“reminding folks about the anti-choice forces who are responsible for creating these terrorists”
Also different: anti-choice killers don’t die, either due to police action or by their own hand, during their killing sprees.
I was with her until she said anti-choice. That’s as irritating to me as when someone from the pro-life side of the debate calls their opponent pro-abortion. The “debate” is just a lot of talking and no listening and I’ve mostly tuned it out these days. Where do you go to hear reasonable discussion on polarizing topics?
You got a better option? How about pro-pregnancy? Pro-incubator? Forced-birthers? No?
It’s hard to have a reasonable debate when one side constantly screams “murderer,” “slut,” “whore,” etc. These epithets wouldn’t be needed by the anti- side if their arguments were even a little bit reasoned. Or honest, for that matter.
When you stop searching. Well you know the rest…
What would you call the strain of political thought that results in people harassing, assaulting, and massacring pro-choice individuals be? “Pro-life”?
If you want to engage in a shouting match, go right ahead. Obviously I can’t (and wouldn’t) stop you. I don’t think it accomplishes anything though other than giving the shouter a sense of satisfaction.
if their arguments were even a little bit reasoned
There probably are more extreme opinions on the pro-life side of the debate. But I don’t think that’s the majority.
I’m just asking where those of us not interested in vitriolics go to talk about divisive issues.
Bad mutant, bad!
I am not questioning your beliefs or assumptions, but what is a better label? My opinion is any group that uses violence to push their agenda doesn’t really get to pick a neutral label.
I also acknowledge there are very strong feelings about this subject, but where are the rampages against planned parenthood protesters? Again, just one Internet mutants opinion, Anti-Choice sounds about right.
You’re here. Commenting. Right? This one of the least shouty places you’ll ever find for a polarizing debate. So, you got an opinion on the subject or are you just whinging about the tone police?
When we look into them, we never see ourselves.
Speaking for myself, no, I don’t see myself in mass murderers. I have never been attracted to mass killing in the slightest, even in my angriest teen years.
I’ve come to think of this as the “disingenuous we.” “We are doing bad stuff,” says the speaker, who actually means, "you are doing bad stuff." Some time, ask somebody who uses this if they really include themselves. Does Winstead fail to identify with killers, but think that she really should? If not, then who is “we?” Who is it who should see themself in a killer?
If that’s what they want to be called, then sure.
You can discuss right here. BB ain’t perfect, but it is reasonable. And the happy mutants here come in all shapes, sizes, ideas, and technology levels (yes, some of us have Ray guns and reactors).
This one of the least shouty places you’ll ever find for a polarizing debate.
Only when the hive mind is in full effect. In some of the comment threads where both sides of the discussion are present, it gets pretty shouty.
At least “anti-choice” is a true characterization, while “pro-abortion” is not. The Pro-Lifers started this semantics war, and as long as their ranks include terrorists I’m afraid they are on the moral low ground here. You don’t see supporters of Pro-Choice going out and murdering Pro-Life people, and they are supposed to be the killers according to that camp.
It gets pretty “pouty” too.
Most of the time the shouting is… Mock shouting I admit to being guilty, but that is usually when that other Michael is winding me up