Catholic Church Waging War on Women a...

Catholic Church Waging War on Women and Gays

There are 217521 comments on the Fables of the reconstruction story from Oct 30, 2007, titled Catholic Church Waging War on Women and Gays. In it, Fables of the reconstruction reports that:

“Pharmacists must seek to raise people's awareness so that all human beings are protected from conception to natural death, and so that medicines truly play a therapeutic role”

Pope Benedict XVI said Monday that pharmacists have a right to use conscientious objection to avoid dispensing emergency contraception or euthanasia drugs - and told them they should also inform patients of the ... via Fables of the reconstruction

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fables of the reconstruction.

Since: Sep 09

Willow River, Canada

#253133 Jul 29, 2013
Tre H wrote:
You've said a couple times you have nothing more to say about this case.
As new thought entered, I did have more to add.

Since: Sep 09

Willow River, Canada

#253134 Jul 29, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>
Talk about a "scary women" [sic]. Just like you make sh!t up in your mind about me, you are now doing it with the jury. You speculate about what makes sense (to you) and then it becomes fact in your mind, even though you've invented some details yourself and left out some of the REAL details. Like you're writing a book or something that is "based on a true story" but fictionalized to make it more palatable and entertaining for yourself.
Your anger is showing Thomas.

I believe that you are certain Zimmerman got away with murder BECAUSE you thought he killed Trayvon on purpose.

And it is my right to believe that way.

Since: Sep 09

Willow River, Canada

#253135 Jul 29, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>
Last night while channel surfing, I caught the tail end of the movie 'The Green Mile' with Tom Hanks and Michael Clarke Duncan. I'd seen it in full before, but not for a while. I recommend it to any one who may not have seen it.
So, don't get you started on assisted suicide? Ummm, okay... but it is an intriguing topic.
I also believe it's a good movie.

Since: Sep 09

Willow River, Canada

#253136 Jul 29, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>
Talk about a "scary women" [sic]. Just like you make sh!t up in your mind about me, you are now doing it with the jury. You speculate about what makes sense (to you) and then it becomes fact in your mind, even though you've invented some details yourself and left out some of the REAL details. Like you're writing a book or something that is "based on a true story" but fictionalized to make it more palatable and entertaining for yourself.
I never once claimed anything was a "fact." I claimed it was my perspective.

Your perspective on the issue is yours and mine is mine.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#253137 Jul 29, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Greetings Junket.
I also don't agree with the death penalty, but if I was called to jury duty where the death penalty was written into law, I believe I would go. However as talk is cheap, I would only know what would occur if I ever was called to that duty.
I believe (with many safe-guards in place) in assisted suicide, but not in euthanasia.
Don't worry. Many people are summoned to jury duty for a single case, most of which are boring traffic violations or something. The lawyers get to be very picky about jurors and they and the judge can ask potential jurors a number of questions to determine if someone is a suitable juror.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#253138 Jul 29, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Zimmerman was being beaten around the head and face when he shot Trayvon. What would ou have done in his situation?
I would probably fight back with my fists. I don't own a gun, and I don't walk or drive around my neighborhood stalking teenagers hoping to bust someone. I think the police in my town are quite capable of handling things. Even if I had a gun, if I felt I needed to use it, I would probably attempt to injure the person rather than shoot them point blank in the chest.

On the other hand, If I'd already called the police, I would have stayed in my vehicle, as instructed, and waited for them to arrive.

I don't know why it's so hard for some people to understand that a kid is dead who shouldn't be dead, and the person who killed him ought to be held responsible. Otherwise, what you're saying is that it's okay to go out and shoot innocent people without any legal liability.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#253139 Jul 29, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>
What the injuries back up is that there was a physical scuffle. They provide no details as to how the scuffle occurred or who "attacked" whom. Unfortunately, Trayvon is dead and can't tell HIS story.
The bottom line is that GZ was getting the worst of the beating as Trayvon had no injuries and the evidence shows that he was over GZ when he was shot.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#253140 Jul 29, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>
I would probably fight back with my fists. I don't own a gun, and I don't walk or drive around my neighborhood stalking teenagers hoping to bust someone. I think the police in my town are quite capable of handling things. Even if I had a gun, if I felt I needed to use it, I would probably attempt to injure the person rather than shoot them point blank in the chest.
On the other hand, If I'd already called the police, I would have stayed in my vehicle, as instructed, and waited for them to arrive.
I don't know why it's so hard for some people to understand that a kid is dead who shouldn't be dead, and the person who killed him ought to be held responsible. Otherwise, what you're saying is that it's okay to go out and shoot innocent people without any legal liability.
Then you would probably been dead or very badly hurt.

He was never instructed to stay in his vehicle. He was told he didn't have to follow him and he didn't. I have posted the transcript of the 911 call and you keep misrepresenting the situation.

Since: Sep 09

Willow River, Canada

#253141 Jul 29, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know why it's so hard for some people to understand that a kid is dead who shouldn't be dead, and the person who killed him ought to be held responsible.
If I was a defense lawyer I would not want you on a jury.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#253142 Jul 30, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Your anger is showing Thomas.
I believe that you are certain Zimmerman got away with murder BECAUSE you thought he killed Trayvon on purpose.
And it is my right to believe that way.
\

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean.

Of course Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin on purpose. He shot the kid point blank in the chest and doesn't deny it. His claim was self-defense, not that it was an accident, so I don't know what point you're trying to make...

other than you think it's okay to say that you believe that I believe something different than what I've said. I've said repeatedly that I don't believe Zimmerman set out to kill anyone, but Trayvon Martin is dead because he profiled him as a criminal that would otherwise get away.

If you'd like to be dishonest and claim that I believe something other than what I've said, I can't stop you. Yes June, you have a RIGHT to be WRONG up to a point, but I have a right to believe you're dishonest and batsh!t crazy.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#253143 Jul 30, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
The bottom line is that GZ was getting the worst of the beating as Trayvon had no injuries and the evidence shows that he was over GZ when he was shot.
The bottom line is that TM is dead and shouldn't be. GZ exaggerated his injuries. If GZ can 'stand his ground' and claim self-defense, why can't TM? BECAUSE HE'S DEAD. TM was NOT the one pursuing GZ, he was walking home. I believe if GZ didn't have a gun on him they would both still be alive.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#253144 Jul 30, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you would probably been dead or very badly hurt.
Not if I'd stayed in the vehicle and let the police do their job. And if I'd been in a fist fight with TM, I would have some injuries common to fist fights, but no one would have been shot. It's ludicrous to assume he would have killed me, just as it's ludicrous to assume he would have killed GZ.
Ink wrote:
He was never instructed to stay in his vehicle. He was told he didn't have to follow him and he didn't. I have posted the transcript of the 911 call and you keep misrepresenting the situation.
I haven't misrepresented anything. You're splitting hairs as to the language used in telling GZ to say in his car. No matter how it was said it amounts to the same thing. GZ was pretty wound up and cursing to the dispatcher, so they were trying to be polite and calm him down, so they said 'we don't need you to follow him' or something like that. Bottom line, he is not the police, and the police are on their way. If GZ would have let the police do their job, TM would still be alive.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#253145 Jul 30, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
http://misterbillohno.newsvine.com/_news/2013...
If you read the transcript on the 911call objectively you will see thatGZ was not folloing and had lost sight of him as he walked back to his truck to await police.
I hope you're not seriously trying to claim that TM was Following GZ, and not the other way around? Obviously they eventually came into contact with each other. Prior to this, TM was talking to his gf on the phone and walking home, while the armed GZ was out looking to catch an f-ing punk. It's pretty obvious who was following who, unless you're claiming that TM pulled GZ out of his truck, which his defense did not claim.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#253146 Jul 30, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
If I was a defense lawyer I would not want you on a jury.
Which would be your prerogative as a defense lawyer. I would not want a dishonest batsh!t crazy woman on a jury either.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#253147 Jul 31, 2013
Svaha wrote:
<quoted text>
This has been debated ad nauseum over on the Schiavo thread. Basically Mr Schiavo and Mrs Schiavo's parents couldn't agree on what Mrs Schiavo would have wanted for herself so Mr Schiavo put it in the hands of the courts where is was thoroughly investigated for years and years, both sides were allowed to speak and, in the end, the court spoke for Mrs Schiavo as to what she would have wanted for herself. By the way, she was on life supoort, a feeding tube which was withdrawn at her request (through the courts) so it certainly wasn't "euthanasia". The claims she was awake and aware are ridiculous. If that were the case why didn't someone simply ASK her? Lifesite News? About as credible as World News Daily
Looks like you're the one claiming she was awake and aware. How could she request through the courts that she be taken off life support if she wasn't "awake and aware?" Look at what you wrote, lol.

You have it all wrong too. Her husband is the one that wanted her dead. There is no evidence Schiavo wanted her life to end that way.

She was admitted to the hospital with neck injuries. Seems her hubby wanted to cover his a** for trying to choke her to death.
He wanted her dead. Dead people can't recover and they can't talk so creeps like him go to prison.
Svaha

Tampa, FL

#253149 Jul 31, 2013
SherylReal wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like you're the one claiming she was awake and aware. How could she request through the courts that she be taken off life support if she wasn't "awake and aware?" Look at what you wrote, lol.
You have it all wrong too. Her husband is the one that wanted her dead. There is no evidence Schiavo wanted her life to end that way.
She was admitted to the hospital with neck injuries. Seems her hubby wanted to cover his a** for trying to choke her to death.
He wanted her dead. Dead people can't recover and they can't talk so creeps like him go to prison.
If you're interested in the case you may want to educate yourself. Or not. Whatever.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#253150 Jul 31, 2013
Svaha wrote:
<quoted text>
If you're interested in the case you may want to educate yourself. Or not. Whatever.
Educate yourself! You're the one that is clueless on the matter.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#253151 Jul 31, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>\
I don't even know what this is supposed to mean.
Of course Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin on purpose. He shot the kid point blank in the chest and doesn't deny it. His claim was self-defense, not that it was an accident, so I don't know what point you're trying to make...
other than you think it's okay to say that you believe that I believe something different than what I've said. I've said repeatedly that I don't believe Zimmerman set out to kill anyone, but Trayvon Martin is dead because he profiled him as a criminal that would otherwise get away.
If you'd like to be dishonest and claim that I believe something other than what I've said, I can't stop you. Yes June, you have a RIGHT to be WRONG up to a point, but I have a right to believe you're dishonest and batsh!t crazy.
You stated he got away with murder as though had you been on the jury he would have been charged WITH murder.

You became the judge and jury on the case without knowing what was said in the court-room. That's the stuff of vigilantism.

You sided with the one juror who claimed that she was "pressured" to come to her conclusion as though the other juror members were not fair with her.

Your terminology of suggesting that Trayvon being black had a part in Zimmerman's intentions ... referring to the governor as a sleazebag and me as batshit crazy indicate your tactics of bullying if you don't get YOUR way.

Actually Zimmerman might have been referring to all young trouble-makers, white or black, but you took the idea that Trayvon was black as Zimmerman's intention to harass and maybe kill.

If I was a defense lawyer, I would not want you on a jury as you are equivalent to a loose cannon.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#253152 Jul 31, 2013
SherylReal wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like you're the one claiming she was awake and aware. How could she request through the courts that she be taken off life support if she wasn't "awake and aware?" Look at what you wrote, lol.
You have it all wrong too. Her husband is the one that wanted her dead. There is no evidence Schiavo wanted her life to end that way.
She was admitted to the hospital with neck injuries. Seems her hubby wanted to cover his a** for trying to choke her to death.
He wanted her dead. Dead people can't recover and they can't talk so creeps like him go to prison.
The fact that her husband Michael waited so many years to go to court over the issue indicates to me that his intentions were that Terry had spent more than enough years trying to come out of her coma, and that he was going to help (from his own way of perceiving) release her from her living coffin.

My guess is, he spent a lot of money on lawyers because his own conscience was bothering him that he hadn't abided by her wishes earlier.

Had he wanted her dead because he was afraid she would say he was the cause, he would have started immediately trying to have her removed from life support but that was NOT the case.

It's too easy to always judge that people have sinister intentions, when maybe it was anything BUT.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#253153 Jul 31, 2013
After Dianne Downs shot her own children, she came into the emergency where her little girl Christie was struggling to live, and suggested that Christie be removed from life-support.

That sent shivers up the spines of people who were busy trying to save the little girl's life.

Dianne knew that if her daughter lived she would tell that it was Dianne that pulled the trigger.

The part of the case I found of specific interest was that when Christie was able to speak, try as they might they couldn't get Christie to admit it was her mom who pulled the trigger ... until the therapist asked Christie to pretend that SHE was her mom and to do what her mom had done.

They set up a scenario of a car and who sat where and when Christie pretended that she was her mom, she went from window to window around the car and kept pretending she was shooting.

It seemed that when Christie was speaking as herself, she couldn't comprehend the fact that her own mother tried to kill her.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Woman Knocks Over Pope Benedict XVI At Christma... (Dec '09) Feb '17 Phart Athletically 165
News Geffen Records Signs New Artist: Pope Benedict XVI (Jul '09) Feb '17 Phart Piously 33
News The Vatican Embraces Facebook and the iPhone (May '09) Feb '17 Phart Religiously 55
News Dr Zakir Naik invites Pope Benedict XVI for ope... (Oct '06) Jan '17 Serah 14,364
News Pope's Turkish tour a surprising success (Dec '06) Jul '14 fener 20
News Pope Urges Irish Bishops to Confront Abuse (Feb '10) May '13 Highknee Hertz 6
News Poll: Does the pope's statement surprise you? (Nov '10) Mar '13 Sol 78
More from around the web