"Jane Roe" speaks: "I was paid to speak against abortion."
-
What if she was paid to say that?
wrote on 20 May 2020, 04:42 last edited by@Ivorythumper said in "Jane Roe" speaks: "I was paid to speak against abortion.":
What if she was paid to say that?
Well, now it's just a stack of turtles all the way down.
-
wrote on 20 May 2020, 12:37 last edited by Mik
Why would anyone listen to a woman who we already know will say whatever she is paid to say?
Perhaps we should apply that same principle to elections.
-
Why would anyone listen to a woman who we already know will say whatever she is paid to say?
Perhaps we should apply that same principle to elections.
wrote on 20 May 2020, 13:07 last edited by@Mik said in "Jane Roe" speaks: "I was paid to speak against abortion.":
Why would anyone listen to a woman who we already know will say whatever she is paid to say?
Ah, but I quoted Reverend Robert Schenck, the guy who paid the woman to say what he wanted her to say.
-
wrote on 20 May 2020, 13:20 last edited by
He's not a Reverend any more. He renounced his faith, and became a radical leftist. So did she. Once that happens you can no longer believe a words they say. Because one has to be mentally ill or evil, or both, to be a Leftist today.
-
wrote on 20 May 2020, 13:21 last edited by Mik
You are not getting it, Ax. What she said had no impact whatsoever on my view on the subject even before I knew she was paid to say it. I've already seen the devastation choice can cause.
Now that we do know that it changes nothing for me and never did.
-
wrote on 20 May 2020, 13:32 last edited by
Never get in the way of a Democrat killing babies.
-
wrote on 20 May 2020, 13:36 last edited by
"My body, my choice!"
"Then why is the dead body not yours?" -
wrote on 20 May 2020, 13:43 last edited by
What an ugly story. Both sides used her as a tool, and she was playing along. Nobody gave a damn about her as a person or, for that matter, the fate of other expecting mothers and their offspring. It was all about winning.
-
wrote on 20 May 2020, 13:55 last edited by
We only have the word of a former preacher turned radical to support the claim that she was paid. She obviously doesn't view lying as a problem.
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 11:52 last edited by
“She was telling the truth when she supported my position, and lying when not. I will need unassailable evidence to convince me otherwise.”
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 12:00 last edited by
Bottom line? She was what Carville had in mind when he made his hundred dollar bill comment.
-
“She was telling the truth when she supported my position, and lying when not. I will need unassailable evidence to convince me otherwise.”
wrote on 21 May 2020, 12:23 last edited by@jon-nyc said in "Jane Roe" speaks: "I was paid to speak against abortion.":
“She was telling the truth when she supported my position, and lying when not. I will need unassailable evidence to convince me otherwise.”
Who is saying that?
-
@jon-nyc said in "Jane Roe" speaks: "I was paid to speak against abortion.":
“She was telling the truth when she supported my position, and lying when not. I will need unassailable evidence to convince me otherwise.”
Who is saying that?
wrote on 21 May 2020, 12:31 last edited by@Mik said in "Jane Roe" speaks: "I was paid to speak against abortion.":
@jon-nyc said in "Jane Roe" speaks: "I was paid to speak against abortion.":
“She was telling the truth when she supported my position, and lying when not. I will need unassailable evidence to convince me otherwise.”
Who is saying that?
Pretty much everybody.
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 13:46 last edited by
At the time she made those statements there was no reason to believe she was lying. Now there is. Not seeing any conflict in those two positions.
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 14:37 last edited by
You can go one step further and weight the evidence:
- there is no evidence to suggest that she was paid to say X (the "pro-choice" stuff)
- now there is evidence indicating that she was paid to say Y (the "pro-life" stuff)
- there is no evidence to suggest that she is being paid to say Z (her "deathbed confession" saying that she was paid to to say Y, including collaborating confession by the person who paid her)
- there is no evidence to suggest that the collaborating confessor was paid to do so
None of these need to change your conviction on the underlying pro-choice vs. pro-life issue, of course. Still, the evidence favors her "deathbed confession" being true.
Separately, I am also curious if there are verified cases of former "pro-choice" spokespeople confessed to (or having been exposed) as being actually "pro-life" but merely toed the "pro-choice" line in public in exchange for material gains. Maybe there is zero "pro-life" person ever sold out to toe the "pro-choice" line in public?
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 14:47 last edited by
It shouldn't actually matter what one person thinks, whether she's telling the truth or not. Millions of people have had abortions, and millions of people think it's wrong.
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 14:53 last edited by
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 14:59 last edited by
She was a bad girl
Then she was a good girl
Now she appears to be somewhere in between
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 15:06 last edited by
Yet another case of the Left getting caught sucking eggs.
Bwahahahaaaaa
-
wrote on 21 May 2020, 15:58 last edited by
Obviously, her lawyer is a completely unbiased source.