Political Contradictions

[Fencer X and Y]

This guy is my favorite poster since Fatfencer.

Trolls are always fun to read

[trickery dickery dock]

Trolls are always fun to read

This is amazing. Apparently, since nobody can argue against me on the issues at hand, you resort to name-calling. Pathetic. "Durr...he's smarter than I'll ever be. Must be a troll!"

[Hauptman]

This is amazing. Apparently, since nobody can argue against me on the issues at hand, you resort to name-calling. Pathetic. "Durr...he's smarter than I'll ever be. Must be a troll!"

Wow... you get more fascinating by the minute. You don't consider "wimp" or "evil" or any of the other derogatory terms you used to be at all arrogant or dismissive?

Regarding 9/11, didn't we have a strong, Christian, conservative administration in place during that complete lapse of intelligence, and security? No contradiction there?

BTW, you still haven't clarified this Christian tradition you keep talking about. Are we talking Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, Mormon, Eastern Orthodox, etc.? Because there seems to be quite a bit of disagreement among Christians.

Which bible are you reading? The King James version is a horrrible translation. You're reading it in ancient Greek or Aramaic, I hope?

[Fencer X and Y]

This is amazing. Apparently, since nobody can argue against me on the issues at hand, you resort to name-calling. Pathetic. "Durr...he's smarter than I'll ever be. Must be a troll!"

Your simplistic theological musings vis-a-vi "without Jesus life is pointless" very clearly show that there is no point in debating with you on that topic since you will not have an open mind.

As far as talking with you about anything else, what's the point? If you think that you're smarter then me then you're not going to listen to me. I hope that your posts are just your internet persona and in real life you are less of a cartoon character and more of a reasonable person.

[I_luv_saber]

You know, just because your demented view of Christianity dictates that we all wander into the woods to hug trees (and probably other men), doesn't mean that the Christian tradition is wrong.

Nice try, but it's not my view of Christian tradition. It's the tradition followed in Jesus' time. They didn't build vast buildings in which to worship (in fact, Jesus condemned this), they gathered at each others houses, shared good food, and worshiped together. The building of churches by the Christian movement (in the way we see them today) is a mix of Jewish influence and barbarians' temples (the latter because they were trying to modify themselves in a way that would be more acceptable to barbarians, as to get more converts). Easter, Christmas, and most Christian holidays are perversions of Christian and heathen religion.

I still don't understand why you need a special building for worship. This begins to sound like heathenism to me.

(note, when I say barbarians, I refer to what Christians called barbarians)

Most of us would like to have a decent place where we can meet for worship, Bible study, baptisms, weddings, and funerals. Is that wrong?

What's wrong with your house? Ever hear of backyard weddings? They tend to be the most fun! And Bible study is not amplified by the stained glass of church, sorry to say. Works just as well when surrounded by the same people.

I'm not saying you are wrong for wanting it. I'm saying you're a hypocrite for doing such and damning others for their actions. If you don't want rocks thrown at you, don't cast the first stone (forgot to read that part?).

Is it really too much to ask? If you liberals had any real sense of logic, you would see how quickly that could apply to everything else in the world.

Just thought I'd point out for a moment that I found this genuinely funny. I'm usually considered by most to be conservative. A moderate one, mind you, but far from liberal. Have it your way, though...

Why have buildings for anything? {big snip for brevity}

Restaurants open... to make money. Hotels open... to make money. Seeing a pattern here? I don't know of any restaurants that let me come and eat for free. It's not about the joy of sharing a love for food. It's about the green (and not the salad... that's for wimps ).

I've still not heard a reason why your houses cannot suffice. Isn't this all about sharing with others? Sharing your religion and beliefs? I can't see how it could not be made better by keeping it local.

A church does one thing. Brings the power to a single place. It allows power to be abused, and people to be misled more easily. It does not accomplish one single thing (unless you are talking of some branch of Christianity I don't know of) that cannot e accomplished, I believe better, in the home.

Why not just live in hippie communes and do away with hotels, restaurants, and stores? Surely there's wasted money there.

Firstly, I don't mind you having your church. Waste all the money you wish, it's yours to waste. I do mind you coming in here with a holier-than-thou attitude towards others when you can't see your own stupidity. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Love your enemies. Did you seriously read this book? I'm having a hard time believing you are one of those participating in study, my friend...

How much have you donated to feed starving children with all the money you think your saving by not going to church?

Firstly, I'm not claiming to be holier-than-thou. That's you. Secondly, I'm in the poorhouse, and what money I do have generally goes to family (charity starts in the home and all that).

Islam is indeed a false and violent religion.

You believe it is false. I have no problem with that. As far as violent, we'll approach that next quote...

In case you haven't noticed, the most violent region on earth is full of them. Coincidence? How else would you explain it? (Perhaps it is also a coincidence that they're trying to destroy Israel, which would also conveniently stop the Second Coming?)

This was my favorite of the entire post. Truly. Do you... know about the Crusades? The mass murders and slaughterings of peoples who did nothing in order to "take back the Holy Land"? And you seriously try to point the finger at Muslims? The Inquisition? Christians have slaughtered thousands of people, so you would have quite a hard time pointing to Islam as a more violent religion.

(If you want more recent examples, I need only point out people such as yourself, and the bombings of abortion clinics. One happened not too long ago... by... you guessed it! Christians. I'm not saying Christians are bad people... but to call it a peaceful religion and point at Islam is insanity!)

As a second note, you are a sad Christian indeed if you believe the Muslims taking over Israel will "stop the Second Coming". The fact you do believe this makes me think you fall exactly into that group of Christians of which I speak, who follow what others say without thinking for yourself. Your only one step away from the suicide-bombers you damn.

FACT: Without Jesus Christ, a human life is not any more meaningful than a rat's life. This is why spreading The Word is important.

I'm so glad you're here to point out facts I've missed.

While it may not distract you from the issues, fake things like global warming and "insufficient" health care give the liberal media an excuse to put the spotlight elsewhere.

This is another comment I don't need to answer. I'll just let it stand on it's own and make fun of itself.

[trickery dickery dock]

Nice try, but it's not my view of Christian tradition. It's the tradition followed in Jesus' time. They didn't build vast buildings in which to worship (in fact, Jesus condemned this), they gathered at each others houses, shared good food, and worshiped together. The building of churches by the Christian movement (in the way we see them today) is a mix of Jewish influence and barbarians' temples (the latter because they were trying to modify themselves in a way that would be more acceptable to barbarians, as to get more converts). Easter, Christmas, and most Christian holidays are perversions of Christian and heathen religion.

I still don't understand why you need a special building for worship. This begins to sound like heathenism to me.

(note, when I say barbarians, I refer to what Christians called barbarians)




What's wrong with your house? Ever hear of backyard weddings? They tend to be the most fun! And Bible study is not amplified by the stained glass of church, sorry to say. Works just as well when surrounded by the same people.

I'm not saying you are wrong for wanting it. I'm saying you're a hypocrite for doing such and damning others for their actions. If you don't want rocks thrown at you, don't cast the first stone (forgot to read that part?).




Just thought I'd point out for a moment that I found this genuinely funny. I'm usually considered by most to be conservative. A moderate one, mind you, but far from liberal. Have it your way, though...


Restaurants open... to make money. Hotels open... to make money. Seeing a pattern here? I don't know of any restaurants that let me come and eat for free. It's not about the joy of sharing a love for food. It's about the green (and not the salad... that's for wimps ).

I've still not heard a reason why your houses cannot suffice. Isn't this all about sharing with others? Sharing your religion and beliefs? I can't see how it could not be made better by keeping it local.

A church does one thing. Brings the power to a single place. It allows power to be abused, and people to be misled more easily. It does not accomplish one single thing (unless you are talking of some branch of Christianity I don't know of) that cannot e accomplished, I believe better, in the home.


Firstly, I don't mind you having your church. Waste all the money you wish, it's yours to waste. I do mind you coming in here with a holier-than-thou attitude towards others when you can't see your own stupidity. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Love your enemies. Did you seriously read this book? I'm having a hard time believing you are one of those participating in study, my friend...

Firstly, I'm not claiming to be holier-than-thou. That's you. Secondly, I'm in the poorhouse, and what money I do have generally goes to family (charity starts in the home and all that).

This was my favorite of the entire post. Truly. Do you... know about the Crusades? The mass murders and slaughterings of peoples who did nothing in order to "take back the Holy Land"? And you seriously try to point the finger at Muslims? The Inquisition? Christians have slaughtered thousands of people, so you would have quite a hard time pointing to Islam as a more violent religion.

(If you want more recent examples, I need only point out people such as yourself, and the bombings of abortion clinics. One happened not too long ago... by... you guessed it! Christians. I'm not saying Christians are bad people... but to call it a peaceful religion and point at Islam is insanity!)

As a second note, you are a sad Christian indeed if you believe the Muslims taking over Israel will "stop the Second Coming". The fact you do believe this makes me think you fall exactly into that group of Christians of which I speak, who follow what others say without thinking for yourself. Your only one step away from the suicide-bombers you damn.

Oh really? Jesus was against his own church? Where in The Bible does he say that (or were you just too high on pot)?

Churches are establishments of the highest order of learning. I admit, my examples weren't good. How about this one: Colleges. Colleges are non-for-profit, and nobody bothers them about not existing in some hippie's living room. (Maybe that's because most colleges are really liberal "churches" (actually I think programming-center is a better word)).

First of all, those things were in the past. Second of all, they were perpetrated by Catholics, not Christians. By the way, which Christian nation is calling for the destruction of helpless Jews?

Re: Abortion clinics: There are lots of crazy people out there, and I can't control what they do. All I know is that God has ways of punishing evildoers, and I can't think of anything more evil than abortion.

No, your closer to being a suicide bomber than I am. You are defending the muslim faith, and questioning the teachings of Jesus Christ. Your last name wouldn't happen to be Lindh, would it?

[lindajdunn]

Oh really? Re: Abortion clinics: There are lots of crazy people out there, and I can't control what they do. All I know is that God has ways of punishing evildoers, and I can't think of anything more evil than abortion.

You must be referencing that case in Brazil where doctors aborted the pregnancy of a 9-year-old girl who was carrying twins.

The church officials excommunicated the doctors and the child's mother but not the stepfather who had raped her for years because, after all, raping a young child is not as bad as performing an abortion to preserve the child's health.

[I_luv_saber]

Oh really? Jesus was against his own church? Where in The Bible does he say that (or were you just too high on pot)?

I didn't say was against his own church. I said was against building vast, opulant buildings for worship. This is more akin to paganism.

Churches are establishments of the highest order of learning.

In my experience this is not the case. Christian colleges, yes, but not churches. A church is nothing more than a gathering place for people to worship. So why spend thousands on it? And why these preachers wearing Rolex's? (didja check that song yet?)

I admit, my examples weren't good. How about this one: Colleges. Colleges are non-for-profit, and nobody bothers them about not existing in some hippie's living room. (Maybe that's because most colleges are really liberal "churches" (actually I think programming-center is a better word)).

Here's the difference: Colleges are not an organization of worship that dis others for not doing what they should be (for the most part anyways... in some ways, I do actually agree, colleges can be quite hypocritical as well). Christians such as yourself tell people they aren't doing enough and proceed to not do what they should be doing either (or at least it appears so in your post). If you disagree, fine, but this is my belief.

Also, mind you, while I dislike the idea of a church anyway, I can see reasoning in building a modest building to provide the needs required. I do not, however, see ANY need in spending thousand of dollars for opulant buildings, stained glass windows, and the like, when that money could go to better causes (even within the Christian faith).

First of all, those things were in the past.

Oh, thankfully that makes everything better now and it's okay to point fingers elsewhere (btw, Christian violence against causes they don't believe in is still prevelant. Another example would be many southern racist organizations stand behind the Bible as reasoning. Stupid and extreme? Of course! But so are the minority extremist Muslims).

Second of all, they were perpetrated by Catholics, not Christians.

Pssssst, FYI Catholicism is a form of Christianity. You get your roots (or I'm assuming, most sects do) from Protestant Catholics.

By the way, which Christian nation is calling for the destruction of helpless Jews?

So since the Jews are not your enemy it's not a violent religion? Interesting logic.

(btw, as an aside, I'm not saying I'm against support of Israel, I'm simply saying that it wouldn't stop the Second Coming if that were to happen)

Re: Abortion clinics: There are lots of crazy people out there, and I can't control what they do.

Neither can the peaceful Muslims control the extremists that are doing things beyond their control. Can you really not see the parallel?

All I know is that God has ways of punishing evildoers, and I can't think of anything more evil than abortion.

While I can certainly think of things much more evil than that, It does not mean you should wish ill upon these people. You've seemed to soak in all the parts of the Bible talking about punishment, while skimming over the parts on how to treat people around you and how to act as a Christian.

No, your closer to being a suicide bomber than I am.

"I know what you are, but what am I?" gonna be your next argument?

You are defending the muslim faith, and questioning the teachings of Jesus Christ.

You mistake me. I'm not questioning the teachings of Jesus. I've read them, and continue to. I do, however, question 1) If you, personally, have read Jesus' teachings as a whole and in context and 2) Your very odd interpretation of what he taught.

Your last name wouldn't happen to be Lindh, would it?

And yours wouldn't happen to be Pharisee would it?

At any rate, this is getting boring. It's obviosuly lost on you anyway, so continue as you were.

[Gav]

Mr Trickory appears to be a classic troll. I find it hard to believe you guys have decided to engage him. And yet you have...

[I_luv_saber]

I know. There's that bit of fun in it. I can't help it sometimes .

It's kind of like training with a fencing dummy. While not as good as the real thing, it can actually help in some cases .

[Insipiens]

I find it hard to believe that people with Trickery's views exist, so I tend to presume that he is exaggerating but I am beginning to think he is not.

As a Christian myself I have to say I think his apporach is very bizarre. It is saddening to think that people might take his approach as representative of what the message of Christ is about. (Although that seems unlikely). I have never heard anyone claim before that if the Muslims destroy Israel the second coming will not be able to happen and that is their motive - it implies that the anti-Israeli attitudes in the Middle East are actually anti-Christian. Weird

But then I am a Catholic so perhaps to Trickery I don't count as a Christian.

[I_luv_saber]

As a Christian myself I have to say I think his apporach is very bizarre. It is saddening to think that people might take his approach as representative of what the message of Christ is about. (Although that seems unlikely). I have never heard anyone claim before that if the Muslims destroy Israel the second coming will not be able to happen and that is their motive - it implies that the anti-Israeli attitudes in the Middle East are actually anti-Christian. Weird

And I think what you point out is what bugs me so much about it. I truly do think that a lot of people do take this as a representation of Christianity, and turn away as a result. It's kind of sad. It sucks to tell someone you are a Christian then they make a weird "uh-oh, here we go face" because of previous experiences with people like that. Bugs me .

[Gav]

I think it comes from the fact that many people have had negative experiences of religious people. If people hadn't had the conversation:

"I am religous..."
"Really? That's good."
"Are you?"
"No."
"Well let me tell you why you should..."

Then there would be less friction.

As an atheist I am cool with you guys wanting to have faith and a god. Just don't tell me I am wrong or try and convert me.

I have Christian pals. Some of them are what you might term "hardcore" church goers. That's fine as far as I am concerned. It's the fundamentalist loonies that get on my tits.

[Hauptman]

I find it hard to believe that people with Trickery's views exist, so I tend to presume that he is exaggerating but I am beginning to think he is not.

As a Christian myself I have to say I think his apporach is very bizarre. It is saddening to think that people might take his approach as representative of what the message of Christ is about. (Although that seems unlikely). I have never heard anyone claim before that if the Muslims destroy Israel the second coming will not be able to happen and that is their motive - it implies that the anti-Israeli attitudes in the Middle East are actually anti-Christian. Weird

But then I am a Catholic so perhaps to Trickery I don't count as a Christian.

Unfortunately, views like Trickory's are all too common in the conservative Republican right here in the U.S.

There is a strong minority that believes in the literal King James bible; that evolution and global warming are myths, and that the world is less than 10,000 years old.

The U.S. has become a dangerously polarized society. I fear that the silent majority is shrinking away. Now that the conflicts overseas have become less prominent in the news, and we have a Democrat in the White House again, I believe we will see more incidents of homegrown terrorism from the radical right. I hate to say it but I believe the next horrific terrorist attack will be similar to the Oklahoma City bombing, and not from a foreign threat.

[I_luv_saber]

I think it comes from the fact that many people have had negative experiences of religious people. If people hadn't had the conversation:

"I am religous..."
"Really? That's good."
"Are you?"
"No."
"Well let me tell you why you should..."

Then there would be less friction.

As an atheist I am cool with you guys wanting to have faith and a god. Just don't tell me I am wrong or try and convert me.

I have Christian pals. Some of them are what you might term "hardcore" church goers. That's fine as far as I am concerned. It's the fundamentalist loonies that get on my tits.

While I totally agree with this position and I think it's yet another point that brings Christians down as a whole, I would also point out I've experienced this exactly opposite as well.

"I am an atheist... "
"Really? That's nice."
"Are you?"
"No, I'm religious."
"Let me tell you why you're stupid for believing that..."

Unfortunately, views like Trickory's are all too common in the conservative Republican right here in the U.S.

There is a strong minority that believes in the literal King James bible; that evolution and global warming are myths, and that the world is less than 10,000 years old.

The U.S. has become a dangerously polarized society. I fear that the silent majority is shrinking away. Now that the conflicts overseas have become less prominent in the news, and we have a Democrat in the White House again, I believe we will see more incidents of homegrown terrorism from the radical right. I hate to say it but I believe the next horrific terrorist attack will be similar to the Oklahoma City bombing, and not from a foreign threat.

While I do agree that these people are out there, I would point out there are radicals from the left as well. True, it's quite a different animal... but they are both just as dangerous. A balance needs to be struck between the two.

I've made clear why I think the country is as polarized as it is in the first place in previous threads. But, as far as the current situation... I am afraid if one side does not extend the olive branch soon the pendulum will swing harder and faster until it reaches an event such as you say. Or hopefully, people will become so disillusioned with the parties that we'll move to a multi-party system. Doubt it, but maybe.

While I think Rush Limbaugh is a pompous ass, one thing he and many conservatives are pointing to, is that if Obama continues this polarization it's going to spark a new conservative movement of a scale that Democrats saw with Obama.

But then again, maybe this needs to happen anyway. The Republicans party no longer represents what it did, and there really is no party anymore for true conservatives (aside from socially). My fear is, is that if Obama does not hold well on his promises and fails to meet the expectations of the people, people will turn to the other side without any reform. The neo-Christian movement will gain speed, and who knows what could happen (imagine another Bush, but worse)?

It'll be interesting to see what happens at any rate.

[tchwojko]

It's amazing the lengths people will go to in order to avoid saying "I don't know."

[trickery dickery dock]

I didn't say was against his own church. I said was against building vast, opulant buildings for worship. This is more akin to paganism.


In my experience this is not the case. Christian colleges, yes, but not churches. A church is nothing more than a gathering place for people to worship. So why spend thousands on it? And why these preachers wearing Rolex's? (didja check that song yet?)


Here's the difference: Colleges are not an organization of worship that dis others for not doing what they should be (for the most part anyways... in some ways, I do actually agree, colleges can be quite hypocritical as well). Christians such as yourself tell people they aren't doing enough and proceed to not do what they should be doing either (or at least it appears so in your post). If you disagree, fine, but this is my belief.


Oh, thankfully that makes everything better now and it's okay to point fingers elsewhere (btw, Christian violence against causes they don't believe in is still prevelant. Another example would be many southern racist organizations stand behind the Bible as reasoning. Stupid and extreme? Of course! But so are the minority extremist Muslims).


Pssssst, FYI Catholicism is a form of Christianity. You get your roots (or I'm assuming, most sects do) from Protestant Catholics.

Neither can the peaceful Muslims control the extremists that are doing things beyond their control. Can you really not see the parallel?

You mistake me. I'm not questioning the teachings of Jesus. I've read them, and continue to. I do, however, question 1) If you, personally, have read Jesus' teachings as a whole and in context and 2) Your very odd interpretation of what he taught.

I guess I can't convince you that God shouldn't be worshipped in some kind of a crappy shack that can't offer activities that reach out and spread the word to the community (after school programs, youth outreach, homeless outreach, senior activities, Bible study, and broadcasting the Word-must not be important, right?), and are capable of recieving many people. Oh well. By the way, you failed to point out the part in The Bible where Jesus says not to build churches. (Who's view is odd?)

Also, God has provided very well for many pastors (many are independently wealthy) Maybe if you were 1/1,000,000th as dedicated as some of them, you wouldn't be struggling to make ends meet.

Wrong again. Most colleges ARE places of liberal programming and worship. Bullcrap ideas (global warming, evolution, fag-genes, etc.) are cooked up there by the godless to promote their own agenda. I have personally seen many people who used to have a good head on their shoulders go off to these colleges and come back mindless liberals. If that isn't programming, I don't know what is.

Again, you've made a straw-man to beat. Christianity is not violent or racist. If you've studied The Bible as much as you claim that you have, you would know this to be true. On the other hand, the koran is full of violence, and calls for violence (ever hear of jihad?). Use some common sense.

[Hauptman]

While I do agree that these people are out there, I would point out there are radicals from the left as well. True, it's quite a different animal... but they are both just as dangerous. A balance needs to be struck between the two.

I've made clear why I think the country is as polarized as it is in the first place in previous threads. But, as far as the current situation... I am afraid if one side does not extend the olive branch soon the pendulum will swing harder and faster until it reaches an event such as you say. Or hopefully, people will become so disillusioned with the parties that we'll move to a multi-party system. Doubt it, but maybe.

While I think Rush Limbaugh is a pompous ass, one thing he and many conservatives are pointing to, is that if Obama continues this polarization it's going to spark a new conservative movement of a scale that Democrats saw with Obama.

But then again, maybe this needs to happen anyway. The Republicans party no longer represents what it did, and there really is no party anymore for true conservatives (aside from socially). My fear is, is that if Obama does not hold well on his promises and fails to meet the expectations of the people, people will turn to the other side without any reform. The neo-Christian movement will gain speed, and who knows what could happen (imagine another Bush, but worse)?

It'll be interesting to see what happens at any rate.

My comments focused on the radical right because that is what we've been discussing. Absolutely, there are radicals of all stripes, and certainly there was violence from the radical left in the late '60s and early '70s. My point is that for the last 20 years or so we have been seeing violence mainly from the radical right.

Another point is that the radical left felt very disenfranchised in the 1960s. And in fact at that time they literally were disenfranchised in that blacks and teenagers had to fight for their right to vote.

The radical right that we've seen over the last 20 years also feels disenfranchised and also uses this as a justification for violence and other immoral acts. However, the difference is that under Clinton and Obama they were not disenfrachised; their candidates simply lost in legitimate elections.

Finally, I see an obstuctionist attitude from the right as well. Under Reagan we saw the Reagan Democrats who voted with him on many occasions. Similarly, Democrats cooperated extensively with the G.W. Bush throughout most of his first term; not on all issues of course but there was significant cooperation.

I give credit to Newt Gingrich in that he and Clinton hammered out quite a few effective compromises and accomplished quite a bit toghether. But since Gingrich it seems as though the Republicans in Washington would rather continuously vote no than support a Democratic President under any circumstances.

[Pieter]

Oh how did I miss this thread?

We save murderers primarily because we think that the state killing someone is vengeance, not justice, and that the state is not entitled to be vengeful. Or, put another way, the modern state is created so that justice replaced vengeance, so by taking acts of revenge, the state compromises itself.

Also we think that a lifetime in a pound-me-in-the-ass prison is much worse than a needle in the arm. Never mind that the death penalty is amazingly racist.

We also don't consider small groupings of cells to be the same thing as a fully formed human.

Personally, I object to paying for that guy's lifetime of imprisonment. Convicts interned for life are expensive, especially when medical issues start arising later in life. Far more pragmatic to kill the worse of them. I fail to see a logical basis for the sheer amount of money put into supporting the most hardcore of criminals.

Personally, I'm pro-abortion, but I still find it hilarious when people are pro-abortion but against the death penalty.

[Hauptman]

Oh how did I miss this thread?



Personally, I object to paying for that guy's lifetime of imprisonment. Convicts interned for life are expensive, especially when medical issues start arising later in life. Far more pragmatic to kill the worse of them. I fail to see a logical basis for the sheer amount of money put into supporting the most hardcore of criminals.

Personally, I'm pro-abortion, but I still find it hilarious when people are pro-abortion but against the death penalty.

I think for most people who have objections to the death penalty that it isn't so much the punishment itself, but the fact that our legal system is too flawed to implement it properly.

We know for a fact that there are innocent people in prison, and that innocent people have been put to death. Some would say that it's ok that a few innocent people died to get rid of the rest, but that's easy to say when it's not you or your loved ones being put to death.

And do you really mean you're "pro-abortion"? Most people would say they are pro-choice, and that abortion is a choice of last resort.