Abortion Doctor George Tiller Reportedly Killed at Church

[RetiredGySgt]

Jillian is telling lies again and so unashamed about it. Go figure.

So Jillian you can not answer in public but rather through the cheap rep system, ehh? Explain again how your comments in this thread are honest and forthright and NOT a blatant political lie designed to enflame people. Go ahead provide us with that exhaustive list of conservatives that have resorted to murder and violence and remind us again how the left doesn't ever do that.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Precisely what the left would do if harm befell Bush Cheney, Gonzales, Coulter, O'Reilly, Palin, (remember you hung her in effigy) Beck, Limbaugh (remember you wished his kidney's would fail) you gonna take responsibility for that despicable act if they do??? yawn yawn yawn!

who's "you", you braindead freak?

Hey, Tech, is Willlow Psycho what you'd call your "sane Christians"? Look how the wingnuts are loving that this doctor was killed.

The people who do this type of thing should be treated no differently than any other terrorists.

Just like I said above. There are some on this thread who believe very similar to Terry. Whether they believe that independently or because of people like Terry, is a question for them.

Look, I disagree with their conclusions, but I understand how they arrived at them. I have seen no reason to doubt that their beliefs are sincerely held. Putting myself in their position with those beliefs, I can understand that they might hold what would seem to me to be a radical view that all these abortions are murder.

Having said all that, it is not legitimate, in my view, for them to then move forward and say violence is justified in face of what they believe is a human tragedy.

But, I would ask you, if you stood with a sniper rifle on a hill outside Belsen in 1943, would you shoot the camp commander, or no?

She is a lying asshole partisan hack. There are very few people that support murder and even fewer that support murder of Doctors that preform abortions, she is labeling people with a rightful point of opinion as terrorists just as our Government is trying to do. Rather then solve this through the political process, which they have failed at ever since the Supreme Court took it out of our hands, she wants the Government to shut up the opposition by declaring the opinion as a terrorist tactic.

You really want to make half the Country terrorists Jillian? Are you INSANE? Like I said, shit like this will lead to open armed rebellion. ANd the LEFT is hard at it pushing issues like this to that very point. Jillian and her buddies are going to find out that armed Americans can and will fight their Government when forced to.

Quit ***** footing around, THAT is what you are saying , she is a big girl and needs to be told what her position is going to lead too.

 

[Shogun]

You don't compromise with people that commit acts of terror, and you certainly don't ask women to do it, either.

You are not monopolizing the values and perspective of ALL WOMEN. I hate to break it to you but pro-lifers aren't all bullish controlling men even if such rhetoric sounds good at the naral gala.

So you are for compromising with people that commit terrorist acts? This doesn't surprise me.

I've got news for you, dimwit. If you don't want to have an abortion you don't have to have one.

Not all prolifers are out "committing terrorist acts". You can't name more than 5 who have killed anyone in the last 20 years. Generalizing the action of Tiller's Killer may help you feel smart but all it dos is clarify your stupidity.

I've got news for you, fatass, you are not the only voice with an opinon on the issue. Half of America disagrees with your fat cheeked response. That, fat girl, is the cold hard fact. And, it will remain a fact until your stupid **** decides to look around you and consider more than your own opinion OR you find the rug swept out from under you regardless.

 

[Ravi]

who's "you", you braindead freak?

Hey, Tech, is Willlow Psycho what you'd call your "sane Christians"? Look how the wingnuts are loving that this doctor was killed.

The people who do this type of thing should be treated no differently than any other terrorists.

Just like I said above. There are some on this thread who believe very similar to Terry. Whether they believe that independently or because of people like Terry, is a question for them.

Look, I disagree with their conclusions, but I understand how they arrived at them. I have seen no reason to doubt that their beliefs are sincerely held. Putting myself in their position with those beliefs, I can understand that they might hold what would seem to me to be a radical view that all these abortions are murder.

Having said all that, it is not legitimate, in my view, for them to then move forward and say violence is justified in face of what they believe is a human tragedy.

But, I would ask you, if you stood with a sniper rifle on a hill outside Belsen in 1943, would you shoot the camp commander, or no?

She is a lying asshole partisan hack. There are very few people that support murder and even fewer that support murder of Doctors that preform abortions, she is labeling people with a rightful point of opinion as terrorists just as our Government is trying to do. Rather then solve this through the political process, which they have failed at ever since the Supreme Court took it out of our hands, she wants the Government to shut up the opposition by declaring the opinion as a terrorist tactic.

You really want to make half the Country terrorists Jillian? Are you INSANE? Like I said, shit like this will lead to open armed rebellion. ANd the LEFT is hard at it pushing issues like this to that very point. Jillian and her buddies are going to find out that armed Americans can and will fight their Government when forced to.

Quit ***** footing around, THAT is what you are saying , she is a big girl and needs to be told what her position is going to lead too.

What the heck are you drinking? She said nothing of the sort.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No no no no no no no no no no!

Cause these same wackos don't want sex ed, birth control, morning after pills, education funding or job training for single mothers, welfare for single mothers or anything else that allows babies to be cared for.

I know you don't think we should be giving muslim terrorists what they want from us to find a common ground.

These people are terrorists.... they need to keep their religion in their churches. Why on earth should anyone compromise their constitutional right to have government stay out of their body to pacify religious extremists?

I think you are indulging in a little "right play." Isn't that what you accuse the Bush of doing? Once you call someone a terrorist, half the battle is won, isn't it?

The difference is that you have to live and work with these people. They are part of your society. I'm not, by any means, saying give up abortion. That's not a compromise, that's a capitulation.

Come'on, you've negotiated plenty before, you can imagine what a compromise in this situation would look like. You give up late term, except in the most dire circumstances. Abortions, are in general, scaled back to only pre-viability. Etc. Etc.

I understand your point about the sex ed, welfare etc. I don't have any problem with it. I'm not sure that it works, but I'm not against it. Careful with my money though. We might have a tussle about that.

As far as the Constitutional right goes, I'm probably not the guy you want to talk to on that. I think Griswold is a big, steaming pile of shit. It's certainly no place to rest your right to an abortion. I'd feel much better about it if the states had granted the right.

You don't compromise with people that commit acts of terror, and you certainly don't ask women to do it, either.

You and Jillian are trying to label half the Country as Terrorists and you want us to believe anything you say? ******* brain dead dumb ass.

 

[Ravi]

You are not monopolizing the values and perspective of ALL WOMEN. I hate to break it to you but pro-lifers aren't all bullish controlling men even if such rhetoric sounds good at the naral gala.

So you are for compromising with people that commit terrorist acts? This doesn't surprise me.

I've got news for you, dimwit. If you don't want to have an abortion you don't have to have one.

Not all prolifers are out "committing terrorist acts". You can't name more than 5 who have killed anyone in the last 20 years. Generalizing the action of Tiller's Killer may help you feel smart but all it dos is clarify your stupidity.

I've got news for you, fatass, you are not the only voice with an opinon on the issue. Half of America disagrees with your fat cheeked response. That, fat girl, is the cold hard fact. And, it will remain a fact until your stupid **** decides to look around you and consider more than your own opinion OR you find the rug swept out from under you regardless.

Tech is the one claiming we should take people's feelings into account if this opinion enflames them enough to commit murder. I don't even know why I bother responding to your stupid posts.

 

[Ravi]

I think you are indulging in a little "right play." Isn't that what you accuse the Bush of doing? Once you call someone a terrorist, half the battle is won, isn't it?

The difference is that you have to live and work with these people. They are part of your society. I'm not, by any means, saying give up abortion. That's not a compromise, that's a capitulation.

Come'on, you've negotiated plenty before, you can imagine what a compromise in this situation would look like. You give up late term, except in the most dire circumstances. Abortions, are in general, scaled back to only pre-viability. Etc. Etc.

I understand your point about the sex ed, welfare etc. I don't have any problem with it. I'm not sure that it works, but I'm not against it. Careful with my money though. We might have a tussle about that.

As far as the Constitutional right goes, I'm probably not the guy you want to talk to on that. I think Griswold is a big, steaming pile of shit. It's certainly no place to rest your right to an abortion. I'd feel much better about it if the states had granted the right.

You don't compromise with people that commit acts of terror, and you certainly don't ask women to do it, either.

You and Jillian are trying to label half the Country as Terrorists and you want us to believe anything you say? ******* brain dead dumb ass.

Oh, I forgot. Del did say that conservatives were all right wing extremists...

Idiot.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Just like I said above. There are some on this thread who believe very similar to Terry. Whether they believe that independently or because of people like Terry, is a question for them.

Look, I disagree with their conclusions, but I understand how they arrived at them. I have seen no reason to doubt that their beliefs are sincerely held. Putting myself in their position with those beliefs, I can understand that they might hold what would seem to me to be a radical view that all these abortions are murder.

Having said all that, it is not legitimate, in my view, for them to then move forward and say violence is justified in face of what they believe is a human tragedy.

But, I would ask you, if you stood with a sniper rifle on a hill outside Belsen in 1943, would you shoot the camp commander, or no?

She is a lying asshole partisan hack. There are very few people that support murder and even fewer that support murder of Doctors that preform abortions, she is labeling people with a rightful point of opinion as terrorists just as our Government is trying to do. Rather then solve this through the political process, which they have failed at ever since the Supreme Court took it out of our hands, she wants the Government to shut up the opposition by declaring the opinion as a terrorist tactic.

You really want to make half the Country terrorists Jillian? Are you INSANE? Like I said, shit like this will lead to open armed rebellion. ANd the LEFT is hard at it pushing issues like this to that very point. Jillian and her buddies are going to find out that armed Americans can and will fight their Government when forced to.

Quit ***** footing around, THAT is what you are saying , she is a big girl and needs to be told what her position is going to lead too.

What the heck are you drinking? She said nothing of the sort.

BULSHIT, she keeps referring to people that oppose abortion as Terrorists as do you, THAT you dumb ass is HALF the Country.

 

[Shogun]

who's "you", you braindead freak?

Hey, Tech, is Willlow Psycho what you'd call your "sane Christians"? Look how the wingnuts are loving that this doctor was killed.

The people who do this type of thing should be treated no differently than any other terrorists.

Just like I said above. There are some on this thread who believe very similar to Terry. Whether they believe that independently or because of people like Terry, is a question for them.

Look, I disagree with their conclusions, but I understand how they arrived at them. I have seen no reason to doubt that their beliefs are sincerely held. Putting myself in their position with those beliefs, I can understand that they might hold what would seem to me to be a radical view that all these abortions are murder.

Having said all that, it is not legitimate, in my view, for them to then move forward and say violence is justified in face of what they believe is a human tragedy.

But, I would ask you, if you stood with a sniper rifle on a hill outside Belsen in 1943, would you shoot the camp commander, or no?

She is a lying asshole partisan hack. There are very few people that support murder and even fewer that support murder of Doctors that preform abortions, she is labeling people with a rightful point of opinion as terrorists just as our Government is trying to do. Rather then solve this through the political process, which they have failed at ever since the Supreme Court took it out of our hands, she wants the Government to shut up the opposition by declaring the opinion as a terrorist tactic.

You really want to make half the Country terrorists Jillian? Are you INSANE? Like I said, shit like this will lead to open armed rebellion. ANd the LEFT is hard at it pushing issues like this to that very point. Jillian and her buddies are going to find out that armed Americans can and will fight their Government when forced to.

Quit ***** footing around, THAT is what you are saying , she is a big girl and needs to be told what her position is going to lead too.

I don't think it will be an armed rebellion at all.. stand down, RGS!


Instead, Jillian would set up a losing showdown in the supreme court which would do for pro-lifers AND the right what Ginsberg and Bruce did for the first amendment and the left. We'd get TROUNCED. Kicked in the proverbial ******* legal gonads. AND, cause half of the nation to run to the far right pointing at a new American Hitler to boot! We didn't like it when righting tried to use the GOV to strongarm lefty speech during vietfuckingnam and we sure as hell aren't going to validate the same shit for lefties to bludgeon righties over abortion.

 

[Shogun]

So you are for compromising with people that commit terrorist acts? This doesn't surprise me.

I've got news for you, dimwit. If you don't want to have an abortion you don't have to have one.

Not all prolifers are out "committing terrorist acts". You can't name more than 5 who have killed anyone in the last 20 years. Generalizing the action of Tiller's Killer may help you feel smart but all it dos is clarify your stupidity.

I've got news for you, fatass, you are not the only voice with an opinon on the issue. Half of America disagrees with your fat cheeked response. That, fat girl, is the cold hard fact. And, it will remain a fact until your stupid **** decides to look around you and consider more than your own opinion OR you find the rug swept out from under you regardless.

Tech is the one claiming we should take people's feelings into account if this opinion enflames them enough to commit murder. I don't even know why I bother responding to your stupid posts.

yea, ravi.. because I can't quote Jillian a half a dozen times referring to anyone to the right of her abortion opinion as nothing less that ******* TALIBAN TERRORISTS...


seriously, go do something you are good at and get yourself another scoop of ice cream.

 

[Tech_Esq]

But, I would ask you, if you stood with a sniper rifle on a hill outside Belsen in 1943, would you shoot the camp commander, or no?

Terrible analogy...and exactly the type of thing that enables the loons... .

My religion says such choices are a matter of conscience. I don't think anyone has the right to impose a different religious or moral belief. their views are neither mainstream nor acceptable.

Again, we don't find "middle ground" with islamic fundamentalists... why should we find "middle ground with these terrorists.

Roe v Wade balanced the right of an individual to control her own body against the right of the government to step in to save potential life...

that works for me.

They need to stay out of other people's bodies.

Actually, it's an apt analogy if, as they do, you believe an abortion clinic is a death mill.

The point that I'm trying to make is one of reality. You have a society and you must maintain order within it. To do that, you must take into account all the viewpoints. That doesn't mean, cave in to any given viewpoint, but it does mean that everyone needs to feel that their views got a fair hearing and that they got something from the process.

I would disagree with you. We do negotiate with islamo-fascists. That's how we got a more peaceful Iraq and that what we are looking for when we talk about negotiating with moderate Taliban members. There are "dead-enders" that is those who will always remain "unreconstructed." They don't get to participate in the "political solution" and neither should those who think it's a good idea to shoot abortion doctors.

I understand that Roe is convenient, but it is based on bad law. I would much rather have the right to abortion more solidly fixed so that it would not be overturned if Griswold is overturned. Given the conflict between the First Amendment and the "Right to Privacy" over this issue, I would not be sanguine about the continuance of Griswold in perpetuity.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

You're trying to use reason and common sense here which is something that is sadly lacking on the left side of the aisle, especially with the likes of Jillian. You could point out that none of what she ranted about is true. There IS sex education in schools, there IS welfare for single mothers, there ARE free clinics out the wazoo available to low income people to obtain birth control and see to pre-natal health, there ARE facilities and charities available to low income mothers for education , job training, and child careand abortion IS legal. There are millions of dollars spent every year on these programs year after year after year. 'They' have everything on their agenda fulfilled and yet is STILL isn't enough, they would throw yet more of our money at it. It will never end, and society will never do enough to satisfy these people. Yet she'll sit there and harp about hypothetical situations as if they were reality. What the hell is she bitching about exactly?

These programs and laws are constantly under threat from conservatives, Newby. Sex education is always threatened. Welfare is always threatened. Funding for free clinics is always threatened. Funding for facilities and programs that help single and low-income mothers is always threatened. The millions of dollars spent on these programs in an attempt to help children of low income parents and in attempt to ensure that those children don't grow up and turn to crime or drugs as is prevalent among America's impoverished are constantly being threatened. Just for a woman to go to a clinic she may have to fight her way through a crowd of protestors calling her baby killer or murderer. Yet she may just be getting birth control pills. A woman's right to choose is always under threat. Just last year 3 states tried to pass laws making abortion illegal: Colorado, North Dakota, and California. And that's just the last election. So don't pretend as though the Left has everything it wants and should just sit back content, because just about everything the Left has fought for over the past century is constantly under direct threat. Unlike anything that directly affects conservatives's lives.

 

[Tech_Esq]

You don't compromise with people that commit acts of terror, and you certainly don't ask women to do it, either.

You are not monopolizing the values and perspective of ALL WOMEN. I hate to break it to you but pro-lifers aren't all bullish controlling men even if such rhetoric sounds good at the naral gala.

So you are for compromising with people that commit terrorist acts? This doesn't surprise me.

I've got news for you, dimwit. If you don't want to have an abortion you don't have to have one.

Actually, as I stated above, we do include those that have committed terrorist acts in our negotiations in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, those are foreign conflicts. It seems to me that we have a much greater interest in reaching a lasting and solid solution to this issue that is the source of repeated strife and violence.

You don't really have the choice to strangle it. Your choice is to reach a solution that lowers the heat level or continue to have flair ups such as this. (And I would speculate worse in coming years). Your choice.

 

[N4mddissent]

Not everyone who opposes abortion is by any means a terrorist, just like being a muslim doesn't automatically make you a terrorist. Anyone who tries to lump people into such a category based on a general shared belief that some in the group have taken to extremes is acting inappropriately.

However there is no question that the anti-abortion individual who shot this doctor did commit a terrorist act. The U.S government defines terrorism under the Federal criminal code. 18 U.S.C. §2331 as:

"…activities that involve violent… or life-threatening acts… that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and… appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion..."

Obviously mudering an individual who is acting legally, but in a manner opposed to your ideology and certainly targeted on that basis, is a violent act done with the intent to intimidate or coerce the civilian population (frighten doctors that perform abortions and those who go to them). This meets the 1st definition and anyone who supports the killer's actions, is indeed supporting terrorism as defined by the U.S. government.

 

[WillowTree]

You're trying to use reason and common sense here which is something that is sadly lacking on the left side of the aisle, especially with the likes of Jillian. You could point out that none of what she ranted about is true. There IS sex education in schools, there IS welfare for single mothers, there ARE free clinics out the wazoo available to low income people to obtain birth control and see to pre-natal health, there ARE facilities and charities available to low income mothers for education , job training, and child careand abortion IS legal. There are millions of dollars spent every year on these programs year after year after year. 'They' have everything on their agenda fulfilled and yet is STILL isn't enough, they would throw yet more of our money at it. It will never end, and society will never do enough to satisfy these people. Yet she'll sit there and harp about hypothetical situations as if they were reality. What the hell is she bitching about exactly?

These programs and laws are constantly under threat from conservatives, Newby. Sex education is always threatened. Welfare is always threatened. Funding for free clinics is always threatened. Funding for facilities and programs that help single and low-income mothers is always threatened. The millions of dollars spent on these programs in an attempt to help children of low income parents and in attempt to ensure that those children don't grow up and turn to crime or drugs as is prevalent among America's impoverished are constantly being threatened. Just for a woman to go to a clinic she may have to fight her way through a crowd of protestors calling her baby killer or murderer. Yet she may just be getting birth control pills. A woman's right to choose is always under threat. Just last year 3 states tried to pass laws making abortion illegal: Colorado, North Dakota, and California. And that's just the last election. So don't pretend as though the Left has everything it wants and should just sit back content, because just about everything the Left has fought for over the past century is constantly under direct threat. Unlike anything that directly affects conservatives's lives.

everywhere you use the word "threatened" a more moderate even minded person would use the word "challenged" yep! nobody threatens you with free speech.. the threat comes when you don't have it.. funny innit? during your eight years of non stop bitching it was a "patriotic" duty to challenge!

 

[Coloradomtnman]

everywhere you use the word "threatened" a more moderate even minded person would use the word "challenged" yep! nobody threatens you with free speech.. the threat comes when you don't have it.. funny innit? during your eight years of non stop bitching it was a "patriotic" duty to challenge!

Not really. "Challenged" doesn't really fit. Its not as though these programs and laws are just being scrutinized to find how to better do them or what should be reduced or minimized, its that those who oppose these programs and laws are attempting to do away with them completely. There isn't a middle ground of reform that is the target, its complete dissolution and overturning a woman's right to choose.

My freedom of speech is "challenged" by obscenity laws which are in place due to conservatives. And by the Patriot Act.

Questioning authority is not only a right but it is an American duty, Willow. When I challenged the Bush administrations policies or Republican lead legislative acts, I was questioning authority. When conservatives question Obama's birth certificate, criticize his policies as being socialist or marxist, call him a radical, or what-have-you they are questioning authority. Its just that their questions are for the most part silly or stupid and lack a true understanding of what it means to live in an organized and civilized society in the 21st Century. Some of their criticism are well-reasoned. Some of them.

 

[Tech_Esq]

everywhere you use the word "threatened" a more moderate even minded person would use the word "challenged" yep! nobody threatens you with free speech.. the threat comes when you don't have it.. funny innit? during your eight years of non stop bitching it was a "patriotic" duty to challenge!

Not really. "Challenged" doesn't really fit. Its not as though these programs and laws are just being scrutinized to find how to better do them or what should be reduced or minimized, its that those who oppose these programs and laws are attempting to do away with them completely. There isn't a middle ground of reform that is the target, its complete dissolution and overturning a woman's right to choose.

My freedom of speech is "challenged" by obscenity laws which are in place due to conservatives. And by the Patriot Act.

Questioning authority is not only a right but it is an American duty, Willow. When I challenged the Bush administrations policies or Republican lead legislative acts, I was questioning authority. When conservatives question Obama's birth certificate, criticize his policies as being socialist or marxist, call him a radical, or what-have-you they are questioning authority. Its just that their questions are for the most part silly or stupid and lack a true understanding of what it means to live in an organized and civilized society in the 21st Century. Some of their criticism are well-reasoned. Some of them.

Funny how the "other side" always asks silly or stupid question or has similarly useless criticism.

I think that's called partisanship when the side being criticized admits no legitimacy to the other side's complaints.

 

[Ravi]

You are not monopolizing the values and perspective of ALL WOMEN. I hate to break it to you but pro-lifers aren't all bullish controlling men even if such rhetoric sounds good at the naral gala.

So you are for compromising with people that commit terrorist acts? This doesn't surprise me.

I've got news for you, dimwit. If you don't want to have an abortion you don't have to have one.

Actually, as I stated above, we do include those that have committed terrorist acts in our negotiations in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, those are foreign conflicts. It seems to me that we have a much greater interest in reaching a lasting and solid solution to this issue that is the source of repeated strife and violence.

You don't really have the choice to strangle it. Your choice is to reach a solution that lowers the heat level or continue to have flair ups such as this. (And I would speculate worse in coming years). Your choice.

I disagree. The violence around this issue is relatively new, historically speaking. Allowing a group of extremists to shape policy only invites other extremists to use violence for their own gains.

The US has a history of MYOB and there is no law that forces anyone to abort. I see no valid compromise.

 

[Immanuel]

From the terrorist at Rescue America:

I believe that the demand for non-violence in regard to the imminent deaths of innocent human beings is totally misguided and is a work of Satan. To promise to be peaceful while innocent human beings are being murdered would be unconscionable.

Rescue America and Operation Rescue about Non-Violence

I think you need to go back and read the link you posted.

You accused Rescue America of being terrorists.

Here is the opening paragraph from your link:

Am in receipt of recent correspondence from Don Treshman of Rescue America. His letter demands that all who will be attending an upcoming combined Rescue America and Operation Rescue event sign a pledge of nonviolence. While I understand Don's motivation of unification with Flip Benham of Operation Rescue, I believe that the demand for non-violence in regard to the imminent deaths of innocent human beings is totally misguided and is a work of Satan. To promise to be peaceful while innocent human beings are being murdered would be unconscionable.

It is obvious that it is David Trosch (whoever he is) that is calling for violence not Rescue America or Operation Rescue.

Who is this David Trosch? Well from the short review I have done about him, he is a defrocked lunatic Catholic Priest who advocates violence against abortion providers. He does not seem to get any support from many people in the pro-life movement except for maybe those few who agree with him. He doesn't speak for the movement. He has his own agenda much like Paul Watson.

Immie

 

[Tech_Esq]

So you are for compromising with people that commit terrorist acts? This doesn't surprise me.

I've got news for you, dimwit. If you don't want to have an abortion you don't have to have one.

Actually, as I stated above, we do include those that have committed terrorist acts in our negotiations in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, those are foreign conflicts. It seems to me that we have a much greater interest in reaching a lasting and solid solution to this issue that is the source of repeated strife and violence.

You don't really have the choice to strangle it. Your choice is to reach a solution that lowers the heat level or continue to have flair ups such as this. (And I would speculate worse in coming years). Your choice.

I disagree. The violence around this issue is relatively new, historically speaking. Allowing a group of extremists to shape policy only invites other extremists to use violence for their own gains.

The US has a history of MYOB and there is no law that forces anyone to abort. I see no valid compromise.

Jillian posted a list of violence surrounding this issue going back to the 1980s. the Roe decision became the law of the land in 1972. So basically, there has been some violence associated with this issue for most of the time it has been around. (There was an organization and mobilization period that had no violence.)

Like I said, the dead-enders, violence lovers, don't get to participate in the political solution. Only those that have renounced violence should participate. This follows the same model that we've used in the areas I've mentioned and that was used in Northern Ireland.

I don't think this is as serious, at least the violence isn't yet, as those cases, but the framework makes sense.

You, like they, are welcome to be intransigent. You merely invite continued unrest if you do though. But, you are welcome to deny that there is an issue.