The Abortion Movement's best-kept secret

"To compare abortion itself to terrorism is irrational, since it has nothing whatsoever to do with any actual definition of terrorism."

I said "reign of terror" not terrorism. "Reign of terror" refers to rogue governments killing their own by the mass numbers, ala 1793 in France via the guillotine.

It is worse than terrorism since it involves the government doing it to or sanctioning these things to people it is supposed to protect.

by Thuyen | Friday, July 10, 2009  8:25:20 PM  |  Report

"Finally, the reliability and accuracy of the vast majority of the listed incidents are extremely dubious, especially considering the political agenda behind their compilation."


Turn that around and use that argument whenever pro-choicers like yourself try to make stats about violence coming from the pro-life side. Your side has political agenda, too. What you offer up is ad hom.

The site did provide examples. It did provide specifics, too. You failed to interact with any of that and pretend they don't exist.

by Thuyen | Friday, July 10, 2009  8:23:37 PM  |  Report

"It hardly deflates any argument presented." Why don't you read the article first, LOL. It definitely refutes most of the arguments, if not all.

"All it did was repeat the ad hom over and over again..." Well just once actually, and it explains well why most of the items are not credible: "Finally, the reliability and accuracy of the vast majority of the listed incidents are extremely dubious, especially considering the political agenda behind their compilation. Most items are very brief, are not sourced adequately or at all, and are often only alleged, rendering them worthless as objective data."

It's not possible to prove wrong a simple assertion (such as unicorns exist on Mars) - the onus of proof is on the one asserting. This proof has not been adequately supplied for most incidents on the lists of "pro-choice violence".

Terrorism is where you kill one representative of a group to scare all the rest. The numbers murdered are not the issue. To compare abortion itself to terrorism is irrational, since it has nothing whatsoever to do with any actual definition of terrorism.

by choice-joyce | Friday, June 26, 2009  7:12:29 PM  |  Report

"As you have no access to NAF records, which are based on detailed incident reports completed and sent in by clinics, you're not in any position to judge their veracity. Lots of clinics don't even send reports, or not consistently, so the tally of incidents is significantly underestimated."

No need to rely on those records, when we got prosecution records, police reports, women who had abortions and suffered from them speaking out, etc., etc.

by Thuyen | Wednesday, June 24, 2009  10:33:00 PM  |  Report

"It is most definitely a 30+ year "reign of terror", no other way to describe it."


A reign of terror, by which only 7 abortion doctors were killed, not all of them by pro-lifers either. That is 1 killed every 5 years. In a nation with millions upon millions of pro-lifers, that's it for "reign of terror." To put it this way, that is 1 killed in 250 years per state. That makes abortion doctors a safe profession compared to many other professions where the rates of murder are much, much higher.

On the other hand, 49 million babies dead in the 30 plus years. That is true reign of terror. Some of which survived botch abortions. Some like baby Sarah Brown survived the botched late term abortion done by Tiller only to die a few years later from the horrible injuries they sustained. And you want to state abortions only kill blob of tissues and not real human beings? Think again.

by Thuyen | Wednesday, June 24, 2009  10:32:02 PM  |  Report

"Oops, you forgot to check this source, which deflates most of your argument:
http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/not-violent.shtml"


Actually, the source does no such thing. It hardly deflates any argument presented. All it did was repeat the ad hom over and over again since pro-lifers claim these areas where pro-choicers committed violences, the claims must be dubious. No documentation at all provided where pro-life sites are wrong in their claims.

by Thuyen | Wednesday, June 24, 2009  10:27:05 PM  |  Report

Oops, you forgot to check this source, which deflates most of your argument:
http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/not-violent.shtml

As you have no access to NAF records, which are based on detailed incident reports completed and sent in by clinics, you're not in any position to judge their veracity. Lots of clinics don't even send reports, or not consistently, so the tally of incidents is significantly underestimated. It is most definitely a 30+ year "reign of terror", no other way to describe it.

by choice_joyce | Saturday, June 20, 2009  10:44:26 PM  |  Report