Daddy Dearest
18 September 2009 by Bob
While there’s some debate on how to view the recent murder of an anti-abortion protester, the guy’s son actually had some interesting things to say about him:
“It will be impossible for some to believe, but my dad really didn’t care about abortion. He did this to stalk, harass, terrorize, scream at, threaten, frighten, and verbally abuse women. He had a pathologic hatred of women: his mom, my mom, everyone. After my mom finally left him and he lost his favorite punching bag the violence and abuse that was always contained within our 4 walls was unleased on the people of Owosso. My dad used the pro-life movement and 1st Amendments foundations to defend him, support him, and enable him. He fooled them all. He was at the high school because my niece was there, and female family members were always his favorite targets. Again, my dad didn’t care about abortion. He wanted to hurt people, upset people. He enjoyed making people suffer. His goal was to be shot on a sidewalk. His goal was to make someone so angry, to make them feel so terrorized, to make them feel the only way they could make him stop was to kill him. His pro-life stance was the most perfect crime I personally know of. He hid behind the 1st Amendment and was allowed to stalk, terrorise, harass, be obsene, ect. These things are crimes. Offending people isn’t a crime, and having different political views isn’t a crime, but he committed several crimes over the last 20 years and got away with it. Yes I really am his oldest son. Owosso is now rid of a mad man.”
Even though the paper confirmed the source, it could still be the case that his son is lying, or has a beef with him pertaining to something else. But if he’s telling the truth — man! — what a fucking misogynist.
Xianity can lead to misogyny? What are the odds?…
18 September 2009, on 3:11 pm
& it took 1/2 a box of Kleenex to wipe up.
18 September 2009, on 3:37 pm
I was just talking with someone about people who use their religious “status” to bully and terrorize others. Like that son of a friend I wrote about in a recent mailbag post who always seemed like a nice kid, raised in a good home and yet now that he is a grown adult he feels the need to use his religion to bully people. Makes them feel important, cool, or something. Then how many of these people have psychological problems and use religion as a vehicle to vent their aggressions and hatred? And when these deranged people begin to appear as a threat, there are others who will be equally paranoid and want to get him before he does something bad.
As Sean used to say, stop the planet, I wanna get off.
18 September 2009, on 5:59 pm
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Nice.
18 September 2009, on 9:43 pm
KA: Kleenex joke was hilarious, thanks for the belly laugh!
18 September 2009, on 10:25 pm
“Dicky Dearest”?…or…Dearest Dicky?
True or not, RE the son’s story, it’s no big (or small) surprise as to what weird, totally convoluted, mental machinations are set in motion by religion.
A “Potential Human” equation, perhaps? Something like:
“Religion + DNA (genetics) = Totally Unsurprising Bonkerdom”
[A totally falsifiable quasi-scientific equation, no doubt.]
On another note…E flat?…or, if you prefer…D sharp?…
How ’bout a completely nit-picky OT, regarding a minor detail in the article’s text; which, if not a typo, reveals something, at least to me, that always tweaks my warped curiosity when I hear someone use (pronounce) the term…
I’m referring to “ect.”.
As an old, long ago, Ancient Latin student, and fallen away (completely into the dirt?) RCC ex-altar boy, I’ve noticed over the years…especially these days…that many people seem to say: “ex-cetera” instead of etcetera (eX vs. eT); which to me reveals the fact that, understandably, they never studied any Latin in school. I attribute it to the demise of Latin in schools since the time in the 1960s when the RCC dropped using Latin in the “Mass”. I hear it often; even by professional media personalities.
I’ve often surmised that when writing, or reading, the abbreviation for what they ‘hear’ so commonly, they think ex. is the abbreviation. Which may be true in some cases.
But in THIS case…
WRONG!!!
Who would’ve thunk it’d be ect. ?
What!…Try looking that up in your “Funk’n Wagnalls” (Funk & Wagnalls)?
Soooo…Bob?
“Let that be a lesson to you!…?
Ect-cetera?”
19 September 2009, on 1:13 pm
I wonder about guys like this. Did he secretly think he should have been born a woman?
19 September 2009, on 8:13 pm
In honor of it bein’ National Talk like a Pirate Day, let’s put the GifS funniest quote of the year in Pirate language:
” Three days after t’ fight, he told t’ Journal that “t’ Holy Ghost came on me & it took 1/2 a box o’ Kleenex t’ wipe up.”
19 September 2009, on 11:33 pm
^ ^ “Harr…thar be a sticky situation, indeed! Alas..having t’Holy Ghost shiver his timber on ye. I would’ve thought…harr…it might’ve called for several rolls of paper towels to wipe the deck clean. ‘Avast’ I say! Thar possibly also being a viral threat, as well?”
[That last bit, Star, was just a lame way of referring to my current, freebie, somewhat 'pirate reminiscent' virus protect.]
20 September 2009, on 8:27 pm
I totally believe what his son wrote. Abortion protesters do not give a shit about fetuses. They only want to harass women, because they hate them.
The anti-abortion crap is a great thing to hide behind, though, b/c it almost kinda sorta gives the illusion of morality. There’s no slicker bully than the bully who is talking from his moral high horse. Great scam, that.
20 September 2009, on 10:27 pm
The only thing about all this that has me scratching my head is the question of what incident triggered his rampage of hatred. Otherwise, one wonders exactly how this guy managed to get a wife in the first place and produce children. The fact that she left him may indicate his expressive hatred manifested after marriage and children.
Comparatively, I’ve read religious manifestos of misogynists (on forums so old I don’t remember their names) attempting to justify their hatred of women through the Judeo-Christian context. A notable one that has stuck in my mind, due to its absurdity, is that the sin of Eve implanted in Adam (and all future men) the sexual desire for women as some kind of curse. Were it not for the Fall of Man, Adam and Eve would have remained immortal companions; but Eve’s sin created the mortality, and thus the necessary function of sex to reproduce with Adam. The segregation of the sexes prominent in social circles of religion can surely account for this degree of fear and misunderstanding. I even recall a guy cursing the graceful body of woman for giving him an erection, and that jacking off to porn is a means of quickly cleansing his body of the sin. Like I said, absurd.
21 September 2009, on 2:33 am
^^Marcy
I don’t think I can entirely agree with you. The son may be spot-on in this case but I don’t think all anti-choicers are disingenuous about their concern about fetuses. Some of them even care about “post-fetus” women, just not as much as they care about embryos. There-in lies the problem. Calling yourself “pro-life” when you believe the “rights” of the fetus supercede that of the woman is laughable.