Pages

Search Ratttler

Friday, August 25, 2006

THE TRUE BELIEVER

Last night I found out a hell of a lot more about Conservative Atheist than I ever wanted to know. We all knew already that he is an unrepentant, ignorant racist. But it turns out that he is also a fanatical anti-choice zealot. And like most fanatics, he is firmly convinced of his own righteousness, and cheerfully dispenses with the existance of those he deems unworthy. Sound familiar? Osama bin something...

I'm not going to lower this blog by linking to his vile site, but I'll tell you that he has put up photos he takes at abortion clinic protests. If you ask around SI, I'm sure someone will know the link, but you won't get it from me. The most damning were photos of the license plates of vehicles. Now, we all know that the only reason to post such photos is so that dangerously unbalanced people can use the info to harass and potentially injure or kill those people. I'm not going to put those people in any more danger. In response, CA was dismissive:

Conservative Atheist: whatever happens happens
Conservative Atheist: I hold them accountable by exposing them to their family, friends, and communioty that they live in
Conservative Atheist: they choose to have those abortions
Conservative Atheist: I cant control what other do
Conservative Atheist: I simply take the pics and post them
Conservative Atheist: any person going in and out of the Abortion Clinics whether a Patient or someone doing business with the Abortion Clinic will have their pics taken and posted for the world to see
Conservative Atheist: any women that go in for Abortion in Cleveland better be prepared to have their pics posted on the Net

What is most disgusting, and most frightening, is that CA accuses liberals of being immoral, without any insight into how potentially destructive his actions are.

If he lived in a city with roving guerilla terrorists, what would he say?

"I saw the terrorists without reporting them, but I didn't help them directly..."

Or: "I let them stay at my house, but gave them no information..."

Or: "I told them who to kill, but gave them no guns..."

Or: "I gave them guns and locations, but didn't go myself..."

At what point on that slope do you realize you are culpable? You cannot give others the information used to do harm without being stained yourself. Don't you understand that if someone from your photos is hurt, YOU, Conservative Atheist, are to blame? Most people viscerally understand this, but zealots do not. You'll have his blood on your hands.

What is most sickening is that CA gives us the refrain of every terrorist: They are bad, so they deserve what they get. And he calls us immoral.

JC

4 comments:

Livid said...

My questions are these! Aren't there some sort of laws or regulations which deal with putting peoples' lives in danger? Is the right to privacy being badly damaged by the photos CA takes and airs, and isn't this right to privacy protected by the Constitution?

A few years back I was a "fairly" frequent visitor to a room in a social sector of PT where people not only used the mics but commonly their webcams.

Someone took snapshots of the folks using the cams and placed them on a website. This was bothersome to some people in the room, and enough so that the management and ownership of the room became involved in trying to have the offending site removed. Paltalk did nothing to help, but ultimately the management contacted the FBI and whatever web unit in which the pictures were shown and the site was taken down. That's the extent of my "certain" knowledge of this incident, but I also "heard" the people who took the pictures without permission and later placed them on the website were charged and convicted (for what I don't recall).

It seems to me this situation is similiar and in some ways, possesses much more peril for those involved. To me CA is intentionally and knowingly putting these people at risk, and if there's not a law dealing with that, there should be.

I'd like to see this issue tracked and investigated to see if there isn't something we can do to stop this, and to punish CA for his activity. Any thoughts?

Just_April1974 said...

CA is your typical hypocritical, controlling, celf-centered, shallow, narrow minded, psychopath. A man who admits to sticking his nose in the lives of others, stalking them to a place where they go to recieve private health care, and then procedes to trample on their right to a CONFIDENTIAL MEDICAL TREATMENT by posting their personal information and location on the internet. I wonder how CA would feel if he contracted the AIDS virus, or a sexually transmitted disease from his wife/girlfriend/boyfriend, or whatever, and went to recieve treatment, and someone on their "Soapbox" decided that HE was the terrible, evil one and exposed HIS information on the net? I'm betting, with his personality he would be so enraged, he would be seeking that person out to cause them harm. This man is so ill he cannot even see how HE has become the criminal who is victimizing others who are recieving LAWFUL medical treatment that is NONE of his damn business! I hope he someday remembers, that what goes around, DOES eventually come back around!


Just my thoughts.

vacreeper2003 said...

To answer your question livid, so far as I understand the law. If CA posts such photographs with the intent of bringing harm to these employees and customers, he can be charged with "accessory" to whatever crime is committed against the employees/customers. He could also be charged with "depraved indifference" if, as he says, he doesn't care about the consequences of his acts. I'm sure there are a gizillion other laws that can be thrown at CA, but much of that is dependent upon locality. He may even be liable under the Patriot Act as pandering terrorism if his goal is to subvert the laws of the United States.

CA would have a difficult time trying to convince a court he is exercising some kind of religious freedom since he calls himself "Conservative Atheist" and from a purely religious perspective, Atheism harbors no ill will against the legal practice of abortion one way or the other.

From my vantage point - CA has a big mouth and a small brain to go with it. I put absolutely zero credence in anything he has to say.

Michelle said...

JC or any other person that feels that CA has crossed the line with privacy issues concerning abortion, please contact me and I will give you the number for the national security director for NAF. His name is Chris Quinn. I talked to him about CA's website and viewed it with him. He said he is a borderline threat, but will alert the clinics that he recognized about the privacy issues. He did say if their were severe threats, such as him giving out specific information about patients or doctors to contact him with that information. Or any other sites that he passes along that contain private information. So, it is being looked into. Unfortunately, like he said, everyday peope do not realise that they are being placed on the net, and there are thousands of them. Hopefully, these clinics will make people aware that they are being photographed and perhaps put on the net. Awareness is the key.

Pageviews