Hostage Situation at Planned Parenthood in Colorado

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

Nope, I'm saying that whenever a white guy shoots up a bunch of people the excuse is that he's mentally ill; the implication being that of course he's somehow less of a murderous villain then a "normal" person. Of course he's still a cowardly bully hiding behind a gun.

Your such a micro aggressor with your entitled white privilege thinking. How do you make those assumptions about white people.

 

Crazy is as crazy does. He's got batshit crazy written all over his reclusive ass in the woods.

 

Stop trying to make it be something it isn't.

 

This guy is obviously a derranged nut job.

[Gene Frenkle]

 

So you're equating a lone nut job with a gun to an army with tanks and AK-47's. Ok...got it.

 

You're equating the army's military actions to acts of terrorism? An army of terrorists? Why are you getting so hung up on words here? I wouldn't call an army of Pro-Life Christians with tanks and AK's terrorists, nor their actions terrorism. It's all semantics anyway. They both suck and are based on ridiculous stories, but that's just me and my anti-religious side...

 

The point is, your "army of terrorists" or any run-of-the-mill suicide bomber in Syria or any of the 9/11 hijackers or any of these abortion clinic bombers/shooters are all motivated by the same thing: god and religion. It's so pointless.

[Chef Jim]

 

You're equating the army's military actions to acts of terrorism? An army of terrorists? Why are you getting so hung up on words here? I wouldn't call an army of Pro-Life Christians with tanks and AK's terrorists, nor their actions terrorism. It's all semantics anyway. They both suck and are based on ridiculous stories, but that's just me and my anti-religious side...

 

The point is, your "army of terrorists" or any run-of-the-mill suicide bomber in Syria or any of the 9/11 hijackers or any of these abortion clinic bombers/shooters are all motivated by the same thing: god and religion. It's so pointless.

 

You don't consider ISIS an army of terrorists? An army of religious fanatics? To even suggest to compare the two is foolish at best. But yeah, yeah, yeah we get it Gene "one trick pony" Frenkle. All religions are the same. They all suck and all those that follow them are fools.

[Gene Frenkle]

 

You don't consider ISIS an army of terrorists? An army of religious fanatics? To even suggest to compare the two is foolish at best. But yeah, yeah, yeah we get it Gene "one trick pony" Frenkle. All religions are the same. They all suck and all those that follow them are fools.

 

I'd certainly consider them an army of religious fanatics. I'd define the words terrorist and terrorism differently, that's all. Like I said, semantics.

 

You're deflecting. What are all the aforementioned solely motivated by?

The only reason you're concentrating on ISIS is because you can't defend the rest of it.

[Chef Jim]

 

I'd certainly consider them an army of religious fanatics. I'd define the words terrorist and terrorism differently, that's all. Like I said, semantics.

 

You're deflecting. What are all the aforementioned solely motivated by?

The only reason you're concentrating on ISIS is because you can't defend the rest of it.

 

Yes Gene it's all in the name of religion. It's a very deep and well thought out point you've made.

 

But if you can't see the difference between a handful of nut jobs who every so often do things in the name of religion vs tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands doing things in the name of religion I can't help you. Why does one religion prompt only that handful while another prompts hundreds of thousands? Global warming?

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

 

Yes Gene it's all in the name of religion. It's a very deep and well thought out point you've made.

 

But if you can't see the difference between a handful of nut jobs who every so often do things in the name of religion vs tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands doing things in the name of religion I can't help you. Why does one religion prompt only that handful while another prompts hundreds of thousands? Global warming?

Has there been any reliable report that the planned parenthood nutcase cited God as his reason for killing people, or is that just hopeful conjecture from the left?

[truth on hold]

 

Yes Gene it's all in the name of religion. It's a very deep and well thought out point you've made.

 

But if you can't see the difference between a handful of nut jobs who every so often do things in the name of religion vs tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands doing things in the name of religion I can't help you. Why does one religion prompt only that handful while another prompts hundreds of thousands? Global warming?

have you agreed on a standard definition of "terrorism"? do you include state actions that target civilians, or are simply indifferent to civilian casualties? I would. Do you weight the degree of "corruptability" of a religion, state, ethnic or socioeconomic class, etc. etc. ... by number of followers? If for example it's a religion and it only has 1,000 followers, but we all agree that 500 of them are terrorists, that's 50% terror rate. Does that make it more dangerous than Islam which has something like 1.5 billion followers, but far less than 50% terror rate? How do you factor in the cause and effect/blowback of one group's terror activities against anothers? I dont know, a lot of stuff to sort thru ... that's why I tend to focus on things we can do better like not militarily intervening in foreign affairs, be it direct or thru corrupt allies

[4merper4mer]

 

Yes Gene it's all in the name of religion. It's a very deep and well thought out point you've made.

 

But if you can't see the difference between a handful of nut jobs who every so often do things in the name of religion vs tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands doing things in the name of religion I can't help you. Why does one religion prompt only that handful while another prompts hundreds of thousands? Global warming?

He's blames everything on the big man because he is bald. Cry me a river.

[IDBillzFan]

Hypocrite much?

 

Seriously.

[DC Tom]

 

I'd certainly consider them an army of religious fanatics. I'd define the words terrorist and terrorism differently, that's all. Like I said, semantics.

 

You're deflecting. What are all the aforementioned solely motivated by?

The only reason you're concentrating on ISIS is because you can't defend the rest of it.

 

Your major mental malfunction in this argument is that you think the key concept at work is "religion," when it's actually "fanaticism."

 

To your credit, you're not alone...virtually every American shares that major mental malfunction. But it's a seriously !@#$ing major one nonetheless.

[Gene Frenkle]

 

Yes Gene it's all in the name of religion. It's a very deep and well thought out point you've made.

 

But if you can't see the difference between a handful of nut jobs who every so often do things in the name of religion vs tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands doing things in the name of religion I can't help you. Why does one religion prompt only that handful while another prompts hundreds of thousands? Global warming?

 

A lot of things.

 

But when specifically talking about acts of terrorism (as opposed to combat), there is no difference. In either case, it's all a bunch of backward-ass ****.

[Gene Frenkle]

 

Your major mental malfunction in this argument is that you think the key concept at work is "religion," when it's actually "fanaticism."

 

To your credit, you're not alone...virtually every American shares that major mental malfunction. But it's a seriously !@#$ing major one nonetheless.

 

As in they'd all be doing the same stuff in the name of some other ridiculous cause if it didn't happen to be religion?

 

I've heard and *gasp* even comprehend the argument. I agree it has some merit. The majority of it today seems to be committed in the name of Allah or (more rarely) Jesus. I certainly wouldn't hesitate to criticize atrocities committed in the name of Hitler or Stalin.any less because the retarded masses were seduced by some other ideology. People are stupid and people are sheep.

 

Let's make a huge leap and assume for a moment that this guy in particular, like many before him, decided to shoot up a clinic because his religion tells him that abortion is wrong. In that case, can anyone really honestly say that this incident is likely to take place at all?

Edited December 2, 2015 by Gene Frenkle

[4merper4mer]

As in they'd all be doing the same stuff in the name of some other ridiculous cause if it didn't happen to be religion?

 

I've heard and *gasp* even comprehend the argument. I agree it has some merit. The majority of it today seems to be committed in the name of Allah or (more rarely) Jesus. I certainly wouldn't hesitate to criticize atrocities committed in the name of Hitler or Stalin.any less because the retarded masses were seduced by some other ideology. People are stupid and people are sheep.

 

Let's make a huge leap and assume for a moment that this guy in particular, like many before him, decided to shoot up a clinic because his religion tells him that abortion is wrong. In that case, can anyone really honestly say that this incident is likely to take place at all?

What about Obama's commie buddies in the 60s with the bombs? They hate God don't they?

 

What about the Can't Wear Rouge?

 

Commies are mostly atheists and did a lot of crap.

 

Greenpiece and the nuts that throw blood at fur coats haven't killed but they intimidate.

[Gene Frenkle]

What about Obama's commie buddies in the 60s with the bombs? They hate God don't they?

 

What about the Can't Wear Rouge?

 

Commies are mostly atheists and did a lot of crap.

 

Greenpiece and the nuts that throw blood at fur coats haven't killed but they intimidate.

 

Lol, you never disappoint...

I failed to mention Obama, Pol Pot and of course Greenpeace, but thought I covered the Commies with the Stalin shout-out.

If I had some hair, I'd probably be a much happier person, but that goes without saying. Also, I'd probably be happier if I spent less time lurking in the echo chamber.

[3rdnlng]

 

Lol, you never disappoint...

I failed to mention Obama, Pol Pot and of course Greenpeace, but thought I covered the Commies with the Stalin shout-out.

If I had some hair, I'd probably be a much happier person, but that goes without saying. Also, I'd probably be happier if I spent less time lurking in the echo chamber.

Well Gene, spend less time lurking over there and make a positive contribution here.

[DC Tom]

 

As in they'd all be doing the same stuff in the name of some other ridiculous cause if it didn't happen to be religion?

 

I've heard and *gasp* even comprehend the argument. I agree it has some merit. The majority of it today seems to be committed in the name of Allah or (more rarely) Jesus. I certainly wouldn't hesitate to criticize atrocities committed in the name of Hitler or Stalin.any less because the retarded masses were seduced by some other ideology. People are stupid and people are sheep.

 

Let's make a huge leap and assume for a moment that this guy in particular, like many before him, decided to shoot up a clinic because his religion tells him that abortion is wrong. In that case, can anyone really honestly say that this incident is likely to take place at all?

 

The majority that you hear about. So religion is the problem because of...confirmation bias?

[4merper4mer]

 

Lol, you never disappoint...

I failed to mention Obama, Pol Pot and of course Greenpeace, but thought I covered the Commies with the Stalin shout-out.

If I had some hair, I'd probably be a much happier person, but that goes without saying. Also, I'd probably be happier if I spent less time lurking in the echo chamber.

 

 

2 questions:

 

From where is the term "going postal" derived? Is that a Lutheran thing?

 

Tell the truth. Is this guy your favorite politician ever?

[Tiberius]

WASHINGTON -- Inflammatory rhetoric inflames. Words -- extreme language and overheated representations -- have consequences. The killer bears the ultimate responsibility for the carnage in Colorado Springs. But if initial reports of alleged gunman Robert Lewis Dear's comments about "no more baby parts" prove true -- and logic suggests that it was no coincidence the attack was at a Planned Parenthood clinic -- Republican politicians who fueled the overwrought and unsupported controversy over selling baby parts bear some measure of responsibility.

The current effort to demonize Planned Parenthood feels different. This is, literally, a manufactured issue, cobbled together from doctored videotapes and overheated accusations. The organization's activities have been so mischaracterized, and the practice of providing fetal tissue so overblown and so manipulated by lawmakers and politicians, that blame for the ensuing violence falls more heavily on them, although it is surely not what they intended.

Some facts: Only a handful of Planned Parenthood clinics in three states provide fetal tissue for research. What money has changed hands -- a practice the organization has now dropped -- went to cover costs, and represents a minuscule fraction of revenue. No federal funds were involved.

Not only does federal law authorize the provision of fetal remains for research purposes, it funds such research, with $76 million last year. If Planned Parenthood critics want to revisit the question of whether it is appropriate to use fetal tissue this way, fine. But let's be clear: Prohibiting this practice will not stop a single abortion, though it might impede some research, on diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and Down syndrome.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/12/02/the_moral_blame_for_the_colorado_springs_shootings_128901.html

[blzrul]

 

Your major mental malfunction in this argument is that you think the key concept at work is "religion," when it's actually "fanaticism."

 

To your credit, you're not alone...virtually every American shares that major mental malfunction. But it's a seriously !@#$ing major one nonetheless.

I actually agree with that. Any religion can spawn extremists. Religion is embraced for many reasons, but people who are so fearful and insecure that THEIR religion HAS to be the "best" (or only) can go off the deep end. My theory is that they're afraid that if they're betting on the wrong horse, they could burn in hell, so they better either convert, or kill, everyone else - if there's only one religion, straight path to "heaven", right?

 

That said, are there Buddhist extremists running around?

[Chef Jim]

I actually agree with that. Any religion can spawn extremists. Religion is embraced for many reasons, but people who are so fearful and insecure that THEIR religion HAS to be the "best" (or only) can go off the deep end. My theory is that they're afraid that if they're betting on the wrong horse, they could burn in hell, so they better either convert, or kill, everyone else - if there's only one religion, straight path to "heaven", right?

 

That said, are there Buddhist extremists running around?

 

Yes.