Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on December 12, 2002, 12:33:16 PM
-
Is this going too far?
Near my home is a Family Planning clinic. There are often protesters outside, and that is fine with me. They sometimes carry signs that read "Jesus Saves" or something similar. That is also fine, and their right.
Yesterday it took a turn though. A guy sat at the curb, it's a very busy street, with a huge (6' by 6') picture of a torn and bleeding baby.
I found the picture disturbing, it might even make some people sick.
Would it be OK to sit out in front of a church with a huge picture of a naked woman bleeding from her vagina?
-
I admit that's a bit much. Had I been anywhere near there I woulda folded that sign around the man and beat him with a street sign.
There has to be limit...and as far as I know there is. If his "free speech" offended anyone else, he could have either been told to remove the sign or fined for it. And if he tried to claim "free speech", it wouldn't stand up because someone else found it offensive.
On another note, I almost got suspended for a newspaper article I wrote about my school...but I digress.
-
Most of the women I've seen in my practice with this problem have been due to complications of an abortion.
-
These idiots have gone one step further. Over the summer, they rented one of those rolling billboard trucks, and had a similar picture blown up and then they drove around town with it. On the news they interviewed these people and they told of how they had to install bullet-proof glass and wear flak jackets.
Here is what you do. Make a sign with a picture of an adult (no kiddie porn) blowing a priest, and stand on the curb in front of this guy's church.
-
PETA a few years back had a campaign going that called MCmurder
They where boycotting McDonalds for killing animals ETC.
SO I check out there page for fun and stumbled on the PDF you could print that was their flier to hand out.
It was filled with nasty images of dead cows and stuff, very disturbing.
They instructed people to wait in from of McDonald's and hand the fliers to Kids... Young kids!!
The stuff was just wrong.
The shirt with Ronald McDonald holding a severed bleeding cows head saying "would you like fries with that" was cool though..
always wanted to order a big Mac wearing one!
-
Sign that size could startle some unspecting driver and cause and accident and possible death.
-
I hate nut-cases like those. I am a Christian. I'm against abortion.
but these idiots do more harm than good. It's like those people who stand on a busy corner with a bullhorn telling people they are going to burn in hell.
the point of protesting, or evangilising is to educate people and lead them to God.
how many people do these A-holes think they are winning over.
they are doing more to make undecided people hate Christians than win anyone over.
-
midnight Target: I found the picture disturbing, it might even make some people sick.
Would it be OK to sit out in front of a church with a huge picture of a naked woman bleeding from her vagina?
MT, I have a better and more appropriate idea. No need for naked women (or blowing a priest) which may actually be specifically regulated by pornography laws and land you in jail.
Just come to that guy and ask him for a copy of that poster - pretend that you are a sympathiser. Also, ask what church he is attending.
Then take exactly the same poster and sit in front of the church with it one morning when they are entering with their kids.
If you can protest abortion in one place, you surely can do it in another. If they ask you to leave, accuse them in supporting abortion.
On the other hand they are probably not guilty and do not deserve it... Still, it was a nice fantasy
GtoRA2: ...holding a severed bleeding cows head...
Hmmm... Mouth watering...
festus: Most of the women I've seen in my practice with this problem have been due to complications of an abortion.
You are wrong. Most of those women's problem have been due to complications of stupidity. Unnecessary abortion is just one of many ways for a fool to do oneself in.
miko
-
...with a huge (6' by 6') picture of a torn and bleeding baby.
Was it a baby or a fetus? Now you see his point? If it was just tissue to be discarded, it may have been disgusting but not against public decency (sp?) standards. If it was a baby then he should have be hauled away, but then he has proven his point that abortion if often infanticide by another name.
ra
-
How does that prove a point for a 5 year-old child that a mother brought to clinic for her PAP-smear (or whtvr) appointment?
miko
-
I guess tolerance and freedom of expression and non-violence cease to be liberal values when someone else's expression is politically inconvenient. I bet a lot of the guys who would beat up that sign bearer are the same guys who support federal funding for pictures of crosses floating in jars of urine. :)
-
That is a bit too much.
What are they protesting against?
If it causes you to not "function" normaly or go about yer daily life normaly then it should be stoped..
-
Originally posted by funkedup
I guess tolerance and freedom of expression and non-violence cease to be liberal values when someone else's expression is politically inconvenient. I bet a lot of the guys who would beat up that sign bearer are the same guys who support federal funding for pictures of crosses floating in jars of urine. :)
Kinda ironic ain't it. The same guys complainin' here about a poster don't seem to have much to say about the religion in Pakistan that is responsible for the killing of over 460 women there last year for crimes as menial as being a bad cook.
-
let's juts hope those protestors get their way some day and root out abortion and birth control for good!
just think about it....someday the united states could be like mexico- we could all be scared to death that god would send us to hell for using birth control or having abortions. and women wouldn't need all them faincy pap smears, they could just pray and if they ended up getting cervical cancer, well it's all part o' god's plan. it's so simple.
won't it be great when we all clean hotel rooms 23 hours a day to feed our 7 kids! yeahhh!!! i can't wait. if we need to see some surroundings other than the squalor of our hut we can always go down to the cathedral where everything is gilded and covered in satin.
those clinics are awful, go protestors!!!!!go soldiers o' the lawd!!!!! ahhh....the future, seems so bright, amen......
-
Mr. Fish would you please enlighten us on the eitiology and pathophysiology of cervical cancer.
-
Every bag of popcorn has some unpopped kernals.
-
Some people find the burning of your flag disturbing.
You can't have your free speech cake and not eat it to.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Some people find the burning of your flag disturbing.
You can't have your free speech cake and not eat it to.
I think I have made myself clear in my various posts that I am all for freedom of speech etc.
My wife thought the picture was akin to an assault and wanted to call the police. I talked her out of it. (Yes I really am that open minded). I wonder though. There are obvious limits to freedom of speech, (yelling movie in a firehouse ;) ). Does this sign constitute a form of pornography? If so is the bearer guilty of violating local ordinances against pornography? Especially pornography available to children?
-
if the picture is that nauseating, vomit on the guy
-
Originally posted by whgates3
if the picture is that nauseating, vomit on the guy
Nice! :)
-
Originally posted by festus
Mr. Fish would you please enlighten us on the eitiology and pathophysiology of cervical cancer.
i'd be glad to...... if i knew what the hell either of those words meant.
i do remember learning that (oddly) it is caused by a virus that many women carry and it can be discovered fairly easily by a regular checkup. is that incorrect?
-> a checkup btw, that even poor women can afford via clinics. the same clinics that usually have some fool standing out front praying at everyone.... the religious right can't wait to run those clinics out of town because they encourage sexual activity in their weird way of thinking by educating women about birth control and of course performing abortions-
what am i missing re: cervical cancer? correct me in english if you're gonna do it ;)
-
Yeah didn't you know all anti-fetus-murder people are anti-birth-control as well?
:rolleyes:
FunkedUp <----------- Opposed to fetus-murder, but in favor of birth control air strikes on certain parts of US cities. :D
-
Originally posted by funkedup
Yeah didn't you know all anti-fetus-murder people are anti-birth-control as well?
Don't you mean you a anti-rights-of-women-and-want-to-opress-them-and-and-turn-them-into-slaves?
And I am fights-for-the-rights-of-my-wife-and-daughter-and-am-unto-like-a-palladin.
Or we can use the terms that are accept as common usage for the to different beliefs? Pro-life, sounds good, for life and all. Pro-choice, sounds good, for choice.
Probably better to use those terms and argument the philosophies behind them, then to try and cloud the issue with different terms, isn't it?
-
Holy straw man, Batman. :D
I'll use whatever terms I like to describe my own beliefs, thank you very much. :)
(Especially when the terms I use are completely accurate, assuming we are using the Queen's English here.)
-
airstrikes funked??- hehe hey you don't happen to mean the marina district here in san fran do you? if so you'll have to act fast because i might be bringing all my fishy goodness to live in piedmont in the next few months :)
you represent a moderate view, most of the people out there with signs are a part of the religious movement against abortion which in most cases involves a parallel view against any form of birth control etc etc.
in fact, the "holy father" forbids bith control so i shall assume most catholics agree with him. maybe he reversed his holy word- anyone know for sure? i'm talking from memory so feel free to set me straight.
since i believe that there's no such thing as a soul, it doesn't bother me to see a fetus destroyed before the higher brain functions start- i know many don't agree but their constant protest does a lot of damage to young unfortunate girls who are already feeling low.
the supreme court's decision seems extremely considered and i think people ought to just back off and take the comprimise- i'd even like to see the viability date moved back even further, they should have to have abortions very early i think so i wouldn't mind seeing that change. but no one's going to budge so to end the BS we should all accept the comprimise.
personally though, i'd never want my wife to get an abortion, i love kids and even raised my friend's kid for a while when they were having a hard time- (2 years!) but everyone is not that way so why can't we comprimise and just get on with it. there's too many important things to worry about.
-
the supreme court's decision seems extremely considered and i think people ought to just back off and take the comprimise- i'd even like to see the viability date moved back even further, they should have to have abortions very early i think so i wouldn't mind seeing that change. but no one's going to budge so to end the BS we should all accept the comprimise.
You're going to think this odd, but I am inclined to agree with this. In a practical sense, people are going to have those abortions anyway, so making it illegal will only kill more people. And since I believe it's God's place to judge this action (not mine), the compromise is the better way to go. Sure, I wish it wasn't legal, and I am against it, but I don't really believe the lines are going to move any more than you do.
-
Well, this may be a lost cause but...
I really don't care if you are pro choice or anti abortion. What about the picture?
Is it different than someone protesting a Catholic church by standing out front with a big picture of a man sodomizing a young boy?
-
Let me ask you a question to answer your question; how do you feel about a picture of a crucifix in a glass of urine?
Second question: Yes, it's different. The clinics have as part of their express purpose for being the support and conducting of abortions. The Catholic church is not about sodomy in any way, and though it is lamentable how the priests are being shielded, it is definitely not what the churches are about. But to tell you the truth, if protesting in front of one of those churches will make the church get rid of the pedophile priest, then I am all for it.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Let me ask you a question to answer your question; how do you feel about a picture of a crucifix in a glass of urine?
As they are both inanimate objects I think that most people would find the image less revolting than a mutilated corps or a graphic sex act with a child.
One other major difference. The photo you mention was placed in an art gallery. People were free to enter and view the objects there if they wished. Not the same as standing on a street corner with a huge blowup.
-
Here's another major difference for you... my tax dollars helped pay for that picture, though I find it extremely offensive.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Let me ask you a question to answer your question; how do you feel about a picture of a crucifix in a glass of urine?
disgust.
-
As they are both inanimate objects I think that most people would find the image less revolting than a mutilated corps or a graphic sex act with a child.
Well... take a stand. Are you suggesting you can't understand how someone who is religious would be highly offended by that picture? Are you tempted to suggest religious folks grow a thicker skin?
I'll tell you how I feel about all of them- they all offend me. I think all three should not be seen, but I know about free speech and have to allow all three (as far as the law currently allows). I will say that, of the three, the picture of the crucifix irks me more not only because it is a slap in the face of my religion, but because the guy was paid some of my money to do it.
-
some of us dont have invisable friends. I think that is a good thing.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Is this going too far?
No, not in my opinion, as long as it's within the law for him to do so. If he's willing to stand out on the corner like a love muffin, that's his business. If someone is offended by it enough, they have ways of dealing with it. They can ignore it, they can call the cops (if they get enough complaints, it may become an issue of being a public nuisance and they'll make him ditch the sign), or if they feel they've been horribly damaged by the image, they can sue him.
I'm also not sure what a crusifix in a bottle of piss has to do with art...seems like more of a political statement about the current state of the catholic church. But I guess there is such a thing as political art. Also, I really don't have anything against my tax dollars going to art programs or individual artists, and don't feel it's my place to judge what art is OK for the money to go to. Just because I don't like it doesn't mean it's not worthy of consideration.
SOB
-
...I think that most people would find the image less revolting than a mutilated corps...
A corpse is the remains of a once-living body, is that what the picture was of? If so, yes that is disgusting. If not, wtf.
-
Originally posted by ra
A corpse is the remains of a once-living body, is that what the picture was of? If so, yes that is disgusting. If not, wtf.
Ah, but there's the crux of the argument, now isn't it? What do you define as a corpse, and what do you define as unviable tissue?
SOB-
I realize you are not religious, and I realize it doesn't mean the same to you. Realize if you are religious, it makes a great deal of difference. I guess about the best analogy would be if they were to hang a huge picture of your grandmother and place a placard under it that read "Crack potato". ;)
-
Mr. Fish>>>"...and women wouldn't need all them faincy pap smears, they could just pray and if they ended up getting cervical cancer, well it's all part o' god's plan."
Eitiology (cause): Certain strains of human papilloma virus.
Pathophysiology (mechinism of action): Infects the cells of the cervix and under certain conditions changes the growth of said cells whom become abnormal (dysplastic or cancer).
How do women get human papilloma virus? By exposure to the virus. How do women get exposed? By a noodle that carries it. So logical deduction brings us to the conclusion, no exposure, no cervical cancer. Therefore, does birth control prevent cervical cancer? No. Except one possibility, and that is the condom. However, what is the risk of slippage (well for some of you quite high). :rolleyes: Or the risk of tearing? Do you not know that there are holes in these condoms. Some large enough to allow the passage of viruses such as HPV, HSV, and HIV. Probably not because the public health officials in this country believe that young people are going to have sex any way and we don't want to scare them now do we?
Festus
-
so some girl may use pills instead of condoms and still be exposed. and how does a girl find out if she's been exposed? at a clinic maybe?
early intervention is important, clinics play a big role here especially for working women who don't have insurance- they also cure working males that don't have insurance either for that matter.
it's not just birth control but even then, many will choose condoms as an alternative because they have access to them so it's still a net positive.
-
Mr. Fish>>>"you represent a moderate view, most of the people out there or a part of the religious movement against abortion which in most cases involves a parallel view against any form of birth control etc. etc."
"infact, the "holy father" forbids birth control so i shall assume most catholics agree with him. Maybe he reversed his holy word - anyone know for sure?"
Hey Mr. Fish, I'm not trying to pick on you. Just address some of your comments.:)
Well, most catholics (at least in the US) don't follow the teachings of the Catholic Church on artificial contraception. Most of the abortions that occur among christians are catholic. They are what I call cafeteria catholics, they pick and choose of the faith what they like and discard the things they don't like. The Holy Father has only repeated the Churches teachings on artificial contraception since the beginning 2000 years ago. There is nothing new, and this teaching is not going to change. Perhaps you'd like to review the document Humane Vitae http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Festus
-
Mr. Fish, I think you may be missing my point. Of course these ladies need treatment. But its the exposure that causes them the illness. Promiscuity has led to the ennumerable cases of exposure to HPV and other STDs. Unfortunately, once is enough. And by the way there is no cure for the carrier. HPV will reside in the normal cells around the cervix or noodle an remain dormant for some and reactivate for others.
-
interesting document- reads like a vcr manual though;)
"To Scientists
24. Our next appeal is to men of science. These can "considerably advance the welfare of marriage and the family and also peace of conscience, if by pooling their efforts they strive to elucidate more thoroughly the conditions favorable to a proper regulation of births." (28) It is supremely desirable, and this was also the mind of Pius XII, that medical science should by the study of natural rhythms succeed in determining a sufficiently secure basis for the chaste limitation of offspring. (29) In this way scientists, especially those who are Catholics, will by their research establish the truth of the Church's claim that "there can be no contradiction between two divine laws—that which governs the transmitting of life and that which governs the fostering of married love." (30)
did i read that right? they are appealing to science to help them learn the 'rthym method' for married couples? heh i never knew that.
this is 1968, pre roe v. wade i believe and also with a different pope- anything newer?
-
Yep Mr. Fish you read it right.
Here are some more interesting sites:
http://www.ccli.org/contraception/index.shtml
http://www.catholic.com/library/birth_control.asp
http://www.ccli.org
-
That guy with the sign must be breaking some obscenity laws .
And his Idea of obscenity is probably a beautiful woman naked . Society is stupid like that .
-
Originally posted by Kieran
SOB-
I realize you are not religious, and I realize it doesn't mean the same to you. Realize if you are religious, it makes a great deal of difference. I guess about the best analogy would be if they were to hang a huge picture of your grandmother and place a placard under it that read "Crack potato". ;)
I can't argue with ya about how you feel about it, but I think the analogy is a bit off. Your example spells out a message pretty clearly "granny's been humpin' for the rock". The crux in the piss is just an image, open to interpretation. Unless, of course, the artist (or whatever you'd like to call him :)) came out and said "hey, I made this because Christians are a bunch of piss drinking diddlys".
Even if it offends you or anyone else...christ, it'd probably give Granny a heart attack if she saw it (she's as holy as they get, 'cept for the whoring)...I don't see a problem with it.
I guess it boils down to whether or not you support any of your tax dollars going to support artists and their work. If you do, I wouldn't agree that it's OK for you to pick and choose where that money goes, even if it goes to something you deem offensive.
SOB
-
there ought to be limits... (http://www.gwbush.com/gwtv/limits_to_freedom.rm)