From: matrixxx09 on
On Sep 4, 12:43 pm, Mark <bogusmailm...(a)> wrote:
> Only when your side's flagrant hypocrisy begs for it to be pointed
> out, which I am more than happy to do for you.

If you're accusing this "side" for being hypocrites for taking the
side of the sick woman at the TH meeting, but not taking the side of
fetuses (but rather the ladies involved), then aren't YOU being a
hypocrite by taking the side of the hecklers (by minimizing their
cruel taunts as simply "disagree[ing] with her")?
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 08:14:21 -0700, edspyhill01 wrote:

> On Sep 4, 10:18 am, Mark <bogusmailm...(a)> wrote:
>> What maniacs?  People who disagree with her?  Did you see anyone rush
>> up and bite her finger off?
>> I wonder how her statement "what happens to the least of us is the
>> definition of who we are" applies to her views on abortion?
>> You'll have to do better than that, the "maniacs" are winning.  :-)
>> On Sep 3, 8:23 pm, matrixxx09 <matrixx...(a)> wrote:
>> >
>> > I wonder how may of those maniacs will be going to church this
>> > sunday.- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> Mark's logic - shoehorn abortion into every argument.

No, no, Ed! That's for Liberals to do every time there's a new Justice
proposed! Who cares about any other laws, what's your stance on abortion?