It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Now Pro-Life Advocates are potential terrorists

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 


This bothers me because it is lumping the extremists in with those who simply hold a belief regarding a certain social issue. I am ardently pro life but would never, ever harm another person, threaten another person, bomb an abortion clinic, etc.

Targeting all pro-lifers as a terrorist group due to the actions of some is no different to me than targeting all Muslims as a terrorist group due to the actions of some, etc. The majority of pro-lifers are very peaceful and would never engage in criminal acts due to their views. I don't care for this at all.

But read the article thoroughly. It extends past just pro-life advocates. Your title is a bit misleading and needs to be updated because that is not exact headline of the article which happens to be, 'Federal agency warns of radicals on right.' The crackdown is on a much wider scope so your thread needs to be updated according to the BAN rules.




posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
The government has categorized "pro-life/anti-abortion rights" organizations as potentially militant.

You may think that the justification for violent action is called for. You may not.

But either way, the inclination to invoke fear in others, by means of graphic depictions, death threats, abusive language, egg-throwing, etc., is clearly considered anti-social. The government has a mandate to ensure that organizations like these do not infringe upon the freedoms of the citizens.

As long as this nation operates under a legal system that allows women the right to abort unwanted pregnancies, your beef is not with 'the people'. Your beef is with the law.

Take it up with them. Not those who have already been granted the right to terminate (kill) their unwanted children.

This transcends your religion. It has to. It is about how what you (or I) believe is no substitute for law.

Just because a person is doing something that YOU have been indoctrinated to hate, or have judged as morally wrong, doesn't mean you have the right to stop them. Since many take issue with that, they push the social envelope until they become nuisances to society in general. A response from the government should be expected.

I disagree with much of what has been thrown about herein, but one thing I can't disagree with is that no one can change this reality without first changing the law. Beyond that, those who militantly protest these practices would do better to do it in front of a courthouse or county seat, or a state capital, than in front of an Abortion Clinic which is licensed and protected by civil law.

The fact that these organizations target private citizens and businesses (sadly, yes, it is a business) is what causes the largest self-defeating aspect of the demonstrators' or protesters' objectives.

And in the end, it got them classified as potential 'terrorists.' Work smarter, not harder. YELLING only gets you ignored.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by Maxmars]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Layla I'd say Paul Hill was a "right wing extremist" who would fall under that category. There's really no denying that, is there?


Paul Hill was a Presbyterian minister, tall, young, good looking, with a beautiful wife who adored him, and three adorable kids. Paul believed he had to do more to save the babies than hold up a sign. As a big strapping man, I believe he felt like a hypocrit, a wimp, standing at the driveway while the abortionist drove by him smirking each Saturday, on his way to his date with death.

I believe Paul made a choice based on his conscience. As a result, there were almost 30 babies slated to die that Saturday that Paul took matters into his own hands. I know many of the "mothers" went on to get their babies killed at another day and another time, but I also know there were many who decided to change their minds, to go ahead and have atheir children.

As a result, there are now people walking around, about what 15 years old, who would not be here if Paul had not saved their lives.

Also, the baby murderer killed his last baby. And many other abortionists decided to give up the "profession" because they decided it was just too darned dangerous.

Could well be that Paul Hill saved the lives of thousands and thousands of babies by what he did.

Anyway, on Judgment Day I'd rather be standing in Paul's shoes than in a lot of these wimpy so-called "Christians" who do not care one bit for the innocent babies that are being butchered by the abortion industry.

I also know there are other people rotting and languishing in prison for caring. People like Shelly Shannon who tried to stop Tiller the Killer in Kansas from aborting the babies in the third trimester. She shot him in his arms. For this, she must spend the rest of her life in prison. Meantime, Tiller continues to abort big babies, viable babies, babies that want to live, human babies. He aborts them and throws them in an incinterator, or sells their body parts to science.

You all may be glad that Shelly is in prison and Tiller is out and about killing babies, but I believe the opposite.

America, the land of the barbarians, wanting mercy from God in these last days, but not willing to show mercy to its own most innocent and weakest members.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Salt of the Earth
 


I'm fully aware of Paul Hill's story. My step-father was at the execution, praying. I know Paul's convictions are what motivated him. I understand his love for the unborn children. None of that takes away fromt he fact that he was, in fact, a "right wing extremist". He used violence and death for what? To fight violence and death. IMO, THAT is hypocritical. He murdered to prevent what he believed was murder. He committed a hainous crime to stop something that federal law allows. As a poster above stated, start with changing the law. Doesn't the Bible state something about not breaking the laws set forth by our government?

Paul Hill was a domestic terrorist, it's true no matter what brush you paint it with.

Edit to add: DO not for one second assume that I am "glad" Shelly is in prison or that Tiller continues to abort. You don't know me, and unless I use those words, don't apply to me. Thanks




[edit on 4/15/2009 by Layla]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Again the power of words..."butcher", "murder". etc...it's like a shock and awe campaign that detracts from a rational debate and is definitely off-topic. I am going to make the assumption that the OP wants to talk about the constitutionality of these issues (not just pro-choice/life stuff). And assume is a good word too...you know what assuming does


+2 more 
posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Salt of the Earth

Originally posted by Layla I'd say Paul Hill was a "right wing extremist" who would fall under that category. There's really no denying that, is there?


Paul Hill was a Presbyterian minister, tall, young, good looking, with a beautiful wife who adored him, and three adorable kids. Paul believed he had to do more to save the babies than hold up a sign. As a big strapping man, I believe he felt like a hypocrit, a wimp, standing at the driveway while the abortionist drove by him smirking each Saturday, on his way to his date with death.

I believe Paul made a choice based on his conscience. As a result, there were almost 30 babies slated to die that Saturday that Paul took matters into his own hands. I know many of the "mothers" went on to get their babies killed at another day and another time, but I also know there were many who decided to change their minds, to go ahead and have atheir children.

As a result, there are now people walking around, about what 15 years old, who would not be here if Paul had not saved their lives.






On July 29, 1994, Hill approached a Pensacola, Florida abortion clinic with which he was familiar. When he spotted physician John Britton and his clinic escort, James Barrett, outside, he shot them both at close range with a shotgun. In addition to the two murders, Hill seriously wounded Barrett's wife, Joan. He was arrested moments later.


Source

If you seriously think Paul Hill's actions were justified in the slightest, you're criminally insane.

If your "conscience" tells you to shotgun a physician, his assistant and his wife, because you don't agree with the field he's in, then you are criminally insane.

If you think, because he was "a Presbyterian minister, tall, young, good looking, with a beautiful wife who adored him, and three adorable kids", that what he did was justified in ANY SENSE, you are criminally insane.

You, my friend, have shown firsthand why people like you should be considered dangerous. I just saw you, in so many words, justify, defend and condone MURDER.

There is a warm place in hell (if you believe in that sort of thing) reserved for people like Paul Hill.







EDIT for typo

[edit on 15-4-2009 by drwizardphd]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
"As for the OP, I'd tend to think that the report is not calling ALL Pro-life people "right wing extremists". "

Sadly I wish you were right but the truth is that there is a general warning of all those who oppose abortion as well as those who oppose open boarders, and those who support the 2nd amendment, and those who aren't happy about our new president being black. LOL not all of middle america is racist! He skin color has nothing to do with the fact that he is unfit for the job.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Yes ... all of those who pray rosaries while walking and pushing baby carriages are just soooooo scary and are terrorizing people with *gasp* a public show of prayer for others.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
"Your title is a bit misleading and needs to be updated because that is not exact headline of the article which happens to be, 'Federal agency warns of radicals on right.' The crackdown is on a much wider scope so your thread needs to be updated according to the BAN rules. "

I appreciate your input on the title needing to be updated. But in truth there is such a general approach in the DHS memo that it can be taken to extremes depending on the conviction of the readers and therefore I will keep this title going.

Thanks again for the input.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockstrongo37
What is more fascist than the threat of the prosecution of those who believe in the sanctity of life for the unborn?

Whats more fascist? Telling people that any other line of thinking is wrong. Like you people are doing.

Also, pro-choice advocates, if you havent noticed, have been mentioned in these little "lists" for years. You are hardly being persecuted.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Yes ... all of those who pray rosaries while walking and pushing baby carriages are just soooooo scary and are terrorizing people with *gasp* a public show of prayer for others.


And Randall Terry, peace-loving dude that he is, advocates blowing up clinics and killing the staff. That's not scary, though, is it? Murder is okay if it's for Jesus, right?



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Yes ... all of those who pray rosaries while walking and pushing baby carriages are just soooooo scary and are terrorizing people with *gasp* a public show of prayer for others.



Yes, there are many innocent, nonviolent protesters.

Those aren't the ones the articles are referring to.

Or did you forget about these: Anti-abortion violence

Face it, there are plenty anti-abortionists who fit all the descriptions of domestic terrorists. (god I hate using that term)

-Religious extremism
-feeling that their violent action will be rewarded in heaven
-intended violence against groups of people (not just abortion doctors, but their clients, assistants and loved ones as well)
-widespread property damage, including use of fire and bombs
-fanatic dedication to their cause (anti-abortion terrorists feel as if their doing god's work and saving babies, so they take little account for their actions or their victims, the killing of abortion clinic receptionists is a prime example)



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Layla
reply to post by Salt of the Earth
 


I'm fully aware of Paul Hill's story. My step-father was at the execution, praying. I know Paul's convictions are what motivated him. I understand his love for the unborn children. None of that takes away fromt he fact that he was, in fact, a "right wing extremist". He used violence and death for what? To fight violence and death. IMO, THAT is hypocritical. He murdered to prevent what he believed was murder. He committed a hainous crime to stop something that federal law allows. As a poster above stated, start with changing the law. Doesn't the Bible state something about not breaking the laws set forth by our government?

Paul Hill was a domestic terrorist, it's true no matter what brush you paint it with.

Edit to add: DO not for one second assume that I am "glad" Shelly is in prison or that Tiller continues to abort. You don't know me, and unless I use those words, don't apply to me. Thanks




[edit on 4/15/2009 by Layla]


My opinion of you is not the highest. You label your stepfather a right wing extremist and take the side of the baby murderer and think we all should agree with you because you are betraying your own stepfather. Sorry. When the Army comes to take me away to a FEMA camp I'd rather have a neighbor like Paul Hill or Shelly Shannon than somebody like you. In fact, a neighbor like you would be turning me in enthusiastically as a domestic terrorist, just as you have labeled the martyred Paul Hill. Pretty disgusting actually.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Everyone is a potential terrorist! That's what makes this whole war on terror absurd! It never ever ends. Endless war.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Salt of the Earth
In fact, a neighbor like you would be turning me in enthusiastically as a domestic terrorist, just as you have labeled the martyred Paul Hill. Pretty disgusting actually.


Wow, just wow.

So you admit then, that what anti-abortionists do is domestic terrorism?

And you go further by saying you would enthusiastically become one simply because you had a neighbor who was pro choice?

I think you just got added to the terrorist watch list, my friend.

EDIT: Nevermind, I misread what you wrote.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by drwizardphd]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Layla
 


What is more heinous act?

Murdering those who have a choice and a voice, or murdering those who don't?



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Its getting to the point where it seems that the kettle is calling the pot black, or that the real problem seems to be with the Homeland Security department which seems like its a nazi organization of fascists that don't answer to the people. Should people continue to allow it to get worse, or should they hold a general strike and surround washington to inform them that they have a list of changes that are going to be made ASAP?.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by mystiq]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Salt of the Earth

Originally posted by Layla
reply to post by Salt of the Earth
 

My opinion of you is not the highest. You label your stepfather a right wing extremist and take the side of the baby murderer and think we all should agree with you because you are betraying your own stepfather. Sorry. When the Army comes to take me away to a FEMA camp I'd rather have a neighbor like Paul Hill or Shelly Shannon than somebody like you. In fact, a neighbor like you would be turning me in enthusiastically as a domestic terrorist, just as you have labeled the martyred Paul Hill. Pretty disgusting actually.


I did not say anyone should agree with me. That, apparently, is one of the differences between you and I. I allow people to disagree. I do not judge Paul Hill on his belief system, but on his actions. I do not disagree with his pro-life belief, nor with my step-father's, but I do disagree with their actions. There is a difference there. You can judge me as "disgusting" for disagreeing with you, and that is your right. What you cannot do is come to my home and shoot me to advocate your beliefs. Violence does not cure violence. Paul Hill's violent acts, in the name of God, are what I disagree with. His actions are EXACTLY the same as those carried out by extremist Muslims in the name of Allah. If believing that makes me "disgusting" in your eyes, that's fine. I know that my step father would disagree with you wholeheartedly, having actually known and raised me.

So with that, how about we get back to the subject at hand and refrain from personal attacks?



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla Murder is okay if it's for Jesus, right?




No more than it is for the government.

Anyways, abort all you want. Lets make milkshakes out of whats left and drink to eternal life.

If a woman wants to go through with it she's more than welcome to.
But hey, I'm just a 'right-wing extremist.'



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
This thread has simply gotten off the subject. And I am beginning to realize there are many in this group who simply are here to muddy up the discussions with distractions.

We cannot allow this kind of memo to simply slide under the radar.
The truth is that the prolife movement has been profoundly non-violent, and with the exception of a few "nuts" who were condemned by the Christian community at large there have been very few incidents of violence period.

The truth is here is that gun owners are beginning to be singled out as potential terrorists, those who think illegal aliens should be removed from our country and be allowed to enter only through legal means are beginning to be singled out as potential terrorists, that those citizens who believe in “state’s rights” are beginning to be singled out as potential terrorists, and those who support a babies right to choose life are beginning to be singled out as potential terrorists.

Please get off this angry attack and stick to the subject which was my whole intention by starting this discussion.

Is it constitutional to single out these groups as potential terrorists?



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join