| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935
|
 Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 11:24 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Doctors often deliver healthy babies a month earlier than the babies Gosnell routinely murdered. He joked as he severed one spine and threw the body into the trash something like, "That kid was so big he could have walked me down the street".
Yet the animals here think that's OK because it's what the mother wanted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
feuser
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1508
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mrgybe wrote: |
A narrow perspective. I fully expect this case to result in a serious examination of abortion policy. The technology existing when late term abortion limits were set in the 70's, has changed dramatically. At 24 weeks, and well before that, anyone can now see clear images of a formed being with recognizable human features and the ability to feel pain. This will make a lot of people very uncomfortable with existing laws and clearly debunk the myth that this is no more than a bunch of cells that can be easily disposed of if deemed inconvenient. |
You are still projecting and assigning positions, opinions and motives, in addition to ignoring the simple fact that what this man did was in violation of existing laws.
Mike, at least, expresses his antipathy toward those who disagree with him in much simpler words:
Yet the animals here think that's OK because it's what the mother wanted.
_________________
florian - ny22
http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| feuser wrote: | | You are still projecting and assigning positions, opinions and motives, in addition to ignoring the simple fact that what this man did was in violation of existing laws. |
Weak attempt at a dodge. I said nothing of the sort as anyone can see. Do you stand by your statement that this case has zero relevance to policy making? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aha, and I was wrong when I said that mrgybe had conflated abortion and murder in a posting that was not clear, assigned motives to people without their permission, and then attacked them? I stand by my opinion.
Mrgybe, if you want to start a serious discussion about late term abortion, as distinguished from the murder case, make your case clearly--and take responsibility for what you say if you find people confused. Waiting... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
feuser
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1508
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mrgybe wrote: | | feuser wrote: | | You are still projecting and assigning positions, opinions and motives, in addition to ignoring the simple fact that what this man did was in violation of existing laws. |
Weak attempt at a dodge. I said nothing of the sort as anyone can see. Do you stand by your statement that this case has zero relevance to policy making? |
Yes. Because existing laws forbid what this man did and he was found guilty accordingly.
The case relevance to policy-making is an extrapolation - nothing else. Coincidentally, I do not agree with you there, either - but that hardly makes me a defender of this kind of criminal behavior.
_________________
florian - ny22
http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
florian brings up an important point. One's interest in the news around us has a lot to do with what we choose to spend our time on. Not everyone is enthralled by all the news stories out there, particularly when politics and religion are whipped into the mix. So often information is twisted and bent to appeal to an audience's interests and prejudices. It's so common today with 24/7 cable news, and particularly with talk radio. In some venues, news can be viewed as entertainment designed to capture the attention of the viewers and keep them viewing. It goes far beyond reporting the news and the idea of sound journalism.
From mrgybe's past commentary, I'm convinced that he has a keen interest in seeing the Roe vs. Wade decision overturned. I think that if he was honest and forthright about his beliefs, he would come out and say that he is against any and all abortions. By zeroing in on the Gosnell trial, it gives him the pedestal he wants to voice his views in a judgmental and condemning way. No doubt, a lot of ugly stuff happens in our world, but fortunately it's not as common as some would like to suggest. Regarding Gosnell's actions, to include others like him, I trust in our legal system to render justice based on the real and pertinent facts of the case. The idea of a trial by the media doesn't appeal to me, particularly when it plays to an audience that is full of preconceived ideas and judgments. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14874
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hey Key,
again I do not know your area of journalism, but I have certainly seen Dan Rather and his.
Now you put in your tin foil rude statements so let me prove you should never write anything again for your absolute in ability to understand as I laid out before lack of ability to understand math stats to understand the deeper part not the what you been indoctrinated into world.
Yes I understand how the BIG LIE can manipulable you and as you cited your studying of liberal media while in journalism school. Again propaganda works, and you are the card carrying example. This thread of examples and facts is the testament, and your lack of showing otherwise with examples and facts is telling.
Now here is another one that you would say is tin foiled by your inability to understand the stats.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dan-rather-dismisses-liberal-media-bias-claims-this-is-a-sham/
Dan Rather Dismisses Liberal Media Bias Claims: ‘This Is A Sham’.
| Quote: | Stewart then asked directly about Rather’s experience with media bias during his time in newsrooms. Acknowledging that perception, he denied such a bias actually exists. Said Rather:
It hasn’t been my experience. Most journalists I grew up with, most journalists I worked with and practiced with were trying to be honest brokers of information. [...] Journalists, the best of them, do see a Dickensian side of society that most people don’t see. So when they try to call attention to that, people who don’t like it say, ‘Oh, you’re a liberal.’ |
again Dan Rather was fired for telling the truth what liberal would fire him for telling the truth. If Fox fired the idiots on fox for just telling lies we would not have any fox ...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14874
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have never debated anyone that knew this information. It was amazing how this information is not known to virually anyone because the media would not bring it up, but they were having a field day saying Dan was wrong documents wre not real. again the below is past the pay grade of rightys for understanding the forensics of proving documents were accurate. and NOTE BUSH would not reply on record even though the Bush whitehouse agreed with CBS to have Bushes father's attorney general look into the matter.
again CBS hired the former Bush Senior attorney general to investigate. No they did not hire an unbiased person. But the following questions were exactly what needed to be answered by the AWOL president alcoholic Bush.
Dan Bartlett Declined to Answer Thornburgh Panel’s Questions About President’s Military Service in 2004, Email Reveals
| Quote: | On Tuesday, December 7, 2004, former U.S. Attorney General Richard Thornburgh sent an e-mail to Dan Bartlett, then the White House communications director.
At the time, Mr. Thornburgh was heading up an independent panel, established by CBS, to investigate the flawed 60 Minutes Wednesday story about President Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard, which aired on September 8, 2004.
"As I mentioned on the phone, we are in the homestretch of our assignment and would find it very helpful if we could secure written responses from the President to the following questions so that we can tie up a couple of loose ends," wrote Mr. Thornburgh. |
Here are the questions the Bush idiot would not answer. again if they were not true it is easy to answer they were not true.
| Quote: |
Mr. Thornburgh then posed eight questions:
(1) Was there a waiting list to become a pilot of the Texas Air National Guard at the time you entered?
(2) Do you recall Colonel Killian being dissatisfied in any way about your National Guard service in 1972 and 1973?
(3) Were you ever ordered to take a physical in May 1972 or at any other time?
(4) Did Colonel Killian say in May 1972 that you could do Equivalent Training for three months or transfer?
(5) Do you recall being suspended from flight status on or about August 1, 1972? If so, how was that suspension communicated to you?
(6) Why were you suspended from flight status? Was there a reason other than not taking a physical?
(7) Describe your communications with Colonel Killian about a transfer to Alabama in 1972.
( Did Colonel Killian or anyone else ever inform you that Colonel Killian was being pressured in any way about your status by a superior officer? |
here is the whitehouse reply
| Quote: | The next day, Mr. Bartlett responded. "I must say, I was somewhat surprised by the questions," he wrote. "I guess we viewed your work as more focused on what CBS did/did not do regarding their reporting, not the substance of their charges. The answers to your questions can be easily found in the public records so we would prefer to keep him out of participating in your report."
|
now why does it matter if Bush answered, well peoples lives were destroyed from their profession. How would you like to spend your life college and so on and never be able to get a job again. Many people were fired at CBS. But because Bush the liar would rather see peoples lives be destroyed to protect his lies of being a AWOL son of a b--tch that will rot in a hot place some day. He has no honor and never has. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| feuser wrote: | | Yes. Because existing laws forbid what this man did and he was found guilty accordingly. The case relevance to policy-making is an extrapolation - nothing else. Coincidentally, I do not agree with you there, either - but that hardly makes me a defender of this kind of criminal behavior. |
You continually seem to be reading words I have not written. Nowhere did I suggest you were a defender of this behavior.......neither have I ignored the "simple fact" that Gosnell was breaking the law. It's absurd to state that I have. If you believe that an ultimately high profile case such as this has zero relevance to policy making, you are entitled to that opinion. I think you will be proven wrong. It took me 5 seconds to find this.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/12/us/abortion-trial-significance/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Still waiting for a coherent thesis and supporting arguments. Hard to do if you can't assign opinions to others, eh? For some. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
