Free speech for me but not for thee. ACLU busted!

okie wrote:

I am totally consistent.

You clearly are nothing of the kind.

First you say this

okie wrote:

Did I ever say it (a woman getting an unwanted pregnancy] was my business?

After you say this

okie wrote:

The abortion issue really boils down to this: we want to have sex all we want anytime we want with anyone we want and if it results in unwanted offspring, our pleasure means more than even they. Our pleasure means more than even our own unborn children. Very sick society indeed.

Sorry okie, but one minute you try to belligerently tell us that how these women get unwanted pregnancies is none of your business, the next minute you are running them down for the way you imagine they became pregnant.

You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that you're not concerned about something then blast away at people for doing exactly that.

0 Replies

keltic, go ahead and ride the horse of abortion into the sunset. Whether you have children, I don't know. If you don't, I sincerely hope you do, and you witness the miracle of life. I believe it will change your thinking, and more importantly, your heart.

Nobody should have to live with the guilt of abortion, and yes by law they have the choice, but at least they should receive the information concerning another alternative. It is infinitely more honorable. And probably the most valuable "abortion service" in the way of counseling they could ever receive.

0 Replies

Keltic Wizard apparently cannot read- Okie. First, you smack him down, then the ACLU smacks him down--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okie- This ground has already been covered but Keltic Wizard acts as if it had not so I will repeat it.

THE A C L U, A C L U( the organization devoted to the First Amendment--The Right to Freedom of Speech--has had a serious internal rift because some of the Board Members question some ACLU initiatives which would appear to be on the side of the Abortionists in this matter.

Keltic Wizard may bluster and moan. He may shout or whisper. He may declaim or assert but since he himself has noted that there is no law against the Anti-Abortion counseling groups at this time, the only device he can fall back on is principle---and that is totally destroyed by the fact that even some members of the ACLU, who, it must be remembered, hold freedom of speech as their HIGHEST VALUE, indicate that the Anti-Abortion groups have a RIGHT to their opinions and operations!

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Nobody should have to live with the guilt of abortion, and yes by law they have the choice, but at least they should receive the information concerning another alternative.

Is that your excuse for practicing false advertising, where anti-choice centers pose as giving "abortion services" when in fact all that is present as these centers is a group of professionally trained anti-abortion convincers poised to talk the woman out of it?

What these centers do would be considered fraud in any other endeavor.

Suppose a car dealer ran an ad in the newspaper which said, "Looking for a Chevy? Come to Smith's Car World" and it turns out that Smith was a Ford dealer. His rationale? Smith wanted to offer "advice" to people about to buy Chevies about "alternatives". Think that would pass any trade commissions or judges? Of course not.

Whether it is a car or counseling, every person has the right to know the nature of who they are dealing with before they walk in. If there is one thing a woman at this critical time of her life is entitled to, it is honesty from the people who advise her. Yet these centers offer nothing but dishonesty in the way they present themselves, and people like Okie think that is just fine.

As stated previously, most scams were legal until the Legislature realized that such deception must not be allowed to continue. If you look at securities fraud lawbooks, you see a whole bunch of laws, each written to stop a specific form of fraud which did not surface previously. Same thing for home selling, car selling, and most other industries.

This form of fraud has only recently surfaced. It should be made illegal, with penalites, just like all the other forms of fraud and deception were made illegal when they surfaced.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

The abortion issue really boils down to this: we want to have sex all we want anytime we want with anyone we want and if it results in unwanted offspring, our pleasure means more than even they. Our pleasure means more than even our own unborn children. Very sick society indeed.

Of course, when Okie posted this, he wasn't fooling anybody. He was merely employing a strategy defense attorneys often use in trials, which is to make the defendant "unsympathetic".

Clearly, these women are being deceived by these anti-choice centers advertising themselves as providing Abortion Services, there's no way around it. So Okie is trying the next best thing. Run down the women who are being deceived by this advertising in the hope that the public will then not care very much what happens to them. Make the women seem as "unsympathetic" as possible.

When called on this, though, okie suddenly switches gears and tries to tell us he separates the action from the person, (clearly implying that it is understood the women's actions are indefensible), but that he still feels "compassion" towards them.

What a guy. First okie runs down the women for being pregnant in the first place, which is none of his business. Then he challenges us to show where he said it was his business-after he attacked them. After that, he paints himself as a hero who has "compassion" for the women he just denigrated-for doing something that was none of his business to begin with.

No wonder these anti-choice centers need to falsely advertise themselves to get the women through the door. If this is an example of the sort of thinking of the people in these centers, the women would never go there willingly.

0 Replies

keltic, fine, go ahead and make every slightly misleading advertisement a crime. But be an equal opportunity guy why don't you? Don't simply pick on abortion services. Apply the same yardstick to all businesses, one example being Planned Parenthood as should be obvious to anybody. I guarantee you are opening a can of worms you will wish you never opened, and there would not be enough courts to jam all the cases into for the next hundred years.

Admit its all about your favorite little agenda, abortion. Its not about misleading advertising. If it was, you would be just as upset about the many other examples given you on this thread.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Apply the same yardstick to all businesses, one example being Planned Parenthood as should be obvious to anybody.

Planned Parenthood is not a deceiving name. It deals with the two ways to limit unplanned pregancy-contraception and abortion. Thee is nothing deceptive about the name at all.

This whole "Planned Parenthood is a deceptive name" bit was invented by you or someone on the anti-choice side to try to make some sort of equivalence between what Planned Parenthood does and what these anti-choice centers do. There is no equivalence. Planned Parenthood is honest about what they do, these anti-choice centers are dishonest about what they do-that is why they masquerade as places that provide Abortion Services.

okie wrote:

Admit its all about your favorite little agenda, abortion. Its not about misleading advertising. If it was, you would be just as upset about the many other examples given you on this thread.

Sorry, but you have provided no examples of deception on the pro-choice side, outside of your ridiculous "Planned Parenthood is a deceptive name" gambit.

Incidentally, your entire argument is absurd. You held to this idea for several pages earlier in the thread, this crazy notion that if a person or organization is against a specific thing, it is to be discounted because if they were honest, they would be against a million things all at once. By your "reasoning", a person who is on a campaign against juvenile diabetes is a fraud, because if he really cared about kids his campaign would support research against juvenile cancer and other juvenile diseases as well. And the fellow who wrote the law forbidding used car salesmen from rolling back the odometer is a phony because if he was really sincere, his law would be against ALL types of fraud, not just used-car fraud.

It is a silly line of argument, and it is not surprising that you keep using it since your side is caught dead to rights on this issue.

0 Replies

One of the things which comes through loud and clear in this thread is the contempt with which women are held by the anti-choice side. Okie, for instance, has spent all thread defending the idea that a woman with an unwanted pregnancy is not entitled to the same protection against fraud when she selects someone providing Abortion Services as she would if she were buying a car. But even above that, Okie blasts away at women with unwanted pregnancies, then claims that's all right because he has "compassion" for these women because he doesn't hold the terrible things they do and the way they live their life against them personally. What a guy.

He also doesn't see anything wrong with deceiving these women into doing what he wants them to do, instead of what they chose to do, and he justifies it by saying that he is trying to prevent them from regretting it later when they realize that they should have done what he wants them to do in the first place.

On the basis of this thread, the anti-choice side has made clear it has no respect for the rights or intelligence of women.

0 Replies

Okie and others on the right love to use the term "unborn children," which is an oxymoron. If a fetus were a "child," I guess it could inherit property, could generate a dependency deduction, be included in the census, etc. This is just one one more example of the deceit employed by the anti-abortion people.

0 Replies

I really don't know why Keltic Wizard is unresponsive. It must be that he cannot rebut what I posted. Or perhaps he missed it--

So--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keltic Wizard apparently cannot read- Okie. First, you smack him down, then the ACLU smacks him down--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okie- This ground has already been covered but Keltic Wizard acts as if it had not so I will repeat it.

THE A C L U, A C L U( the organization devoted to the First Amendment--The Right to Freedom of Speech--has had a serious internal rift because some of the Board Members question some ACLU initiatives which would appear to be on the side of the Abortionists in this matter.

Keltic Wizard may bluster and moan. He may shout or whisper. He may declaim or assert but since he himself has noted that there is no law against the Anti-Abortion counseling groups at this time, the only device he can fall back on is principle---and that is totally destroyed by the fact that even some members of the ACLU, who, it must be remembered, hold freedom of speech as their HIGHEST VALUE, indicate that the Anti-Abortion groups have a RIGHT to their opinions and operations!

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

okie wrote:
Apply the same yardstick to all businesses, one example being Planned Parenthood as should be obvious to anybody.

Planned Parenthood is not a deceiving name. It deals with the two ways to limit unplanned pregancy-contraception and abortion. Thee is nothing deceptive about the name at all.

keltic, all of your assertions are plain wrong, especially accusing me of no respect for women, bla bla bla. Your whole post is an insult keltic, for accusing me of all that nonsense.

But let us just take this issue of "Planned Parenthood." You claim it is not deceptive. Well, I've already told you once, but I will tell you again. When I first learned of Planned Parenthood, and then what they did, I was more than surprised and wondered why they named their business after something that they try to prevent, which is parenthood. They are not into planning parenthood, they are all about preventing it. I do not know what the percentage would be now because I think most people now know what they do, but if this were a brand new business, I would wager that half the people would be surprised that their main business is preventing parenthood. It is a deceptive name plain and simple, keltic.

Now, I have never advocated outlawing those people to use the name Planned Parenthood. One thing is sure however, if I were running their business, which of course I would not, but if I did, I would not name it "Planned Parenthood." Likewise, for someone offering only counseling concerning alternatives to abortion as "abortion services," I would not advertise that way if I were running their business. However, as I've said before, this is not a case that rises to the level of fraud. It is simply an advertisement that is ambiguous, not fraudulent. Keltic, as I've repeated dozens of times already, if you wish to outlaw ambiguous advertising, you are opening a can of worms that you would wish you never opened. And if you cared about this as an issue, you would apply it to much more than "abortion services." You would also apply it to "Planned Parenthood," "Employment Opportunities," and the list goes on.

Now, enough of this contempt for women accusation, keltic. I love my mother, mother-in-law, my wife, my daughter, and my granddaughter, and many other women. And I would not have aborted any of them. The worst contempt for a woman is to abort them, or to advise them to have an abortion so that they live with the guilt the rest of their life. I would not do that to a stranger, much less someone I loved and cared about.

0 Replies

Let'sface it, Okie. Keltic Wizard is a murdering Totalitarian. He believes in murdering millions of babies and is against the first amendment giving people freedom of speech.

What could be worse?

0 Replies

Not much, Bernard.

Oh, I thought of something else for keltic, Bernard. Maybe if the "abortion services" people would name their business "Planned Abortion," and then offered the opposite of abortion and contraception, things like actually taking responsibility for their own pregnancy and having the child, or maybe offering it for adoption if they were simply unable to raise the child, maybe keltic would like that better? Abortion could be planned for down the road a ways, but for now the Planned Abortion people could help you find every way possible to not prevent you from having the baby.

so keltic, I think I have the perfect illustration to win this debate hands down. If "Planned Parenthood" makes perfect sense to you, then "Planned Abortion" should make every bit as much sense if Planned Abortion offers the exact opposite of services as Planned Parenthood does. After all, the names are opposite, and so would be the services offered. There is absolutely no difference. And it obviously follows that if "Planned Abortion" fits what they do, then "abortion services" would obviously be part of what they do. Conclusion, "abortion services" is absolutely a perfect description of what they are offering. No fraud and not even any misrepresentation whatsoever.

keltic, whether you realize it or not, you have absolutely lost this debate in every way imagineable. You should have admitted it at the start when you obviously lost the debate of logic surrounding the concept of the "right to privacy."

0 Replies

Oh, my. Okie, you are lashing out in such embarrassing ways.

But then, you have been unmasked, so it is to be expected.

Okie, having an abortion is not the opposite of being a parent. For a woman can have an abortion and then be a parent at the same time.

It is a simple concept, which you will try hard to pretend you do not understand. Unplanned and unwanted pregnancies can be aborted or, even better, contracepted. Planned pregnancies will be welcomed.

It's a simple concept, really, which only the feverishly desperate will pretend is not understandable.

Eliminate the unplanned parenthood. And what is left is Planned Parenthood.

A third grader can understand this. The fact that I am communicating with a man in his fifties or older is actually frightening.

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Oh, my. Okie, you are lashing out in such embarrassing ways.

But then, you have been unmasked, so it is to be expected.

Okie, having an abortion is not the opposite of being a parent. For a woman can have an abortion and then be a parent at the same time.

keltic, are you ready for another lesson in logic?
No, I defy you to show me a woman that can have an abortion and become a parent at the very same exact time. If you mean different times, a woman can become a parent first and then later have a planned abortion.

Quote:

It is a simple concept, which you will try hard to pretend you do not understand. Unplanned and unwanted pregnancies can be aborted or, even better, contracepted. Planned pregnancies will be welcomed.

Likewise, pregnancies can be carried to term and a baby can be born. Planned abortions can be welcomed later, just as abortions can be done now and planned parenthood can be welcomed later.

Quote:

It's a simple concept, really, which only the feverishly despearate will pretend is not understandable.

Eliminate the unplanned parenthood. And what is left is Planned Parenthood.

Likewise, eliminate the unplanned abortion, and what is left is planned abortion.

Quote:

A third grader can understand this. The fact that I am communicating with a man in his fifties or older is actually frightening.

Have you finished the third grade yet keltic? If "Planned Parenthood" clinics provide "planned abortion" services instead of planned parenthood services, then what is wrong with a "Planned Abortion" clinic providing planned parenthood services? Whats good for the goose should be good for the gander.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

The abortion issue really boils down to this: we want to have sex all we want anytime we want with anyone we want and if it results in unwanted offspring, our pleasure means more than even they. Our pleasure means more than even our own unborn children.

Okie, you wrote these words of your own volition. This is a condemnation of women with unwanted pregnacies, pure and simple.

Yet when confronted with this, you try to act hurt and claim the statement is justified because you have "compassion" for these women, due to your laudable ability to separate a woman's awful acts from her worth as a person. Gee, you're just pure, spun gold aren't you?

Except that how a woman became pregnant is none of your business. She doen't have to explain herself to you or anyone else how the pregnancy happened. And it is not for the likes of you to judge, either. But judge you will, and you will take such incredible positions such as it is all right to lie to and deceive this woman about a center which advertises Abortion Services when there is nothing there except anti-abortion spokesmen because eventually she is likely to realize you are correct all along.

She shold choose the path you choose for her instead of the path she chose for herself. And that is all right, because a man in his fifties or older knows better about what is good for a pregnant 19 year old woman than any choice she can make for herself. About her own life.

The arrogance is staggering.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

I defy you to show me a woman that can have an abortion and become a parent at the very same exact time. If you mean different times, a woman can become a parent first and then later have a planned abortion.

So who said anything about "at the same exact time"? The point is that a woman has the right to become a parent when she wants to, and not become a parent when she doesn't want to. Hence the utterly accurate title, Planned Parenthood, because it prevents the birth of unplanned pregnacies. Preferably by contraception, as a last resort by abortion.

It is just incredible that some people think they should have more say in a woman's pregnancy than she herself. Yet, that is the central basis of the entire anti-choice movement.

0 Replies

Yes, keltic, I wrote those words, and I stand by them. I believe we live in an over-sexualized society, wherein sex is bombarding us on the airways and in advertisements. Young people are more sexually active at earlier ages because of this. Society is sending the message that sex is primarily for the purpose of pleasure, that there are no consequences or responsibilities inherent in our sexual behavior.

I happen to disagree with this philosophy, and I think many agree with me. I believe sex is enjoyable, it is meant to be, but most importantly its primary purpose is to propagate the human race, and that is our primary responsibility. Therefore when we decide to have sex with another person, we should have already made the decision that we would be responsible for the possible offspring resulting from that union. Human life is human life, and if you have children, you would hopefully understand the miracle of it. I do not think one can dismiss pregnancy as a nothing more than a medical condition or some such thing. And hey, just fix it by aborting. You are one sick person, and I stand by my assertion that society is sick in this regard.

Because young people, and women may not believe the same way as I do, I do not look down on them because I realize they are immature and often a victim of their culture, but I do think they are misguided and have the wrong philosophy. I think the evidence shows that a young woman is not mentally and emotionally prepared to know the consequences of an abortion, and I think they need abortion counseling, which would spell out the consequences of an abortion, both positive and negative, along with the alternatives to abortion. Since abortion is currently legal, they then must make the choice. To counsel a young girl to have an abortion and then performing it, without fully offering the alternative, is I think very uncompassionate to the girl. Let the record show that many live to regret the decision, and endure guilt for the rest of their lives. keltic, this is downright unnecessary and cruel. You need to take a good look in the mirror when you accuse me of not caring about women.

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

okie wrote:
I defy you to show me a woman that can have an abortion and become a parent at the very same exact time. If you mean different times, a woman can become a parent first and then later have a planned abortion.

So who said anything about "at the same exact time"? The point is that a woman has the right to become a parent when she wants to, and not become a parent when she doesn't want to. Hence the utterly accurate title, Planned Parenthood, because it prevents the birth of unplanned pregnacies. Preferably by contraception, as a last resort by abortion.

It is just incredible that some people think they should have more say in a woman's pregnancy than she herself. Yet, that is the central basis of the entire anti-choice movement.

What you are overlooking keltic, is that when a woman engages in a union with another person, it should no longer be just about herself. That is the whole point of this discussion. A pregnancy is the beginning of another person, that she is now responsible for. It is not just herself anymore. When she considers abortion, it isn't a medical condition about herself, it involves another human being now.

keltic, we could discuss this until doomsday. Bottom line, I come down on the side of life, and the mother by the way. You stand up for what, abortion. How uplifting? I think its pathetic, keltic.

0 Replies

keltic wizard

I'm certainly not the first to note the disjunction between okie's 'culture of life' sanctimony re abortion while remaining happy as a pig in a poke on war, torture, tobacco executives, and capital punishment. All 'grounded' in his love and respect for the wisdom of the Good Book, one expects.

We don't hear much about Jesus' notation on how likely it might be for a rich person to enter heaven (eg Bush, Cheney, Murdoch, Kerry, Gore, etc) or on the Psalm that prudently advises us to not put our trust in Princes (hi, dubya).

Carter was the first evangelical president. The degree to which he is demonized by the modern right is a wonderful curiosity. Part of the reason is that he is capable of subtlety and nuance, and avoids the simplistic and cliched ideological certainties which appeal to folks like Okie.

Here's a Garry Wills review of Carter's recent book. link

0 Replies

Free speech for me but not for thee. ACLU busted!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know