Christian extremist certainly do use terrorist tactics. That's what I call it when they harass people who want to have a legal medical procedure done, or when they make threatening and hateful phone calls to people, bomb clinics, set them on fire and shoot doctors. All those acts are acts of terrorism!

So, let me know when you are going to wipe them out, Eric, because I want a front row seat.

Please let me help you sort out your thoughts here. You listed several acts:

Harassment
Hateful phone calls
Threatening phone calls
Arson
Bombing clinics
Shooting doctors

Are you lumping all those actions/crimes into one basket, and telling me that if I don't call for their immediate death, I'm being inconsistent?

I'm not ready to wipe anyone out, Muslim, Christian, or Atheist, or other, for harassment (also known as exercising freedom of speech in most cases.) The same goes for nasty phone calls. There are laws against that, and anyone who makes harassing phone calls I want prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

BTW, I haven't caught news of any abortionists being murdered recently. When was the last one?

I'd like to see more of these people who work at abortion mills exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. It'd be nice hearing about an attempted abortion mill bombing or attempted murder, where the intended victim defended themselves and shot the would be murder/arsonist before they could do any harm.

Good question, look at the 19 who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. Many of them were from well-off families, well educated, and didn't become extremists until they were adults. I know at least one of them wasn't exposed to extremist teachings until he was studying in Europe. Bin Laden himself came from a family that was extremely successful. He left a lot behind in order to pursue his life of terrorism.

Here's some info for you, There are dates and names included as well as a range of specific acts.
Abortion-related violence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Referring to them as 'mills' does not change the fact they are medical clinics where medical professionals provide legal medical services.

Thanks for the link. Care to offer an answer to those questions I asked you in my last post?

I'm not sure

This one I gave you the link to

I don't see any more questions to answer

Are you saying you would like to see an old fashioned shoot-out like we have going on a larger scale in Iraq?

When you're sure, get back to me. We can continue to discuss. Looks like their hasn't been a murder since long before 9/11.

Who poses a great threat to the country - abortion clinic bombers or islamic terrorists?

You still don't seem to be sure what you're talking about. How about we continue this tomorrow when you have a clearer head?

It seems you may be suggesting that you only adopted this moral principal or posture since 9/11. Is that an accurate interpretation of what you have written?

They both pose great threat to our freedom in my view.

As for your insinuation that I don't seem to know what I'm saying; I am completely aware of my words and use thereof, you are just simply not sure how to interpret them (know what you are (virtually) hearing). Let's not try to get into each others head, Eric (you've said you don't like doing that, didn't you?). Instead, why not stick to exchanging views? Asking questions for clarification in one thing and attributing intent to the other person is another. Seem fair to you?

What poses the greatest threat is our reaction to terrorism, more than either of those acts. If our reaction alters our way of life, alters our way of thinking, reduces our liberty, and promotes xenophobia, we've done more damage than the terrorism ever could. I don't see how any violence required us to immediately start experimenting with radical changes to our society.

Sorry if I'm veering from the topic...

Converting to or from a religion will do nothing. I see religion as mainly a channel through which people express themselves, rather than the reason they feel the way they feel. We need to change the underlying dynamics behind the feelings, not the channel through which they are expressed. And so I don't sound too weak on terrorism... I do believe we should vigorously fight back. Not for or against a religion, it should be for our way of life and against a threat to it.

Do you think that merely converting people from Islam would cause peace to break out?

Starting with your last question: Islam needs to go through the same transformation as Christianity did centuries ago. I honestly have no problem with who they pray to, I just don't want people running around who believe its their duty to tell people to convert or die.

In Bin Laden's world - converting will keep you alive. You have to understand the context here. In his most recent tape (assuming its even real) he gave the ultimatum to convert or face war with them. But all the "atheists" would rather bitch four words on a dollar bill or christmas trees on the courthouse lawn.

Regarding your first point. Ok, you say the current response to Ilamofascism is wrong. Tell me how you want to deal with the people who want to hack your head off. You guys need to remember, these animals aren't just mad at Republicans, they hate gays, treat women like cattle, etc, and so on. They won't give you a pass for being liberal - they might even hack your head of quicker. So tell me your solution.

I've always personally disagreed with things like cutting the clitoris off young girls, forcing people to convert to a religion, treating women like cattle, etc, and there was an awareness that these extremists were running around killing innocents in the name of their religious beliefs, but yeah, seeing over 3000 of my countrymen slaughtered put a fresh perspective on things. While I wouldn't say my moral principles are much different than they were seven years ago, how seriously I take the threat is.

You mean if I show them my MoveOn.org credentials they won't make me honorary mullah? ;-)

Fighting them where they were when they attacked us made a lot of sense. Giving up before the job was done and drawing them in elsewhere made no sense. Changing laws that protect important rights made no sense when there were means to achieve the same things within the law. (digression alert)

I'm not saying we shouldn't vigorously fight, spy, eavesdrop, and use whatever tools make sense. I'm saying we didn't need to preemptively alter a couple of hundred years of law to do it. If we need a dirty trick, or even torture, to get the job done, it still doesn't need to be legitimized for general use. In war people often have to do things that are legally questionable to get the job done. But we don't (usually) change our general standards just in case it will come in handy.

The word "islamofascism" just sounds wrong. It implies a possible causal link between the religion and fascism. It also implies the terrorists are a state, not that Wikipedia proves anything. We need to more precisely focus on the actual problems, not the religion, not inapplicable names, and not a general anti-jihad-jihad against the Middle East.

You liberals need to get out of "bitch and complain" mode. Your team is in the drivers seat next November. I asked for your solution - not more bitching about what this administration is doing.

Jeeezus there's no way to please you guys. You won't let me be lazy and just call them Muslims, so I specify exactly which Muslims I'm talking about so as not to confuse the fascist ones with the benign one, and you still bitch.

It is entirely applicable. How wouldn't it be? Their religious beliefs drive what they do. Why is that hard for you to swallow? BTW, aren't you one of the proud atheists?

Anyway, when you go to war, there has to be a "who" to fight. After Pearl Harbor was attacked from the air we didn't go to war against aviation and pilots, we went to war against the Japanese. The "who" we are fighting now are Islamofascists, Muslim extremists - what do you want to call them?

Please do not stereotype me. I have voted Republican just a little less than Democrat, and also voted for independents a number of times. Pigeon-holing people may make it easier for you to deal with differing opinions. Fine. But at least don't try to convince others that I am what I am not, since you don't know me.

As far as "bitching" goes, sorry if I was off-topic. But you have to understand where it comes from. When our government takes a complete "screw you" attitude toward the majority there's just a lot of anger that gets vented, appropriately or inappropriately. And my crack "team" in Washington is a complete waste of air space, as far as I can tell.

You like careful word use. So do I. I don't like "Islamofascist" because it was coined for a propagandistic effect. It's inaccurate and doesn't serve a purpose. I don't care what else you call them, as long as it's not what Sean Hannity and his ilk repeat a hundred thousand times a day as a battering ram.

And you're absolutely correct about who we attacked after Pearl Harbor, i.e. the Japanese. What I would have preferred we do is fight the real al Qaeda where they were and are, in Afghanistan. Period.

My entire on-topic point about Islam and peace is that the cause and effect is backwards. Islam doesn't cause war and it won't cause peace. Religions are a banner to fight under. We should address or attack the people misusing the religion, not the religion. As a practical matter, attacking a religion just galvanizes the enemy. They're already using it as a phony excuse, why give them more justification?

Is that what you like to say when people disagree with you or are trying to have some give and take. It is this type of rhetoric that gets you in trouble, Eric. Then you take the victims posture by claiming everyone loves to hate you.

Why not cease trying to define everyone else and stick to your viewpoints?

I'm sure you realize how much easier it is to argue against a two dimensional stereotype than it is to discuss ideas with individuals. Left-leaners call the other side "wingnuts". Right-leaners call them "liberals", since that has become insulting enough in their mind. None of this helps. This is why I have a revulsion to labels like "Islamofascism". It's just a simplistic crutch.

By the way - I've actually changed my viewpoint many times over a lifetime. I discuss and argue not so much to be declared correct, but to learn where I'm off-base, and where I might need to do some more thinking, or at least that's what I like to believe.