend didn't want to accompany her to the
> clinic.
> Her boyfriend didn't have (or didn't want to pay)
> money to cover the expense.
> Her boyfriend was not happy that he couldn't have
> a sex with her after the operation.
> Her boyfriend still refused to use a condom, but
> forced her to take pills.
> Her boyfriend dumped her for his guilty feeling.
>
> I hate to listening the preaching like "Don't kill
> our babies" to women.
> Don't blame women who are physically and
> emotionally suffered.
> So many blames go to men who cannot handle their
> wives/girlfriends' unwanted pregnancy.
>
> To make it short, the demonstration in front of
> the clinic won't change anything.
> We have got to educate kids - show them shocking
> pictures at a sex education class.
> They need to learn consequences of unprotected
> sex. No sex before marriage is better.

How about you educate your own kids with good morals, values and some common sense instead of resorting to shock and awe type photos. Instead of devoting some time to volunteer and help people these nut jobs are out there wasting good poster boards and time to display this trash.

The year is 2012 and we know what causes pregnancy. Abortion shouldnt even come up except in case of rape. Otherwise show some common sense and use protection. There is also the morning after pill, use it.

What is wrong with showing the truth?

prolifers are funny. they bitch because a fetus is aborted, but are ok with letting man trying to change nature by attempting to get a woman pregnant via fertility facilities. Nature told these women to fuck off.

A coworker of mine who was driving his preschoolers to daycare was so pissed, that he circled around the block, came back, and ripped the signs out of the ground and put them in his trunk. He then disposed of them at a dumpster at work.

The signs in question featured hacked up fetuses. Completely in appropriate to display in public, and if my kids were with me, I'd be livid.

This was at Eaton Place near Rt 29/50 and 123.

@rob
you are such a liar. . . catholics believe that abortion is murder and invitro is just as grave a sin

I just find it ironic that these pro-lifers lose all interest in people once they have passed beyond the embryo stage. If they would spend just a fraction of their time caring about unwanted children or the women entering these clinics...

It's so strange that they pick on women who are at this vulnerable point of their lives, but could not give a fuck about women who aren't pregnant.

It's such a waste of time and energy. There are already 7 billion fully developed fetuses walking around on this planet... Can't we just deal with them?

I wonder if they care this much about tadpoles?

I'm surprised this isn't deemed as some sort of public indecency and stopped

liberal mom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am opposed to these terrible pictures as well.
> When I pass them I tell my kids not to look and
> continue playing Call of Duty.

+1, well-observed.

Don't let a fetus defeat us.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just find it ironic that these pro-lifers lose
> all interest in people once they have passed
> beyond the embryo stage. If they would spend just
> a fraction of their time caring about unwanted
> children or the women entering these clinics...

Yeah, actually, we do spend a lot of time, money, and energy helping those people. They're called "Crisis pregnancy centers", and you can find them all over.

And if abortion really is murder, as we think it is, which is the bigger problem? Killing a million babies a year or...well, anything else?

You really ought to educate yourself before you start mouthing off.

Abortion isn't murder. If it were it would be called murder.

There are so many other problems facing the world and our country and yet we let a vocal minority of lunatics hold our politics hostage with this issue.

Women have been aborting children since the beginning of time and doing so in some horrific ways before it was legal to do so. If 1 million mothers are doing this now with a relatively safe medical procedure, you can only imagine the carnage we will go back to if a safe legal option is not available.

We can go back to the good old' days when the rich would quietly have the procedure done in the back room of a doctor's office and poor women using a coat hangar.

I don't mind these idiots standing out on the streets protesting. They can join ranks with the God Hates Fags wackos and really create a spectacle. I just wish the media and the politicians would stop paying attention to them.

Thank you for conceding the point about crisis pregnancy centers.

We can disagree about issues, of course. But let's at least agree on the facts. Pro-life people do an enormous amount for women and children after they're born, too.

Bottom line why force someone to have a child who 1. Isn't ready to bare the responsibility and 2. Doesn't want to have the child. If you want them to have the kid go adopt one to make up for the despair you are having.

I like all the tards that have the double standard: arbortion is murder but capital punishment is allowable, and morrally acceptable because of....well I cant seem to articulate this position-maybe someone can show me the way

Kardinal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank you for conceding the point about crisis
> pregnancy centers.

I am not sure what those are, but if these crisis centers do anything more than lay guilt on pregnant women and actually help with prenatal care, them that is commendable.

I never post or argue this subject because it is generally the province of the mentally unstable.

There are a million other subjects that deserve more attention than this, including providing counseling and medical services to women who actually want to have a baby. Trying to convince those that don't to have one is just a bad idea for everyone involved. On moral grounds there are plenty of other things to be outraged about rather than inventing this one.

Here's what happens at "Crisis pregnancy centers" - or, at least, what used to. An anxious young woman walks in and is given a pregnancy test. While waiting for the results of the test, she is forced to watch a pro-life video with terrifying images. If she has any sense, she gets the hell out of there.

And thank you Ito for your thoughtful posts.

babafeet,

I can only speak for myself. I see babies as being unable to defend for themselves and who did not ask to be murdered. I see people(adults who are more than aware of what they are doing) who commit crimes against people that society has deemed to be so outrageous they deserve to no longer live in our society.

bobafeet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I like all the tards that have the double
> standard: arbortion is murder but capital
> punishment is allowable, and morrally acceptable
> because of....well I cant seem to articulate this
> position-maybe someone can show me the way

The double standard exists in order to allow the self righteous to display that they are more moral and spiritual than you.
Making sense and consistant thinking are secondary.

Arlingtonkid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> babafeet,
>
> I can only speak for myself. I see babies as
> being unable to defend for themselves and who did
> not ask to be murdered. I see people(adults who
> are more than aware of what they are doing) who
> commit crimes against people that society has
> deemed to be so outrageous they deserve to no
> longer live in our society.

Of course fetuses and embryos can't defend themselves and they aren't asking to be "murdered".They aren't asking anything.
Their brains are underdeveloped, they have no self awareness. They lack the intelligence of a salamander.

Everyone who is against abortion should volunteer to care for the otherwise unwanted babies. Whats that? You won't save the lives of the poor little victims?
Then you are an accomplice in their murder!

bobafeet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I like all the tards that have the double
> standard: arbortion is murder but capital
> punishment is allowable, and morrally acceptable
> because of....well I cant seem to articulate this
> position-maybe someone can show me the way

Of course it is. Society kills people criminals (when absolutely necessary) to defend itself the same way you defend yourself from a criminal who is trying to kill you and take your money.

Do you think about these things before you say them, or do you just try to find ways to look down on others and make it up?

BEH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone who is against abortion should volunteer
> to care for the otherwise unwanted babies. Whats
> that? You won't save the lives of the poor little
> victims?

We do. We run crisis pregnancy centers and adoption agencies and private charities that give new mothers the things they need, including training, we will accept any babies who aren't wanted and find them homes.

But that doesn't suit your agenda to acknowledge that...so you don't.

Simple minded nut jobs... case closed!

@Ito

You are such a fraud--you come on this thread and argue and then when you start getting beaten in the argument, claim you don't really want to argue about it, and your opponents are irrational. . . . if you don't mind the people on the street, then why chime in? that's what the OP was about. . .

@BEH and bobafet

The difference is the unborn never did anything wrong. Capital Punishment is on the guilty. Also its the State that does the killing, like in war. The individual then isn't responsible for taking the life of the guilty.

And the objections to Capital Punishment all disappear when were talking about Hitler or Osama Bin Laden. Then its all "git 'er done!"

Finally on the status of fetuses "personhood" how do you know what their "intelligence" is? When we can start killing people that are stupid for being stupid, can we get the tards next? And if a fetus isn't a person, then how come it has human DNA, and not the same DNA as its mother or father, like their toes or appendix or any other "blob of tissue"?

@2con4you - you sound as crazy as the original one

@slops - yeah.....and sometimes terrorist scum, also: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-709777.html

@Kardinal - it's the legal and tasteful ways of opinion changing that you are mentioning that should be put on the forefront. The asswipes who stand on a sidewalk with nasty pictures just make any anti-abortion person look like just another asshole.


@the asswipes with the pics on the 29: If someone's like me, on the fence on the whole thing, then how do you want me to see you and others like you when you pull up to the light with yr anti-abortion bumper sticker? Do you want me to see you like a normal person, or like a terrorist asshole? Well, you really arent helping yr cause at all doing what you are doing. All you are doing is reminding me that you are crazy just like the type of person who would kill a man in his church handing out pamphlets on a Sunday Morning cause you dont like what he believes in.

Damn, I could have joined the party!

@roflcopter - I always educate my kids with good morals, values and common sense.

My kids (lower elementary) already saw pictures of fetuses and embryos and such including sperms and ova in the children's encyclopedia. They know what they are. "If" they saw a picture that shows the fetus is removed from mother's uterus, they must think that the awful thing has happened.

I believe human life begins from conception. To think of Jesus... to think of the Annunciation...life begins from conception... isn't it? I also consider the day I conceive a baby is the day my baby arrives to my life.

I don't support shocking posters in public, but such a sensational propaganda is also within freedom of speech and freedom of expression...no matter how you hate.

@2concerned4

These idiots have every right to stand on the street and hold up their signs. I'm not getting beaten in an argument if I agree that stupid people have a right to do stupid things.

My point is that there are a million better things to be upset about than abortion on the right and the left.

You are exactly the type of person I don't want to have a discussion about this with because you really care about the fetus more than the woman carrying it. In effect, you are more worried about the blood clot in her womb.

Life might begin at conception, but that is irrelevant. You can't take that zygote out of the woman and make it live at that point.

I just wish people would stop worrying what is going on in someone else's vagina.
I also wish that our politicians and media would stop giving these domestic terrorists a platform.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> My point is that there are a million better things
> to be upset about than abortion on the right and
> the left.

It may be your "point", but if someone believes an abortion kills a unique human being, it rings rather hollow.

> Life might begin at conception, but that is
> irrelevant. You can't take that zygote out of the
> woman and make it live at that point.

How would it be irrelevant? Newborns can't survive on their own without external action and caring either. Only the environment and method of delivery of such care has changed.

snowdenscold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How would it be irrelevant? Newborns can't survive
> on their own without external action and caring
> either. Only the environment and method of
> delivery of such care has changed.

It is irrelevant because after a child is born, it is not solely dependent on the mother for its life. There is a reason why children aren't given names before they are born.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> It is irrelevant because after a child is born, it
> is not solely dependent on the mother for its
> life.

I don't see how that makes your point any better. Sounds like as long as there are 'options' in terms of providing care then it's real life, but if care is limited to the mother it's some sort of fake life? That's a dangerous precedent.

Look, I realize there are numerous physiological differences between being in-womb and outside, but if you're going to open up the possibility that life begins at conception, dismissing it as an irrelevancy opens us all sorts of issues.

If a child dies from miscarriage is it suicide? Is it manslaughter because of negligence by the mother?

This issue is the "perfect storm" for the true believers in the sky daddy. People who have imaginary friends get all caught up in the abortion issue because the idea of life beginning at conception implies a soul being created by some mythological being. When those who have faulty logic to believe in talking snakes and angels and devils influencing daily activity get to thinking about what happens when a woman gets pregnant, this is the result. I really wish the church pushed the stork story harder on its followers.

The reality? It's a biological accident by the parents. They fucked, some sperm survived long enough to fertilize an egg. The first time the woman realizes it only comes weeks later.

Not every pregnancy goes full term to begin with and it is a great burden on the mother to ensure that it does.

The other reasons why this is a perfect storm is that it ties into all the social issues. Women aren't supposed to enjoy sex, it's for procreation only. People aren't supposed to have sex unless they have been married by a church. A woman once impregnated by a man has to live with the consequences for the rest of her life. It's all really backward. The Taliban have all of these views and then some.

Before contraception, women would start having children as soon as they hit puberty and continue until menopause. In fact, biologists now believe that menopause was one of the evolutional breakthroughs that led to modern man and homo sapiens finally becoming modern-- death during childbirth would kill older women, but if women could stop becoming pregnant at a certain age, then these grandmothers would live long enough to pass on important information to the tribe: "Don't eat those berries!" or "Your grandfather died falling off that cliff. Be careful!"

We don't need women having 8 - 10 children anymore. Yes there is contraception, but condoms break and shit happens.

Jesus never complained about abortions. In fact, infanticide was quite common in those days.

If you are so concerned about the ink blots that are removed during the first trimester, could the alternative of making it illegal or more difficult be better? Are we to doom a 13 year old to motherhood? Is a woman with 6 kids to be forced to have another?

The burden of this debate always falls on the woman. John Lennon was right when he said, "Woman is the nigger of the world."

I doubt most women who get abortions do so with a light heart and no guilt.

If these personhood amendments pass, I can't wait to hear the debates about when social security numbers can be issued.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If a child dies from miscarriage is it suicide? Is
> it manslaughter because of negligence by the
> mother?

No and no. I see where you're going, but I'm not biting.

>
> This issue is the "perfect storm" for the true
> believers in the sky daddy. People who have
> imaginary friends get all caught up in the
> abortion issue because the idea of life beginning
> at conception implies a soul being created by some
> mythological being. When those who have faulty
> logic to believe in talking snakes and angels and
> devils influencing daily activity get to thinking
> about what happens when a woman gets pregnant,
> this is the result. I really wish the church
> pushed the stork story harder on its followers.

Very amusing.

> Not every pregnancy goes full term to begin with
> and it is a great burden on the mother to ensure
> that it does.

So?

> Women aren't supposed to enjoy sex, it's for procreation
> only.

False dichotomy.

> People aren't supposed to have sex unless
> they have been married by a church.

False (since you added those last 3 words).
>
> We don't need women having 8 - 10 children
> anymore.

I agree, but abortion isn't the answer.

>
> Jesus never complained about abortions. In fact,
> infanticide was quite common in those days.

Argument from silence, and a ridiculous one at that. Jesus didn't speak explicitly on a lot of things, but it's pretty easy to piece together God's thoughts on them unless you have some really screwy hermeneutics.

>
> If these personhood amendments pass, I can't wait
> to hear the debates about when social security
> numbers can be issued.

Oh please, you can support the idea of a conceived fetus as life/human being without taking it to unnecessary and ridiculous conclusions, if for pragmatic reasons if nothing else.

@Ito
You claim that the other side is a bunch of credulous cretins but then you make arguments that contradict even your own.

For example, your infanticide argument--the practice of infanticide during the Roman Empire was exposure of the infant, already born, somewhere outside of town--are you saying because Christ didn't mention this that he or anyone approve of it? Do you approve of it? Christ didn't mention alot of what was going on in Rome at the time, which is not pretty much universally condemned, even by your freethinking friends--does that mean he condoned?

And your statement about the taliban--because the taliban shares a view that makes it patently wrong? And where do you think the taliban got the view--Islam is a Christian heresy so of course they're going to share many of the proscriptions of Christianity. . . .

The rest of your "arguments" amount to something like 'waaah! that sounds mean so it can't be true! waaah!'

Guess what--good looking people, rich people, powerful people, all pretty much live better lives than everybody else. Sometimes the wrong man goes to jail and the orphan gets molested and then gets cancer.

Your going to have to have some better method of making decisions than 'this isn't fair so i don't believe it' to figure out what's true and what's not. That is, if you want any one to listen to you.

Which you obviously do, since you are posting here.

Again, on a thread whose original point was the free speech of anti-abortion protesters should be suppressed.

BEH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Arlingtonkid Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > babafeet,
> >
> > I can only speak for myself. I see babies as
> > being unable to defend for themselves and who
> did
> > not ask to be murdered. I see people(adults
> who
> > are more than aware of what they are doing) who
> > commit crimes against people that society has
> > deemed to be so outrageous they deserve to no
> > longer live in our society.
>
> Of course fetuses and embryos can't defend
> themselves and they aren't asking to be
> "murdered".They aren't asking anything.
> Their brains are underdeveloped, they have no self
> awareness. They lack the intelligence of a
> salamander.
>
> Everyone who is against abortion should volunteer
> to care for the otherwise unwanted babies. Whats
> that? You won't save the lives of the poor little
> victims?
> Then you are an accomplice in their murder!


Even after being born, babies need help, so I guess you would be in favor of killing babies after they are born too? brains are not fully developed until well after birth. Next.

2con4u - no, the thread isnt about suppressing free speech - it's about the assholes on the side of the street. Dont try to twist up shit, jackass........
@snowden - they do the Twist better than Chubby Checker LoLz
@Ito - most of the pro-lifer who prefer the "Harassment" method to get their point across..............well they are the same type of ppl who believe "barefoot and pregnant" is the moral role of women, y'know? :(

> Argument from silence, and a ridiculous one at
> that. Jesus didn't speak explicitly on a lot of
> things, but it's pretty easy to piece together
> God's thoughts on them unless you have some really
> screwy hermeneutics.
>

The Oracle at Delphi used to interpret the thoughts of the gods. Researchers have figured out that the "visions" came from inhaling vapors that came out of a cave.

This is really the crux of my argument. If we are going to make public policy based on interpretations of a book written by people written during the Byzantine Empire 1600 years ago, then we are screwed. Constantine was smart enough to mould this religion to rebuild his empire and it is amazing that it still mesmerizes people to this day.

However, we live in the age of reason. We are supposed to realize that people need to make decisions not only for the betterment of their lives, but for the betterment of society. If the mother, who is actually carrying the tadpole doesn't want it, why should you be arguing for it? As grisly as abortion is! It is safer than the alternatives.

Ok I've stated my piece, you all have fun with it. The wackos who spend every waking moment worried about this and carry the signs with mangled fetuses have every right to do so. If the signs make you sick, don't look at them. As long as all they are doing is protesting and not blowing up clinics or threatening doctors lives, let them have their fun. It's a sad existence, but that is what they want to do with their lives. That, and talk to their imaginary friend.

What's funny about the religious argument about abortion is that the bible isn't anti-abortion.

According to the bible (in many locations), life begins with breathing, i.e., after birth.

For example, genesis 2:7 "God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."

Again in Job 33:4 "The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life."

Of course the anti-abortion people say god or the pope is telling them something different now, but it really goes against their bible.

Meh. Pro-life, pro-choice, I don't care.

Showing chopped-up fetuses on a street corner is beyond the pale.

I can't show a boob in public, but I can show a live decapitation to toddlers. Something is terrible f'ed up to allow that to be legal. But then again, this is Virginia...

I saw some homely looking dude with a 10 foot high sign speaking against abortion in Kamp Washington area(Fairfax City) on Sunday afternoon. Was standing right at the crossroads of route 29 and route 50.
It was a very hot day and I stopped to offer him a Heineken but he said ,"fuck that Shit!"

The "assholes" on the side of the street are exercising free speech. Speech that you don't want to hear. Because it hurts you conscience. So you want to suppress it.

That's what it means when people want to make forms of speech "illegal" or "beyond the pale"

Get it, Gorgo?

Killing babies is ok but killing convicted murderers is wrong.
Attachments:

dr welby Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The year is 2012 and we know what causes
> pregnancy. Abortion shouldnt even come up except
> in case of rape. Otherwise show some common sense
> and use protection. There is also the morning
> after pill, use it.


This is the most useful statement anyone has made.

If a golden road is laid before you and you CHOOSE to not be cautious going down it, well deal with it. I did and I was just a kid, now that one's getting ready to go to college...

I don't wanna show my kids pics like that. I've raised them to be people who take responsibility for their actions. People who have a value of human life. My aunt had 1 abortion ovr 30yrs ago, and now she's over 50 and will never have the kid she wanted later in life, because I love her I don't say 'I wonder why'. I agree they shouldn't have nasty pictures to make their ponit, at least not where little kids have to see. But I agree with the the statement I copied above.

@Gordon-weren't those the same kids that were at MY kid's school???? Trying to let her and all her friends know how evil and sinful they are? Go back to the meme's! for me? ;)

@Jen - yeah, same ppl

@2con - no, it's you who dont get it. Nice sidestep there though, Dorothy. But aint my first rodeo. We grown ups call it a "Straw Man" approach. Cute, but pretty 8th grade of ya.

Anywho, has not a thing to do with conscience, just reality. YOU are, in reality, the ONLY person to bring up any speech being made illegal on this thread so I dont know what's going on in that head of yrs.

They are distasteful. And to put distasteful pics on the side of a public highwat is being an asswipe. It's the exact same thing as like if I were to put a Goatse pic up all around a school or something. Same exact thing with these asshole protesters.

pic unrelated



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2012 09:47AM by Gordon Blvd.
Attachments:

You can go to as many rodeos as you want, Rodeo clown--but the point is about free speech.

The speech here is a picture, but presumably you object to kids hearing "abortion is murder" because then they'd think their mom is a murderer and there'd be all kind of embarrassing questions to answer, like, why'd you kill my brother, mom? Why didn't you kill me?

These are qualitative different intentions that those who display pornography.

And liberal mom, ArlingtonKid, and haniel have all remarked this is a speech issue above, and

topsgotta, HNK3U, WNYTY have all said it should be prohibited.

So you are not only stupid, but you are a liar as well.

Freethinking Fraud.

As I wrote, I disagree completely with these people that abortion should be illegal. However, I will defend the rights of these people to show their signs and protest to my last breath. These people deserve the right to show the extremism of their position and also deserve all the public ridicule the receive for doing it.

If you don't like the pictures, don't look at them. If you don't agree with what they are saying, don't listen.

dude, no wonder you took 2con's name - yr just as crazy............none of thoes ppl said ANYTHING should be prohibited:

tops said it's wrong to see.
Posted by: Tops gotta ()
Date: July 01, 2012 07:03PM
What crazy as organization are these people with? Im all for freedom of speech but the photos they are using are outlandish, I don't have kids but this would be totally wrong for them to see.

HNK said they were inappropriate,
Re: Pro life demonstration on lee hwy
Posted by: hNK3U ()
Date: July 01, 2012 10:49PM
A coworker of mine who was driving his preschoolers to daycare was so pissed, that he circled around the block, came back, and ripped the signs out of the ground and put them in his trunk. He then disposed of them at a dumpster at work.
The signs in question featured hacked up fetuses. Completely in appropriate to display in public, and if my kids were with me, I'd be livid.
This was at Eaton Place near Rt 29/50 and 123.

WNYTY stated shock that it was legal.
Re: Pro life demonstration on lee hwy
Posted by: WNYTY ()
Date: July 03, 2012 10:48PM
Meh. Pro-life, pro-choice, I don't care.
Showing chopped-up fetuses on a street corner is beyond the pale.
I can't show a boob in public, but I can show a live decapitation to toddlers. Something is terrible f'ed up to allow that to be legal. But then again, this is Virginia...

You do know how the internet works? You cant just pretend that what ppl type is gonna change cause it's gonna just stay there the same way they wrote it, k? So you can STFU on that whole "liar" tip, Closeminded asswipe. YOu can twist it up all you want, but "Free Speech" aint the issue - its the fact we dont like assholes standing with distasteful pics on the street, plain and simple. If it was a "free speech" deal, we'd be speaking in at 401 Courthouse Sq, not Fairfax Underground..........

whoops, forgot the unrelated pic.............. If the pro-life movement ppl could just plan this in advance, maybe ppl would start listening to them more.................



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2012 11:27AM by Gordon Blvd.
Attachments:

@ito - nobody said anything about it being illegal - this 2con is just as crazy as the other one, is all LoLz

Let me spell it it out for you:
"Completely in appropriate to display in public" means should be prohibited

"Something is terrible f'ed up to allow that to be legal" means should be prohibited

"I'm surprised this isn't deemed as some sort of public indecency and stopped" means should be prohibited.

and finally "Im all for freedom of speech but the photos they are using are outlandish, I don't have kids but this would be totally wrong for them to see"

Saying "I'm all for freedom of speech" and then "but" yadda yadda yadda means you think these images should be prohibited.

Pornography is and should be prohibited. Profanity is and should be prohibited. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre is and should be prohibited. The reasons for these are well rehearsed.

And it is clear from the above quoted posts, that these posters want the public square protected from these images as well.

Otherwise they'd says stuff like Ito says along the lines of "well, I disagree but I will defend. . . "

I will not defend others right to show pornography. In fact I will take it from them and rip it apart. And I will expect the law to protect me and not them. But if I choose show a picture of an aborted fetus, then I will expect the law to protect me from those who want to take it away and rip it apart.

And who's crazier--the lunatic who posts all over the place for days on end, or the lunatics who match him post for post in order to bait and egg them on?

Tough call. . .

@2concerned

You mean like we are doing for you? We enjoy baiting lunatics. That is what we "do" here.

The reason why pornography exists is because it is protected free speech too. There are public obsecenity laws and the community has the right to determine what is allowable in the public space.

You probably would not get the cops backing if you physically destroyed pornography or these idiots' mutilated fetus signs. Expression of free speech ends when you start getting in physical confrontations with others.

@Ito - as easy as killing flies LoLz
@2con - it only means "prohibited" if yr off yr meds and following someone you dont know around on the interweb, I guess...................and oh yeah - Porno is not really "prohibited" http://bit.ly/uKPhhZ unless you are talking about the type of porno you are into....................which of course would kinda explain the creepy "follow Gordon around the interweb" thing you got going on..........

Anywho, hope you have a happy 4th :)

pic unrelated
Attachments:

Yeah, i don't think Ole Gorgo would be quite so worked up with all the epithets and the preening if it were just baiting. . . I think the conscience was sparked there, but maybe not.

At any rate he/she/it is a demonstrated liar, as was demonstrated.

Pornography is not legal in public, which again, seems to be the point of the posters up above--that they don't want their kids to see the fetus pictures, just like, presumably, they don't want their kids to see porno. That means its prohibited, stupid. And that's what they want--no free speech with pictures of fetuses on the street.

As to who is crazy, well, we've had 30 years of unfettered abortion, contraception, divorce on demand and now gay marriage--and how's that society working out for you there?

You recall Einstein's definition of insanity? keep it up. . .

And I post after you Gorgo because (1) you post everywhere on this thread and (2) I think you are fraud. A fraud freethinker. You claim to be all "everything goes" except when you don't like it. And I'm baiting you.

Red Brix Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's funny about the religious argument about
> abortion is that the bible isn't anti-abortion.
>
> According to the bible (in many locations), life
> begins with breathing, i.e., after birth.
>
> For example, genesis 2:7 "God formed a man from
> the dust of the ground and breathed into his
> nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a
> living being."
>
> Again in Job 33:4 "The Spirit of God hath made me,
> and the breath of the Almighty hath given me
> life."
>
> Of course the anti-abortion people say god or the
> pope is telling them something different now, but
> it really goes against their bible.


That's the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard concerning abortion and the Bible. First, Adam is hardly a good example, as that was a fairly unique situation. And the Job verse doesn't even prove your point.

There are numerous other passages in both the OT and NT (e.g. Psalm 22, 51, 139, Jeremiah 1, Luke 1 and 18 and Galatians 1, etc.) which would flat out contradict the inference you try to make.

Reading tea leaves makes more sense.

I knew it would only be a matter of time before someone started quoting chapter and verse.

A thought
Attachments:

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reading tea leaves makes more sense.
>
> I knew it would only be a matter of time before
> someone started quoting chapter and verse.


Yeah and notice it wasn't a pro-life person who started it.

Good to know liberals would like me aborted.

The first amendment doesn't have any stipulation for being pretty. Whether you agree or disagree, its an honor that in this country, we are allowed to protest peacefully. Many countries would love this but don't have it.

In utero: zygote/embryo/fetus.
Post-birth: baby.
At the very least, people should acquire proper knowledge of such topics before participating in a debate regarding the ethics of legal abortion.
First off, a fetus isn't a "baby" until BIRTH, whereby it is officially an autonomous life-form. The fetus is entirely dependent on its host's compliance in order to survive and develop accordingly, prior to birth.
For instance, if a baby's mother dies the child is no less able to breathe and sustain life(provided there are others to care for him/her)than they were when the mother was previously alive.

On the other hand, when pregnant women die, the developing fetus simultaneously expires. If her respiration & heartbeat end, all bets are off. A fetus is by definition, a parasite until gestation is complete, thus not classifiable as a human life.

Furthermore, fetuses are incapable of experiencing pain as is often suggested by countless pro-life lowlifes. Take all that overzealous propaganda and shove it. Or at least quit pretending the fuss is based on the welfare of fetal rights rather than your collective hatred of women, particularly those who dare exercise reproductive control/prevention.

.................
Attachments:

dr welby Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The year is 2012 and we know what causes
> pregnancy. Abortion shouldnt even come up except
> in case of rape. Otherwise show some common sense
> and use protection. There is also the morning
> after pill, use it.

What about ectopic pregnancies that require termination? Women should power through for 9 months, HOPING doctors' predictions of imminent death are inaccurate?
Or if the fetus is determined to have sub-fractional chances of successfully surviving pregnancy or childbirth--who in their right mind takes their chances and willingly subjects themselves to miscarrying/stillbirth? That experience is guaranteed to end in emotional trauma; especially if said pregnancy was a planned, wanted endeavor.

See that's the major issue with the application of personal moral beliefs on others. You are not aware of case-sensitive circumstances; nor are you fit to dictate choices made by others, regardless of their motive(s).

Reality bites.

@captain obvious

Waaah!! Its hard!! life is hard!! many people get a raw deal!!! so i don't believe in the obvious purpose of sex, and would like to extinguish its consequences so i can treat my cohabiting girlfriend as a semen-wastebasket!

Do they even have those anymore? wastebaskets? how quaint!

2concerned4you Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @captain obvious
>
> Waaah!! Its hard!! life is hard!! many people get
> a raw deal!!! so i don't believe in the obvious
> purpose of sex, and would like to extinguish its
> consequences so i can treat my cohabiting
> girlfriend as a semen-wastebasket!

One of the most advantageous features offered through the advancement of civilization & particularly medicine is the ability to fornicate without the consequence of mandatory parenthood. It's also quite apparent that contraception has proven no hindrance to procreation rates, given the volume of our current population.
Get off your high horse already. Preaching the sentiment that childbirth is the only acceptable motive for engaging in sex is a hallmark of intellectual degeneration, and your cause is a detriment to mankind.

Not to mention...satan will be happy to extinguish your soul with a smerk on his face....

how many puds have you squeezed off captain o, prior to your curing of cancer. . . oh my bad, you were saving your lassitude for some greater problem. . . . poverty?. . . economic inequity. . . war. . .


wow, apparently you saved it for sleeping in and kicking her out. . . nice call

2concerned:

Are you a misogynist or just a prude?

If woman wants to have a baby, she must consider a fetus as her "baby". She may be joyful when a pregnancy test shows positive. Otherwise, she is only afraid of being pregnant.

Don't you know some (many) women forget taking pills in their busy schedule? Not only once or twice. So, morning after pills are handy for them. Really? Some of them cannot even remember when the last menstrual period was (therefore Ogino method won't work either). And pills are not safe for women's health in a long run. Don't you see law suits against pharmaceutical companies?

Actually, one of my children is with special needs. I never took those screening tests when I was pregnant because I knew I never abort my baby. When I learned the fact, I was shocked to receive the news. Nonetheless, I LOVE him very much and I am glad to have him in this world. He needs some help and support while he enjoys his life. I am willing to take that challenge as his mom. Honestly, I never regret anything at all.

I know some women choose to take screening tests and then decide what to do. It's totally up to them. Still, it was mixed feeling when I heard my friend said she could not sacrifice herself to take care of a child with disability. So, she will abort a baby (fetus) if the screening tests come back with "positive".

All in all, I don't apply my personal moral beliefs on others including my said friend. I just go with my own beliefs. Pro-life is one of them. Again, I don't support the extremist.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 2concerned:
>
> Are you a misogynist or just a prude?

2conservative is presumably a specimen of christian fundie republicunt, complete with 44"-waist khaki panties caught in a perpetual bunch...because tree-hugging, fag-enabling secular heathens undermine our traditional American values by encouraging reprehensible levels of sexual immorality!

the pro-life movement acknowledges menstruation as nature's punishment to sexually active, fertile women incapable of meeting their inherently assumed monthly goal: pregnancy.

@Ito,
I would say that it is you who are the "misogynist". treating women as if they wanted or enjoyed sex like men do is inherently "misogynistic". Even if you subscribe to some version of evolutionary materialist psychology, they couldn't possibly because of the limits of physiology.

But it seems pretty obvious they don't anyway, empirically. Women have a natural affinity for babies, and want to get pregnant, hence the current ludicrous debates about "having it all" . . . .

I just happen to think that's a good thing, and appreciate that about women--actually admire that they are different than men.

@Captain O
I also find it amusing how all you free thinking openminded types immediately start slapping the labels on those who advance arguments you cant address. "fundie" "repubulicunt" "misogynist"--what happened to all of the tolerant openminded, live and let live-ness, hmmm?

How about addressing the point, or have we exceeded you meager capabilities in that regard.

@2c4u

I feel bad for you that you feel that women do not want or enjoy sex "like men do". That might be your own personal experience and for that I am sorry.

I guess your point of view is a little better than the fundamentalist types who believe that women are responsible for original sin and "tempt" men to have lust.

I guess you answered my question though, you are a prude.

So your belief must be that most women just tolerate a man's penis just for the sake of him implanting his seed. They crave having that baby and are willing to undergo some sort of humiliation in order to achieve their goal.

You also believe that women are more or less just biding their time in life until they get old enough to get married and have children. "Having it all" would be that they would want to have a career or life outside the home, but you believe that most (if not all) women would prefer to stay at home and raise babies.

Is this right?

I didn't say they don't enjoy sex as much as men do, i said they don't enjoy it like men do.

Is this so revolutionary? If they did, public restrooms would probably be filled with more than just homoerotic assignations--and there'd be far less movies about all the problems with "friends with benefits", don't you think?

It seems pretty obvious.

as to the second point, that "women are just biding their time until they . . . .have children."

Absolutely.

What is a "career" anyways, compared to bringing a new life in the world.

What is "life outside the home"? spending 8-10 mandatory hours per day with people who really neither like nor respect you?

Pushing papers around in an office?

even medicine now is 70% bureaucracy. . . . what idiot would choose this over actually raising a person.

On the prude part, sure. If the opposite means I have to praise casual sex and porn.

Forgive me for putting words in your mouth, but I just want to see if you agree with this...

The "Sexual Revolution" brought about by the "pill" and contraceptives in the 1960s was an aberration and an affront to god and the natural nature of women. Sex should not be had before marriage because the purpose of sex is to have children and not for mere sexual gratification (mainly of men).

The world was a better place when there was a nuclear family when women did not work and spent their time in the home taking care of the kids.

Generally speaking, do you feel that women do not necessarily want to have a career like men do, but are forced to work outside the home because it is the only way to make ends meet? Compared to the job of child bearing, women should not bother seeking higher education or a purpose in life other than the family?

Do you think that women are not as smart as men or why is it that they wouldn't want a career? Why wouldn't they have interests beyond raising children? Is it because of their natural "affinity" for children that gives them purpose in life?

There is no way the government should be telling women if they should get an abortion or not.

@Ito

Agree with much of it, except would assign women's desire for "careers" to the same "Sexual Revolution" currents--a steady drumbeat that marriage and family were thwarting and some kind of slavery. Those currents go well back before the beginning of the 20th century.

Also I don't know how "smart" has anything to do with wanting a "career". It seems to me like people that believe they have a "career" nowadays are the stupid ones. Pushing paper around so someone else can get rich from your efforts just makes you a wage slave.

The really "smart" ones either figure out how to make money for doing nothing, or at least something totally independent of others assigning of a value to it

2concerned4you Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @Captain O
> I also find it amusing how all you free thinking
> openminded types immediately start slapping the
> labels on those who advance arguments you cant
> address. "fundie" "repubulicunt"
> "misogynist"--what happened to all of the tolerant
> openminded, live and let live-ness, hmmm?
>
> How about addressing the point, or have we
> exceeded you meager capabilities in that regard.

Tolerance is not unconditional, don't know what could've made you think otherwise. And unlike you & all those LL Bean-clad cronies of the same ilk, us "open-minded" longhairs don't conspire to eliminate personal freedoms(abortion, gay marriage)and continue to picket in hopes of popularizing your brand of hate-culture.

Why would you expect to receive openmindedness, when your rhetoric preaches the exact opposite? Is this another sensationalized cognitive dissonance--the only technique that the Grand Ole Party/Golf Oil & Prostitutes relies on, now that they're losing considerable traction, as well as credibility?

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Abortion isn't murder. If it were it would be
> called murder.
>
> There are so many other problems facing the world
> and our country and yet we let a vocal minority of
> lunatics hold our politics hostage with this
> issue.
>
> Women have been aborting children since the
> beginning of time and doing so in some horrific
> ways before it was legal to do so. If 1 million
> mothers are doing this now with a relatively safe
> medical procedure, you can only imagine the
> carnage we will go back to if a safe legal option
> is not available.
>
> We can go back to the good old' days when the rich
> would quietly have the procedure done in the back
> room of a doctor's office and poor women using a
> coat hangar.
>
> I don't mind these idiots standing out on the
> streets protesting. They can join ranks with the
> God Hates Fags wackos and really create a
> spectacle. I just wish the media and the
> politicians would stop paying attention to them.

+1

2concerned4you Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> as to the second point, that "women are just
> biding their time until they . . . .have
> children."
>
> Absolutely.
>
> What is a "career" anyways, compared to bringing a
> new life in the world.
>
> What is "life outside the home"? spending 8-10
> mandatory hours per day with people who really
> neither like nor respect you?

> On the prude part, sure. If the opposite means I
> have to praise casual sex and porn.

Those matters boil down to personal discretion and individual goals. It's not your place to determine where women should or shouldn't be applying themselves in life. Several don't aspire to become parents, or are professionally-oriented and prefer to define themselves through career success.

@gianni: +1 It's so pathetic that some ppl can only see women only as "objects" or "goals" not as individuals
@Capt - cause they would rather be an asshole to women than respect them or seriously try to want to help them (even IF they disagree with them)
@bleeder - next, they will want you to have to register it as soon as it starts working LoLz
@Ito - sounds like 2cons is more like ................well: the same type of ppl who believe "barefoot and pregnant" is the moral role of women, y'know? :( And stop being so closeminded. Why can you ONLY see 2con being a misogynist OR a prude? It is obvious that they are both. LoLz

and because you were so baiting and begging for my attention (what is it WITH these nutcases needing my input??? can somebody explain this to me? Been happening for over a year now.............blows my mind to this day o_0 )

@2con - still crazy, I see. Also best to know what season it is before you bait cause I wasnt here LoLz. To answer yr question, though: 30 years ago, society thought it was coming apart at the seems. US was in a wwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayy worse recession than the shit we just went thru. The black plague known as AIDS was running rampant with no end in site. And as scary as terrorism is nowadays, IT DOES NOT EVEN FUCKING COME CLOSE TO THE THOUGHT OF THE WORLD BEING BLOWN TO FUCKING BITS BY NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST!!!!

So yeah, in the last 30 years , society has come along quite nicely thank you very much. Maybe someday, you will be mature enough to join us..........

pic unrelated



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2012 07:43AM by Gordon Blvd.
Attachments:

Gorgo! you took 5 min. off? good for you! get some rest...

yeah, this 21century is really a utopia--we sure got rid of those std's, and the new "knowledge economy", you know the one, where bankers dream of even more catastrophic ways of making bonuses, while the rest of us suffer any losses because of the insane risk and leverage their "knowledge" has put into the global system--yeah that's really a boon.

And you think the recession in the 70s and 80s was worse than what's going on now? Try reading a little--and hold on to your socks, cause this "recession" hasn't even gotten going yet.

An all for what? even the 40% of the household worth that the middle class just lost in about 4 years, they were previously spending on crap they didn't need. Ipads and the rest of the crap they have so they don't have to look at each other. Yep that's progress.

AIDS running rampant? who thought that 30 years ago? maybe gays, but everybody else thought it was just about about as dangerous as they do now.

But the real point is whether all these kids we have today with ADHD, and all the rest of the dysfunctions which have rendered the educational "system" we have pretty much defunct wouldn't be better off with two parents.

Where do you think all these pathologies come from? flouride? climate change?

how bout the profound sense that they are not really wanted, and are just another checkbox on the way to "having it all"

But go ahead, keep claiming its progress. It worked for the soviets, after all. Maoists too!

I notice progress is working out for EVERYBODY

except ppl like you LoLz

pic unrelated
Attachments:

Pretty interesting, how tea-tards claim a collective mission to reduce extraneous government intervention in everyday life, yet continually propose laws and policies which specifically aim to thwart various forms of contraceptives.

@Capt
Attachments:

As a woman....

I've been told many times I f*** like a man. So, you're wrong on that point. You either don't like sex the same, or you're a man and have never experienced a fiesty woman. It has nothing to do with casual sex.

I'm 100% sure my eldest daughter will never have kids. She doesn't want them at all. I look forward to being proud of thr career she'll have after college. Neither of us are waiting for her to have kids to fulfill her destiny as a woman.

That said, my birth control failed, and I don't believe in abortion. But I had my tubes tied at 22, had to sign the paperwork 3x I was so young. I'd have done it at 16 if given the option. I love my kids, I'm glad I have them. I'd love #4, but I am SO glad I never met him/her thanks to the tubal. Doesn't that go against what was just said by 2C4Y?

Back on the ranch---

How do I "protect" my kids from your freedom of speech if it's huge banners on the side of the road? on here, online, I block a web page, same with cable, I use parental settings...I don't have the button when I'm driving.

I'm not dissing freedom of speech, just really, turn your sick pics toward the people/building you're pretesting against. Not random motorists, you don't know who's on your side and just doesn't wanna see that. I don't have to look at it just because I don't believe in abortion, I'm already there, but now I'd never join a demonstration.

aww, Gorgo, back already? guess those seasons are "catching" up on you

Good, i'm happy for you that you are pleased with the way things are going, though. Maybe you'll have less to post about, especially after they legalize pot. Then you can just take a cannabis holiday and just not have to worry about things.

I'm sure they'll tell you when to be happy or anxious, and how many kids you get to have, and what kind of public housing you get to live in.

Captain Zero,

As somebody mentioned above, abortion is a pretty poor form of "contraception" especially as it misses the definition of the word.

And I don't even understand your philosophy--it seems like you are libertarian (which is what the "tea-tards" are) but only for sexual activity? So you want the gummint to regulate everything else so you can do whatever you want with your privates? have you ever even read Brave New World?

Jen K,

You really don't get how men think. This is what men want out of sex--it lasts about 5 minutes, and then they get to go to sleep. Then maybe later then same thing. And if they give in to the baser desires, they'd like it with a different person every time, preferably, also one that is about 20years old. Everything else that you've heard is bs. I'm sure some "sensitive" guys will come on here and lie about it, because they are whipped, but that's pretty much the biology of it.

Do you want that? I don't think so.

2concerned4you Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But go ahead, keep claiming its progress. It
> worked for the soviets, after all. Maoists too!

So let me see if I get your point here...

You are comparing a society whose major problems are that people are too fat because of an abundance of food, spending too much time in front of a computer, who don't get exercise because the majority of people drive their cars to work and to the supermarket instead of walking, to these regimes:

Soviets: Who stood in line for hours and hours to get a loaf of bread in the middle of winter, who Stalin killed millions of people because he collectivized the farms and sent his political enemies to the gulag. Who micromanaged every facet of a person's life from cradle to grave.

Maoists: Who also killed millions of people because of collectivization of farms, who killed all the small birds in the country because Mao didn't like them (and then the country was overwhelmed by insects), who tried to boost steel production by making each village have its own blast furnace, who killed millions of people because they did not conform to its single-minded political ideology.

---

Again, abortion is a first-world problem when there are not many other serious problems to worry about. There are still many countries in the world where children and pregnant women's major concern is malnutrition and access to clean water. Where access to prenatal care means a 3 day walk to the nearest clinic.

You believe that women have no other purpose in life besides reproduction, so I guess the idea of abortion really upsets your worldview. Fortunately for the rest of the population, we realize that women should be allowed to choose what to do with their bodies and their lives. We are fortunate to live in a country that does not force women to have abortions (one family, one child) and we are fortunate that we live in a country that has access to contraceptives and that educates its women to be something more than baby makers.

Hyperbole is a good instrument in making your argument, but comparing the U.S. in the 21st Century to 20th Century China and the Soviet Union makes you look like a lunatic.

Contraception is defined as a method of birth control and abortion, by default, prevents childbirth. I assume abortion is rarely a first choice, considering the procedure is costly and requires the help of professionals in contrast to the Pill, rubbers etc which are administered by patients themselves.

In summary, it doesn't make sense to conclude that the purpose of abortion is slut-enabling. It's a situational last resort in many cases, given its inconvenience and stigma. If unwelcome pregnancy is not a burden you'll ever bear, all this moral meddling is of no discernable relevance.