andthenyoucankillthebaby.com

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Show Title: andthenyoucankillthebaby.com
Actual Link: andthenyoucankillthebaby.com


This is the show from Tuesday February 12th, 2008.

SUMMARY:

* New Domain Name: You may want to check out a andthenyoucankillthebaby.com to see what can be done by those willing to barter with the lives of children by reducing the inalienable (non-transferable) God-given right to life to a second-tier negotiable matter. And see what can be done by others who just say no to those who pass laws that say andthenyoucankillthebaby:

* Johnny from Compton California: one of Bob Enyart's all-time favorite callers, pointed out correctly (although Bob was a bit slow to acknowledge Johnny's point) that we Christians need to warn others that Barak Obama is a child killer who promotes abortion. Bob completely agrees with Johnny, of course. But he made the point that the BEL audience, which after all is the brightest audience in the country, needs to be alerted to pro-choice candidates who nonetheless get endorsed by Christian pro-life leaders, and that the vast majority of our audience is very aware that every leading democrat (like most Republicans) rejects the God-given right to life of the unborn!

* South Carolina Pro-lifers: are moving ahead with their own personhood amendment! Bill: H.3284, the "Right to Life Act of SC"

Where: Room 511, Blatt House Office Building, SC State House complex, Columbia
When: Thursday, February 14, at 9:00 AM
Legislative body: Constitutional Laws Subcommittee of the SC House Judiciary Committee: www.scstatehouse.net/html-pages/housebios.html

Chair, Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester) - fgd@schouse.org
Rep Thad Viers (R-Myrtle Beach) - ViersT@schouse.org
Rep. Jim Harrison (R-Columbia) - HJU@schouse.org
Rep. Creighton Coleman (D-Winnsboro) - cbc@schouse.org
Rep. Fletcher Smith (R-Greenville) - FNS@schouse.org
Note: Both Rep. Delleney and Rep. Viers are co-sponsors of H.3284 (see below).

The Right to Life Act of SC vests legal personhood at fertilization with no exceptions, thereby invoking the constitutional protections of due process and equal protection for legal "person," thereby ending legalized abortion (child-murder) in South Carolina. www.scstatehouse.net/sess117_2007-2008/bills/3284.htm

H. 3284 STATUS INFORMATION
General Bill

Sponsors: Reps. Davenport, Vick, Huggins, Bingham, Toole, Hamilton, Leach, Shoopman, G.M. Smith, Bedingfield, Simrill, Littlejohn, Owens, Rice, G. Brown, Barfield, M.A. Pitts, E.H. Pitts, Loftis, J.R. Smith, G.R. Smith, Weeks, Whitmire, Viers, Pinson, Talley, Mahaffey, Duncan, Mulvaney, Cato, Walker, Lowe, White, Spires and Delleney

Article 5 Right to Life

Section 1-1-310. This article may be cited as the 'Right to Life Act of South Carolina'.
Section 1-1-320. The right to due process, whereby no person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and the right to equal protection of the laws, both of which rights are guaranteed by Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution of this State, vest at fertilization."
SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.

Thanks guys for serving the Lord and the innocent in South Carolina! Great job!

Today's Resource: For our annual February telethon to keep Bob Enyart broadcasting for the next year, instead of listing a BEL resource that you can benefit from, we're listing a resource you may have that can help BEL stay on the air to reach more people through 2009! Donations. If you value the influence of BEL, please consider sacrificially giving a non-tax deductible one-time or recurring monthly gift either online, or by subscribing online to one of our monthly resources, or by calling us at 800-8Enyart!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Adam

New member
Hall of Fame
I appreciate the efforts of the redirecting domain, but...

I don't think people are smart enough to get it. The 'and then you can kill the baby' phrase was launched by Colorado pro-lifers and needs some explaining itself before people will understand. Taking them to nrlc.org will make it look like backwards marketing done by the NRTL. Similar to the way that some Christians sites will use words like porn and sex in their keywords to draw people in to the Gospel message.

Please correct my understanding of this situation if I'm wrong.
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I appreciate the efforts of the redirecting domain, but...

I don't think people are smart enough to get it. The 'and then you can kill the baby' phrase was launched by Colorado pro-lifers and needs some explaining itself before people will understand. Taking them to nrlc.org will make it look like backwards marketing done by the NRTL. Similar to the way that some Christians sites will use words like porn and sex in their keywords to draw people in to the Gospel message.

Please correct my understanding of this situation if I'm wrong.
I agree that something more useful and clear could be done with that domain name.
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
So, they're exposing themselves?

NRLC? No. Did you miss the word "not" in my post that you just quoted?

Turbo said:
The domain name andthenyoucankillthebaby.com is not owned by NRLC, of course.

I think another part of your confusion comes from you using pronouns without clarifying their antecedents. Earlier you asked, "That's not an actual NRLC site, is it?" You didn't specify whether your "That" was referring to andthenyoucankillthebaby.com or nrlc.org (the site that andthenyoucankillthebaby.com redirects to). So Wamba thought you were asking about the destination site (nrlc.org), not andthenyoucankillthebaby.com
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
NRLC? No. Did you miss the word "not" in my post that you just quoted?
No. I knew the "andthenyoucankillthebaby.com" was not owned by NRLC. And I thought it was funny that it redirected to NRLC's actual site. Then I read the site that it redirected to, and found it to expose the NRLC.

I think another part of your confusion comes from you using pronouns without clarifying their antecedents. Earlier you asked, "That's not an actual NRLC site, is it?" You didn't specify whether your "That" was referring to andthenyoucankillthebaby.com or nrlc.org (the site that andthenyoucankillthebaby.com redirects to). So Wamba thought you were asking about the destination site (nrlc.org), not andthenyoucankillthebaby.com
Wamba was right. I was asking about the destination site. They expose themselves on their own site.

"National Right to Life applauds
U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act
"

After the exposure of the wickedness of that act, and it's fraudulence, why would they continue to admit that they support it?
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
No. I knew the "andthenyoucankillthebaby.com" was not owned by NRLC. And I thought it was funny that it redirected to NRLC's actual site. Then I read the site that it redirected to, and found it to expose the NRLC.


Wamba was right. I was asking about the destination site. They expose themselves on their own site.
OK. I guess I was the one who was confused. :idunno:

"National Right to Life applauds
U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act
"

After the exposure of the wickedness of that act, and it's fraudulence, why would they continue to admit that they support it?
They're just staying the course. The vast majority of pro-lifers still have absolutely no idea about what was actually in the Gonzalez v. Carhart ruling. They don't even know that there is controversy over it among pro-lifers. And NRLC certainly isn't going to tell them!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top