Anti-Choice Groups Condone “Biblically Justified” Violence Against Gays, Women

A correction was made to this article at 6:33 pm Monday, May 3rd, 2010.  In the earlier version, Kenya was incorrectly described as a “western” African country.  It is in East Africa.

Army of God adherent and Georgia gubernatorial candidate Neil Horsley is under arrest for a series of bizarre diatribes against pop star Elton John.
Gay rights activists are also demanding an investigation into perceived death threats directed at a gay New York travel agent on a website bearing an eerie similarity to Horsley’s infamous “Nuremberg Files.” Kenyan abortion providers are named on the site under “not-wanted” banners sporting animated illustrations of dripping blood.

Horsley’s most recent legal problems though stem from a rant-filled protest staged outside the singer’s Atlanta high-rise condominium where he hoisted a sign proclaiming “Elton John must die. Hebrews 9:27.”

The openly gay pop star apparently angered Horsley after telling Parade magazine in a Feb. 17 interview:

I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems. On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him. Jesus wanted us to be loving and forgiving. I don’t know what makes people so cruel. Try being a gay woman in the Middle East — you’re as good as dead.

Later, in the video posted Feb. 28 on YouTube, Horsley was joined streetside by Jonathan O’Toole, a long-time associate in the Army of God, an organized confederation of militant anti-abortion activists around the nation. Horsley and his Georgia-based cell are fairly unique within the terrorist group for incorporating anti-gay threats into their grisly anti-choice activities.

Horsley was arrested March 10 by the Atlanta Police Department’s fugitive squad and the U.S. Marshal Service. The putative candidate of the Creator’s Rights Party has been charged with “terroristic threats, criminal defamation and using the Internet to disseminate threats,” according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Bond was set at $40,000 on all three charges.
Should Horsley make bond Magistrate Judge James Altman ordered the notorious anti-abortion activist to reside with his son, Nathanael, who is serving as his father’s lawyer, and to maintain a household telephone land-line.

It’s unknown if Horsley currently remains in the Fulton County slammer but he’s long been a fixture in the federal court circuit.  In 1999, Horsley unsuccessfully sued Gloria Feldt and Kim Gandy, then-presidents of Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women, respectively, for libel, assault and slander. He demanded a whopping $107 million judgment. A similar suit against TV talk show host Gerald Rivera was also dismissed.

Along with other Army of God members, Horsley was the subject of a 2003 court injunction granted to a Buffalo women’s clinic after a protester invasion blockaded its entrance. In 2002, Horsley was ordered by a federal appeals court to take down the “Nuremberg Files” website, a thinly-veiled hit list of 12 abortion providers containing personal information, maps and photographs of family members. To encourage further violence, Horsley marked the images of those who had been killed or maimed by fellow extremists in a macabre death tally. Active links to the “Nuremberg Files” remain on Horsley’s other website, Christian Gallery, which is replete with gory photographs, graphic illustrations of sex acts, fiery Biblical justifications for murder and his secessionist platform for the State of Georgia.

Project SEE, the group’s newest Internet threat, borrows heavily from that not-so-disbanded site. One page contains photos of and calls for information about 26 women’s health care providers in the African nation of Kenya accusing them of participating in an international abortion conspiracy.  Kenyan laws restrict abortion care only to prevent maternal death. Like the previous U.S. website, the “not wanted” posters are simply designed to inflame political tensions between health care providers and fundamentalist vigilante groups.

Also featured on the site is a threat directed specifically at Kenneth Hieber, the owner of Gay2Afrika, Inc., a New York-based firm that organizes excursions for gay and lesbian travelers. An English language “not wanted” poster bears Hieber’s image and a homosexual slur. The Swahili version contains a crude depiction of anal sex. The website lists his address, phone number and email. It also claims the firm is promoting gay sexual tourism, a claim Hieber vigorously denies.

Same-sex relationships are illegal in Kenya and subject to long prison terms. Recent news reports document a steep increase in anti-gay violence near the capital city of Mombasa. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center , Hieber contacted the New York City Police Dept. but “they did not believe the Web site constituted a direct threat.”

The hate crimes watchdog group also notes:

Meanwhile, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Campaign, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) and other human rights and faith-based groups are discussing how to challenge the Web site without further endangering the leaders in Africa who are being targeted by it.

Hieber lodged an abuse complaint with, the Internet host for Project SEE. However, the firm refuses to remove the site because it claims while the content could be perceived as obscene it is not illegal. The individuals involved in Horsley’s latest terrorist effort should give the GoDaddy legal department plenty of room to pause over the group’s violent history.

The local Kenyan supporters are affiliated with The Ark of Kenya, a militant fundamentalist Christian group led by Pastor Peter Bushnell.

O’Toole who also appeared in the Elton John protest video, is reportedly married to Esther Njenga, a Kenyan woman he met while scouting the eastern African nation for the new Army of God outpost. The site notes that O’Toole is the site editor.

Rev. Michael Bray is also listed as contact for the group and posted an endorsement of Horsley’s new Christian mission. Bray, a founding member of the Army of God, was convicted in 1984 and was sentenced to six years in federal prison for a series of bombings at abortion clinics in the mid-Atlantic states and the Washington, DC, offices of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Abortion Federation.

All of the men have signed a letter condoning the vigilante-style execution of abortion providers as Biblically justified. The Army of God is linked to dozens of murders, assaults, bombings, arsons and clinic blockades throughout the U.S. over the last two decades.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

  • mechashiva

    Just what Kenyans need, American terrorists setting up cells in their country. I can understand why the Army of God wants to set up shop there, though. They would be completely unregulated and free to promote violence. They could train assassins there with relative anonymity and then bring them to the US to carry out missions.


    People are terrified of the legal fees they know they’ll have to pay if they stand against these terrorists. That’s disgusting on so many levels.

  • ahunt

    Words fail me, But perhaps this is what Concerned Mom means when she claims the rights of Xtians to fight to impose their beliefs  on the rest of us.

  • concernedmom

    Amazing how the ultra left consistantly profiles pro lifers, huh?
    Gee, I was just going over my list of ammo & rocket grenades to donate to the local CPC so they can sneak up on the nearest Planned Parenthood fund raiser. *rolls eyes*

    I won’t even dignify your tacky remarks with a defense, since that might make me look as ignorant as you do.

  • concernedmom

    “Anti Choice Groups Condone ‘Biblically Justified’ Violence against Gays, Women”

    Contrary to what the Millitant Liberals are trying to propagate, the Pro Life movement, in union with the teachings of both Catholic & Protestant Churches, has repeatedly & publicly REJECTED violence as a solution to the abortion issue. ANY person who carries out, intends to carry out, or justifies in therory such acts of violence [against abortionists/mills or individual anti life citizens] is recognized as nothing more than a common thug.
    History has shown a realitively small number of so called “pro life” people have committed acts of violence against fellow human beings or property. There is no excuse for this behavior whatsoever & the authentic Pro Life Movement has never tolerated it under ANY circumstances.
    While citizens concerned for the unborn/all human life condemns violence against the Culture of Death in any manner, we ALSO condemn the violence used by their own movement on a daily basis. This includes the violence of terminating innocent unborn babies, the violence against peaceful pro life witnesses & their property [i.e.signs, displays, etc.] and of course the violence against the disabled [starvation & dehydration]. Also we oppose the violence against human embryos such as in “selective reduction”.

    Despite anyone who is truly Pro Life NEVER condoning violence, it appears the opposition seems to relish focusing a great deal on the limited instances of violence by a very small number of ALLEGEDLY “pro life” individuals in an attempt to obscure the daily violence committed against innocent unborn human beings by lucrative abortion franchises. This exaggerated focus on the violence by rogue individuals against gays/abortionists manages to confuse those who don’t have first hand knowledge about the Pro Life Movement. Many movements have a FRINGE MINORITY who try to use violence to get their message accross. A number of Pro Life groups such as the American Life League, Life Media, Arkansas Right to Life, Central Illinois Right to Life & others have statements AGAINST violence.

    As one may also consider, there are always peaceful picketing, sidewalk counseling, protesting, etc, taking place in front of abortion mills thru out the United States. If violence was as rampant as this above article suggests, the media be swarming with almost daily reports.

    Makes you think, doesn’t it?

  • jayn

    That’s kind of a ‘no true scotsman’ argumant, don’t you think?  Whether or not you consider them to be pro-life, they consider themselves to be part of the movement, and there doesn’t seem to be much effort on the part of major anti-abortion groups to separate themselves from the more radical people who use their agenda to create and even legitimise violence.


    As far as your last statement goes, the other possibility is that such violence has become so common that it’s no longer noteworthy.  I’m willing to bet that there are areas where that is the case.

  • amyc

    concerned mom said,”If violence was as rampant as this above article suggests, the media be swarming with almost daily reports.

    Makes you think, doesn’t it?(sic)”

    You’re forgetting what today’s media is really like. With Rupert Murdoch’s “news” channel and his other outlets constantly distorting the facts of every issue (along with the other major networks beginning to follow suit just to keep up in ratings), it’s hard to believe that the media would pick up on this any time soon. Dr. George Tiller was discussed in the media for maybe a month, but Heaven forbid anyone actually call his killer what he really was–that is a pro-life (anti-choice) terrorist. As we all know, according to Fox “news”, post-911, there’s no such thing as a white/right-wing terrorist. The only discussion I heard was about people pointing fingers at a certain “news” personality (O’Reilly) for labeling the victim a “baby killer” in the months leading up to his death. There was no real discussion about the issue, just a lot of finger pointing and people trying to justify their beliefs. This came from both sides of the aisle.

    Also, I see plenty of media outlets devoting time to the violence of extremist groups (these groups as well as others). Places like: Huffpost, this website,,, etc. What are those places if not media outlets?


  • mechashiva

    CM, I think it is important to note that this article is specifically about violent terrorist groups that are anti-abortion (and anti-queer).


    If you would argue that the title of the article is misleading, I would point out that small words and qualifiers like “some” are generally left out of article titles for the sake of making them less cumbersome. It comes from the days when newspapers were on paper, title fonts were bigger, and so titles had to be short, sweet, and to the point. It’s a matter of formatting. There isn’t anything in this article’s content to suggest that anyone equates the Army of God with the peaceful protesters outside clinics, even though they share the same position on the issue of abortion. In fact, there is another article on RH Reality Check  right now on that very subject.


    You don’t have to hate the ideological position of a group to recognize that they are terrorists who should be locked up. Consider eco-terrorism as an example. Leftists (and plenty on the right) support environmentalism, but do not support terrorist groups that claim the same ideological position. Unfortunately, I would argue that the greater pro-life movement does not do enough to denounce the Army of God and similar terrorist groups. These people are often protected by pro-life lawyers or sponsors (often the same who donate to other pro-life groups), which is why they are not brought to justice. For instance, Scott Roeder violated federal law during the week prior to Dr Tiller’s murder, yet he was not arrested. Why? Probably for the same reason GoDaddy didn’t want to shut down a pro-life terrorist website… they would rather not have to deal with the legal fees until something bad actually happens. There is not enough emphasis placed on preventing violence, and there is not enough done to punish those who have already become violent. I find it very sad that the primary reason is “the Benjamins.”

  • jodi-jacobson

    Anytime you stigmatize people or their behaviors based on your own “superior” moral view, you provide a basis for the violence you may later decry.


    Calling women who choose–morally and based on their own capacities–baby killers and questioning the moral, ethical and intellectual capacities of women; using the language of violence to describe their own decision making stigmatizes women and therefore enables others to justify violence against them.  You don’t get to go around talking about “killing babies,” and then excuse yourself from the eventual outcomes of your rhetoric.

    Likewise, supporting laws such as those that force women to undergo medical procedures they do not desire–e.g. ultrasounds, transvaginal ultrasounds, endless and unsupportable “counseling,” waiting periods, and so forth–these laws not only stigmatize and undermine the human agency of women, they are in themselves often violent.  To force someone of sound mind and body to undergo a medical procedure they do not want is a form of violence and a human rights abuse.  To force someone to live in pain with an untreatable terminal illness is a form of violence.  All of these actions and all of the rhetoric associated with them simply enables those whose actions you here decry but whose work in effect you support.

    I can not see myself determining for another woman what is moral for her in regard to an unwanted pregnancy.  I do not walk in her shoes.  You seem to be very happy to do so, and in so doing, allow others to see her as immoral and less than human.

    It is no different than those who constantly decry homosexuality as “evil,” but then say: “Who me?” when the laws to execute gays come along, or the violent tendencies of individuals or mobs are unleashed (Matthew Shepard?).

    And as for the “peacefulness” of clinic protests, read our cover story today on the FACE Act.  There’s a whole lotta violence going on.



  • gordon

    ConcernedMom wrote: ‘While citizens concerned for the unborn/all human life condemns violence against the Culture of Death in any manner, we ALSO condemn the violence used by their own movement on a daily basis. This includes the violence of terminating innocent unborn babies, the violence against peaceful pro life witnesses & their property [i.e.signs, displays, etc.] and of course the violence against the disabled [starvation & dehydration]. Also we oppose the violence against human embryos such as in “selective reduction”.’


    But it does not, apparently, include violence against pregnant women.  Let me explain something, ConcernedMom.  A woman who dies in childbirth because she couldn’t get an abortion, or commits suicide because she couldn’t get an abortion, or dies during an unsafe abortion because she couldn’t get a safe one, is every bit as dead as if some domestic “pro-life” terrorist had taken an AK-47 to her.


    I ordinarily think profanity is the refuge of the inarticulate, but I can think of only two words to adequately describe your protestations of rejecting violence, and the first one is “horse”.

  • hilmarc

    “O’Toole who also appeared in the Elton John protest video, is reportedly married to Esther Njenga, a Kenyan woman he met while scouting the western African nation for the new Army of God outpost.”


    Kenya is an East African country. 

  • wendy-banks

    I agree with you totally on that– These people totally bat-shit crazy.

  • concernedmom

    The way this article is arranged, it certainly is IMPLYING that the Pro Life movement condones violence, which it is happy to suggest. As I said in my rebuttal, no genuine Pro Life group approves of the radical fringe using our banner as they carry out their heinous acts. I read some of that “Army of God” webside [theirs aint no God of mine, BTW] & found it to be repugnant at best. The devil practices to decieve, & he certainly uses the criminally insane to his own ends- especially if it puts REAL Christians in a bad light.

  • concernedmom

    Jodi, let us look at the record on violence from ‘pro choice’ activists, against those being Pro Life:

    Human Life International has documented more than 8,519 acts of violence & illegal activity by pro choice individuals. These crimes include:

    *1,251 homicides

    *157 attempted homicides

    *28 arsons & firebombings

    *904 assaults

    *1,908 sex crimes, including rape

    *106 kidnappings

    *420 cases of vandalism

    *290 drug crimes

    *1,616 medical crimes

    A few headlines to recall:

    “Parents kidnap child with intention to force abortion”

    “Pro lifer attacked” [video available below]

    “Pregnant teen forced to drink turpentine”.
    I can give you many more examples- maybe you should make sure your own side is squeaky clean before you throw mud at ours?


  • prochoiceferret

    The person who stole your wallet and doesn’t mind if women have abortions? Pro-choice larceny!


    The man who bumped into you in line and thinks feminism isn’t so bad? Pro-choice assault!


    The guy who killed his wife because she was cheating on him, and gave money to John Kerry’s presidential campaign? Pro-choice murder!


    Here, let me join in the fun:


    ConcernedMom, you seem like a very nice person… FOR ME TO POOP ON!!!


    There, I just committed pro-choice harassment. Please update your number to 8,520.

  • crowepps

    An interesting viewpoint, since I clearly remember that the reason the cops had so much trouble laying hands on Eric Rudolph that he was being helped by the local ProLife people who felt his bombings and murderers were justified, and that when the various ProLife roadshows come to town they get free room and board in the homes of local ProLife people who are thrilled to have a little vicarious self-righteousness rub off hile they plan  their arsons and bombings.


    The devil practices to decieve … especially if it puts REAL Christians in a bad light.

    Yes, which is why it bothers me that you combine your self-labeling as a ‘real Christian’ with posts that are just dripping with nastiness of all sorts.  Talk about your ‘bad light’ – you spread darkness wherever you go.

  • saltyc

    CM wouldn’t count a violent boyfriend who murders his pregnant girlfriend as a pro-choice activist, now would she? Because that would be extremely dishonest, agreed?  An activist would have to speak some of the movement’s key talking points, as Scott Roeder did cite central anti-choice tenets for his defense in his murder trial after he killed Dr. George Tiller. You wouldn’t count any random acts violence with some connection to pregnancy or abortion as “pro-choice violence against pro-lifers” would you now?

    None of those people who kidnap or force their will on a pregnant woman is part of a pro-choice movement.

     And just because someone reacts strongly to one of your side carrying bloody, gory images that contain fighting words and inflammatory language, doesn’t make him or her a pro-choice activist. (although that woman in the prolifer attacked video was awesome, I have to say.)

  • crowepps

    CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va.—A Virginia lacrosse player suspected of killing a member of the women’s team told police he shook her and hit her head repeatedly against a wall, according to a court document in the case. … Police said the suspect, George Huguely, told them he had an altercation with Love and had kicked in her bedroom door. … “Huguely stated that he and Love had been in a relationship and that the relationship had ended,” the document said. … Earlier Tuesday, his lawyer, Francis Lawrence, said he was confident the death was not intentional. … “We are confident that Ms. Love’s death was not intended, but an accident with a tragic outcome,” Lawrence told reporters. He did not elaborate and said he would have no further comment.

    I know it’s a legal entitlement, but sometimes I just really dislike lawyers. This little creep kicked in her door, shook her repeatedly, banged her head into the wall repeatedly, but, oh, golly, it was all an ACCIDENT! He just kept accidentally hitting the wall with her head and then left her unconscious and bleeding at die.

  • saltyc

    According to CM’s link, he might have been a unionist, (was she wearing sweatshop products?) a gay rights activist (was she heterosexual?) or an animal rights activist. Maybe she had just eaten a ham sandwich.

    See, the left is prone to irrational violent mayhem, whereas the “pro-life” side wisely limit its targets to actual abortion doctors and staff, which, also according to that website, is entirely justified.

    Funny that, CM distances herself from the violence inherent in her movement, then links to a website that does justify that violence.

  • crowepps

    Well, there are about 100,000 forcible rapes REPORTED in the United States every year, and of course ALL of those rapists obviously are trying to FORCE those women to be impregnated and to stay that way, so all those rapists must be ProLife, right?  So that means being ProLife is equivalent to thinking rape is wonderful, right?


    Sometimes your ‘logic’, or the lack of it, really gets to me.  Or, for that matter, your gullibility.  Going to find ‘statistics’ on a ProLife website is like assuming there must be a pony in the pile of manure.

  • prochoiceferret

    This little creep kicked in her door, shook her repeatedly, banged her head into the wall repeatedly, but, oh, golly, it was all an ACCIDENT! He just kept accidentally hitting the wall with her head and then left her unconscious and bleeding at die.

    Wow! What’ll those crazy pro-choice activists do next?

  • concernedmom

    When it comes to debunking & bashing your opposition, you have that market cornered, I must declare.
    When it comes to speaking with passion to defend the unborn, stepping on the toes of those that marginalize the value of unborn children goes with the territory, unfortunetly.

  • concernedmom

    You quack me up! So funny how you try to excuse REAL FACTS & STATISTICS as “imaginary”? But that’s only if it runs against this “cause” you feel so [umm, dare I say] SELF RIGHTEOUS about?? Let’s face it, when it comes to dishing out the “poop”…you’ve got that base covered!!

    P.S. I love you too!

  • crowepps

    When it comes to debunking … your opposition, you have that market cornered, I must declare.

    As for bashing, I don’t think so. I’ll stand on my record as contained in my posts as compared to yours any day.

  • concernedmom

    “Non of those people who kidnap or force their will on a pregnant woman is part of a pro choice movement.”

    Really? Then why is it so hard for you to accept it when I get upset when so many times you say the same thing (erroneously) about those claiming to be “pro life” while committing acts of violence??!

    Shame on you.

  • concernedmom

    I should have gone to one of those anti life sites that would enlighten me to all their perfectly legitimate & credible statistics?

    Okay, then give me the same statistics on crimes against pro life activists that ISN’T on a pro choice website. I’ll be sure & get back on Google to search for impartial sites that carry a few items like the ones I referred to on

  • crowepps

    Actually, if you want accurate statistics, you’re going to need to look at neutral sources, like scientific studies or sociological research or crime rates.


    “Give me the same statistics” from another source? Can’t be done because those statistics are manufactured.


    When a guy who doesn’t want to pay child support kills the girlfriend he’s gotten pregnant, or the guy who’s cheating on his wife kills his pregnant mistress, that isn’t because either of them are ProChoice — it’s because they’re users with no intention of allowing some woman to inconvenience them.


    When women who have post partum psychosis kill their infants it isn’t because they’re ProChoice but instead because they are insane.

  • concernedmom

    My link advocates violence? It shows only what the “lunatic fringe” are doing under the banner of “pro choice” to those who are Pro Choice. Of course those comitting these acts are just as WRONG and REPULSIVE REGARDLESS of which side they claim is behind their actions. Gimme a break!

  • jayn

    Show me a news article about someone bombing a CPC.  Show me a pro-choice website that condones harassment of pregnant women.  Show me a prominent pro-choicer calling their opponents ‘evil’, ‘devil-worshippers’, ‘child-killers’, or other hateful language.  Show me a pro-life activist being routinely harassed at work, at home, who has their family threatened, who has to wear a bullet-proof vest to be safe at their job.


    I’m not so naive as to say there’s never been pro-choice related violence, but the pattern of actions so far show the pro-life side to be pretty good at inciting acts of violence.

  • concernedmom

    [trouble with people coming in room while I’m writing]

    I MEANT in above paragraph:

    “It shows only what the ‘lunatic fringe’ are doing under the banner of PRO CHOICE to those who are PRO LIFE.”

  • saltyc

    By pro-lifers,


    for instance

    In conclusion, pro-abortion claims that they respect the consciences of pro-lifers are laughable, since they condemn every type of pro-life activism without exception.
           And then these same people express outrage and shock when frustrated “pro-lifers” firebomb an abortion mill.
           Pro-abortionists have never learned the lesson taught by John F. Kennedy and so many others: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.”


    “Pro-life” violence is almost always directed at the burning and destruction of abortion mills. In fact, clinic bombers have explicitly testified that they carried out their activities in the middle of the night to avoid hurting anyone. As shown in the comparison above, the vast majority of pro-abortion violence is directed against human beings. This is logical. If a movement can advocate the killing of millions of inconvenient or unwanted preborn people, its members will naturally extend this killing to born people.



  • saltyc


    Then why is it so hard for you to accept it when I get upset when so many times you say the same thing (erroneously) about those claiming to be “pro life” while committing acts of violence??!

    I can accept your getting upset. But the reason I feel justified in placing Scott Roeder and others like him in your movement is that they explicitly cite “pro-life” rhetoric during their defense trials, and this hasn’t been universally condemned by the most influential “pro life” organizations.

  • concernedmom

    Those websites you referred to are all blogs. I was talking about media AS IN national newswires.

  • concernedmom

    Harland James Drake? He’s the dude that opened fire on a peacefully picketing (Pro Life) old man, JAMES PUILLON. Funny bout the timing too- right after the Tiller murder. Would Harland J. Drake qualify as a “pro choice looney”? Or would you suppose he didn’t have anything against Pro life folks & would’ve killed Mr. Puillon anyway?? Hmm.

  • ahunt

    Research, CM.


    Reports are that three people were “targeted,” and that spree killer James Drake is simply a murderer. Look it up.

  • concernedmom

    It HAS been condemned by ALL authentic PRO LIFE organizations to NEVER use violence toward the opposition. People who do are acting out of derranged vigilante motivations, NOT with the blessing of Pro Life Organizations!

  • crowepps

    Jame Pullion was outside a SCHOOL with his disgusting, obscene chopped up baby photos, and the shooter opened fire because his mother had expressed the view of the majority of Americans that those kinds of photos were NOT APPROPRIATE viewing for children.  Other than that, we have no information at all about either his or his mother’s opinion on abortion.  Maybe Drake and his Mom are both fervently ProLife and just think the PHOTOS are disgusting.

  • crowepps

    Well, golly, it’s really hard for the rest of us to divide up the ‘authentic’ nonviolent organizations from the ‘radical’ violent organizations, since they all SOUND THE SAME and use exactly the same “MURDERERS” rhetoric.

  • jayn

    Even if Drake were to be exposed as pro-choice, what happened to Pullion is a drop in the bucket compared to what Tiller and other abortion providers have had to deal with.


    Nice try, but you’ve got a helluva way to go to show that our side is half as violent as yours, CM.

  • colleen

    Would Harland J. Drake qualify as a “pro choice looney”?

    He would qualify as a ‘loony’ but not as pro-choice. He had no ties to the pro-choice community or any pro-choice organizations. He was initially declared mentally incompetent to stand trial but, having recovered from his psychotic episode, was recently tried for the two murders he committed and received a sentence of life imprisonment. Mr Drake apologized and expressed remorse for his crimes at his sentencing hearing.
    Like men who murder their inconveniently pregnant wives and girlfriends or parents who make their inconveniently pregnant daughters drink turpentine, Mr Drake was not ‘pro-choice’ and had no ties to the pro-choice community.

    The man who killed Dr Tiller, Scott Roeder, was also tried and convicted. Mr Roeder did not apologise for his crime; He expressed no remorse and said he would do it again.
    Likewise Mr Roeder’s associates including various members of Operation Rescue, are being investigated by the FBI. Scott Roeder’s visitor’s list while in prison was described as a Who’s Who’ of pro-life ‘leadership’ and I hope that their involvement with this man provides many leads for the authorities. After all, we wouldn’t want to see further violence, now would we….

  • mechashiva

    Others do bring up valid points that the people who try to force abortions on women are not pro-choice. It isn’t just a matter of actions-fitting-within-the-ideology either. These people are not activists the way that the pro-life terrorists are. They are not affiliated with pro-choice groups, have not participated in pro-choice campaigns, and their criminal motives were not based on their interpretation of pro-choice ideology. Anti-abortion violence statistics are based primarily on incidents that involve pro-life activists who are actually affiliated with pro-life organizations/campaigns/etc.


    Even if pro-life terrorists are crazed lunatics, they are still pro-life activists. Drake was a crazed lunatic, but he was not a pro-choice activist. I don’t doubt that pro-choice activists have harrassed pro-life activists during protests, but I have never heard of a pro-lifer being injured by a pro-choice activist. As for the video on the site, it appeared to be someone whose primary motive was stealing a sign, not trying to injure the protester.

  • squirrely-girl

    I guess this is one of my biggest issues of bringing God into the debate in the first place. There are SO MANY interpretations of God and his message that people are absolutely bound to disagree.


    So anytime somebody whips out God, Jesus, or bible passages to support their position, all I hear is “wah wah wah wah.” This doesn’t mean I don’t believe in God, it means I don’t want some person’s individual interpretation of God to be the basis of legal decisions… especially when I can’t be certain that this individual isn’t one of the crazy Jesus freak types.


    There’s no litmus test for the crazy Christians versus the “regular” Christians – more evidence for why there is separation of church and state…



  • jayn

    Religious arguments are especially weak for people who don’t adhere to traditional Christian lines of thought, either because they’re of a different religion or because they’ve broken away from organised religion entirely.

  • catseye71352

    Do you even have a clue how ridiculous you sound?