HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » friendly_iconoclast » Journal

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Sep 8, 2006, 12:47 PM
Number of posts: 8,854

Journal Archives

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »

friendly_iconoclast

RSS RSS [All]
friendly_iconoclast's ProfileSend mail to friendly_iconoclast

DUers: Please stop Gosnelling arguments

The recent trial and conviction of Kermit Gosnell for murder (along with certain arguments about other
subjects seen regularly here at DU) has inspired me to come up with a new phrase:

To Gosnell an argument: Claiming that the wrongdoing of one is indicative of
the wrongness of the whole, with claimed indifference to the suffering of others


Sad to say, certain posters here at DU ape this rhetorical device. I point no fingers, but they are there
and can be seen almost daily.

I'll provide some examples from some well-known fetus fetishists and right wingers.
You're free to search for analogs of the same used by DUers. Some of you will already know of some examples. Frankly, I expect special pleading for their use of this technique within the first dozen or so replies...


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3006791/posts


Gosnell is the current face of the culture of death, the logical outcome of the cultural upheavals of the 1950′s and 60′s. The callous disregard for human life, the merciless and inhumane treatment of baby and mother, the bloody scissors and the misnamed “Woman’s Health clinic” which was literally a septic mess, are the logical conclusion of the world view that gave us abortion.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3007104/posts

Meanwhile, any television network that refuses to bring these harrowing details to light (yet unfailingly reminds the public that Republicans are waging a “war on women”) should be treated with contempt. What about the real war on living, sentient human beings? Do they really have nothing to say about that?



http://washingtonexaminer.com/michelle-malkin-who-are-kermit-gosnells-co-conspirators/article/2527636


Michelle Malkin: Who are Kermit Gosnell's co-conspirators?


Gosnell's enablers also claim that his case is a grisly exception. But I repeat: Deadly indifference to protecting life isn't tangential to the abortion industry's existence -- it's at the core of it.



http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/345598/understanding-gosnell-kathryn-jean-lopez/page/0/1


In the relative silence, there is a complacency and indifference that cannot stand. There was a lack of charity that drove women to Gosnell’s clinic, and there was certainly love lacking within the walls of his facility. Children expect love. They cry when they do not receive it. A former employee of Gosnell’s testified that one baby was “screeching” like “a little alien.”

The desensitization that 40 years of legal abortion has wrought must be undone. We must become once again a welcoming people of expectation and hope, loving children, supporting mothers, building up fathers.

Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Mon May 13, 2013, 09:55 PM (0 replies)

Do you think if you keep repeating it you'll convince someone? Or get your credibility back?










Your words remind me of the large river in this map:



Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Mon May 6, 2013, 09:57 PM (1 replies)

The confiscation of *registered* SKS rifles in California is no "NRA talking point".

Because it certainly happened:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=30001-31000&file=30710-30735

30720. (a) Any person, firm, company, or corporation that is in
possession of an SKS rifle shall do one of the following on or before
January 1, 2000:
(1) Relinquish the SKS rifle to the Department of Justice pursuant
to subdivision (h) of former Section 12281.
(2) Relinquish the SKS rifle to a law enforcement agency pursuant
to former Section 12288, as added by Section 3 of Chapter 19 of the
Statutes of 1989.
(3) Dispose of the SKS rifle as permitted by former Section 12285,
as it read in Section 20 of Chapter 23 of the Statutes of 1994.
(b) Any person who has obtained title to an SKS rifle by bequest
or intestate succession shall be required to comply with paragraph
(1) or (2) of subdivision (a) unless that person otherwise complies
with paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of former Section 12285, as it
read in Section 20 of Chapter 23 of the Statutes of 1994, or as
subsequently amended.
(c) Any SKS rifle relinquished to the department pursuant to this
section shall be in a manner prescribed by the department.


Will you be using an excavator, Bobcat, or plain old shovel for your backfilling?

Once again, "NRA talking point" is demonstrated to be the equivalent of "ex cathedra"...
Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Mon May 6, 2013, 01:28 PM (2 replies)

Bloomberg prefers to use his money to threaten Democratic officeholders.

Because he's 'progressive' or something like that...
Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Sun Apr 28, 2013, 06:13 PM (0 replies)

And yet "(t)rying to pigeonhole a particular weapon based on trivial technical minutia"...

is the very heart of the assault weapon ban YOU touted here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2540588

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons-ban-summary

What the bill does:

The legislation bans the sale, transfer, manufacturing and importation of:

All semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: pistol grip; forward grip; folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; barrel shroud; or threaded barrel.
All semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: threaded barrel; second pistol grip; barrel shroud; capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip; or semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
All semiautomatic rifles and handguns that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
All semiautomatic shotguns that have a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; pistol grip; fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds; ability to accept a detachable magazine; forward grip; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; or shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
All ammunition feeding devices (magazines, strips, and drums) capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.




Just like terrorism watch lists were bad:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3031131#3032492

baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
25. People are harassed, investigated & arrested for their political beliefs.

Held anonymously without charge, trial, or communication with the outside world.

The President's press secretary says that people should watch what they say, or else - and the press is too afraid to say anything.

People are prevented from traveling freely because they are on a gov't list.



until they became good when guns entered into the discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/www.fas.usda.gov/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x431371#431380

baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. The TSA's No-Fly list is entirely different than the FBI's Terrorist Watch List.

Trying to conflate the two is RW propaganda.



http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/nsb/tsc/tsc_faqs

Does TSA’s Secure Flight program have anything to do with the TSDB?

Secure Flight is the U.S. Government-mandated program responsible for matching passenger information against the government watch list. Secure Flight conducts consistent watch list matching against TSDB entries for flights into, and out of, and within the U.S.
As with all government programs that screen for terrorists, TSC provides the Secure Flight program support to ensure terrorist identity matches are correct.


Checking your posts for revisionism and inaccuracy takes a bit of work, but is quite illustrative
of the attitude amongst you lot here...
Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Wed Apr 24, 2013, 03:23 AM (0 replies)

Practical politics takes a lot of hard work, while carping on Internet forums is easy.

Besides that, if you don't actually do anything in the real world you don't have to worry
about the prospect of finding out that your opponents are better at retail politics than you are...
Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Mon Apr 22, 2013, 01:22 PM (0 replies)

Yeah, about that: "Note: ALL gun owners support the NRA" -and that's just from today at DU

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022700602

Are we to believe you or our lying eyes?

Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Fri Apr 19, 2013, 07:32 PM (1 replies)

Free Republic-style stereotyping should have no place at DU.

It's like chickenshit and horseshit:

They come from two very different kinds of animals, but they're both shit and they both stink.
Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Fri Apr 19, 2013, 07:10 PM (0 replies)

It's very simple: If you want new gun control laws, you need the cooperation of legal gun owners.

I would suggest to those of you that have been pissing on them since Newtown-

Knock it off. You are not going to browbeat them into agreeing with you or shame them into 'seeing the light'.
Quit treating them the way Pamela Geller treats Muslims


You have learned today what indulging in cultural warfare will get you-

Nothing

So, unless you'd like gun control to go the way of alcohol prohibition, stop otherizing them.
You are not automatically smarter or better educated than they are, most of them are just as law abiding as you are.

There are about 80 million of them and they tend to vote far more often than the public at large.
So unless and until you are prepared to permanently forgo the votes of 20-25% of the voting pool,
a change of attitude on your part is in order.

And for you bitter-enders that won't let go: Please consider leaving the Democratic Party
Go form and form some sort of Gun Safety/Control Party.
There's even a role model for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_Party
Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Wed Apr 17, 2013, 11:14 PM (303 replies)

Why are you surprised? Gun control advocates were *always* going to get played.

The White House, for all their fine words, knew from the start that substantial new gun control
measures would never make it through the House.
Posted by friendly_iconoclast | Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:14 AM (0 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »