Murder by an individual is against the law. By a government, it, too, one day be scrutinized for its actions. Whether one is pro-life or pro-choice, any language to threaten another's health and life must be illegal and immoral. No matter the provocation. The Nazis had the opportunity to examine their consciences and made the wrong choices. They were brought down. Abortion is a little bit different than whole groups of living humans that were living OUTSIDE the womb. The fetus is a bit different as they have not become sentient until after the first breath. I am against abortion however I believe that the abortion is between the woman, the woman's doctor and her God. Some religions permit abortion. Not all humans are Christian. We must recognize that just because they have other beliefs, it doesn't mean that they are atheists. The issue here is that Angel Dillard made a terroristic threat and must reap the consequences of her acts. That is the issue today. Abortions have been done in time memorial but more women have died because of the use of the hanger or other dangerous things. The viable human that is already alive must take precedence. Not from some nut who thinks God gave her the right to sin by threatening to kill another. Two wrongs do not make a right. God is NOT sin. God does not ask or tell someone to sin...ever.
Angel Dillard is not being persecuted for her beliefs. She used specific way of finding the doctor and to hurt the doctor. Especially with the words about an explosive device under the car of the Doctor's vehicle. THAT is why she is being considered having made illegal speech. There is a law against ANYONE making terroristic threats. Anyone. That means that if I or anyone else were to threaten the life or health of someone for any reason whether it is for religion or for anger against someone or because we think someone is doing something against what we don't like. Her threats could spark someone to act. It could cause her to decide to act by her own if she didn't feel things weren't going as quickly as she felt. That is a crime. It had nothing to do with her religious beliefs. Just the threat of violence. For people who believe in life there's a lot of death being done against other people.
It is hubris to believe that God himself has proclaimed to make someone sin. God is not sin nor does he make people to sin. One of the commandents is to not murder. Also, the Bible cautions against vengeance of any sort. In the Bible too says that vengeance is mine saith the Lord. Two wrongs do not make a right. As for abortion, I'd rather let God and the woman's doctor and woman make whatever decision she must make. This Angel Dillard is a nut of the worst kind because she wants people to sin and murder another human. Therefore, this Angel Dillard needs serious prayer. Very serious prayer. It is not up to us to play judge, jury and executioner. As for the hubris, the Bible also says that the heart can be deceitful and what evil we plan could be from the deceit of the heart. It is what it is: Terrorism. Pure and simple.
God: That's an insult to feral cats! It is true it is terrorism.
Not a prude: Huh? Art with women who are nude or partly nude does not translate to having child porn. Seeing statuary or paintings or drawings with nudes does not make people do bad things. Those perverts already have their own agenda with or without art. There is more problems with the internet. Therefore, your idea that art with nudes does not cause child porn or any kind of porn.
I am an artist. I took classes for life drawings and paintings. The idea to censor or destroy or remove a statue or a painting or drawing because it is "obscene" is obscene in itself. Where do we draw the line? It is like a book that someone wants out because it is "obscene." I don't like the statue but I understand it. It had nothing to do with sex. (Ooo. Did I say a bad word?) I took my classes and I had to learn the bones and the muscles before I had to draw humans who just happened to be naked. The artist had to learn it also in order to create the statue. If your children think that the human body is something "nasty," ugly, evil, obscene or porn, then your children will look for the skin mags for excitement. Art is subjective. If it were a man as subject of the statue, we probably wouldn't even be talking about it unless it was a nude. One of the great paintings in the Vatican had a pope that had another artist paint little aprons because, I think Michelangelo, had painted naked people. The philistines are always at the gate. Looks like this Chris guy is a philistine. His statement about his kids are athletes. Not scholars, not artists, not humanitarians but jocks. So he must have been a jock too. The statue does not degrade women. It is a statement on the modern life. Some of the masterpieces were shocking in its day. Music as well. If you are thinking that the statue is about sex, get you mind out of the gutter. Take a course on art appreciation. I got the statue. I don't like it but that is a personal opinion. Fight the philistines for they are at the gate!
Re: “Man shoots wife in the leg over dinner at the Longbranch Steakhouse”
Idiot of the worst sort. One NEVER puts a gun in ones pocket. You've heard of calling with your pocket? This is worse. I can't understand why Kansas wants to go back to the Old West. I hope his wife divorces him for stupidity. He could have killed her.