Sniffles is a sniveling, inconsistent blogger who gets their feelings hurt if you don’t accept their word or position as the one and only way. He / she claims to be a Christian, but when you back them into a corner or pose a question which shows their ignorance, they forget to respond. At which time, they move on to argue with others.

So sniveling sniffles, crawl under a rock and drop this lunacy. If you want to make a point, do so without the hatred and pompous attitude.

If you read the PRINT version of this article, you will see that I gave credit to the source cited.
The tag line read:

Bishop David Epps serves as a bishop to Georgia and Tennessee. He is also the founding pastor of Christ the King Church, 4881 Hwy 34 E., Sharpsburg, GA 30277 between Peachtree City and Newnan. Services are held Sundays at 8:00 and 10:00 a.m. Bp Epps is also the Mission Pastor of Christ the King Church in Champaign, IL. He may be contacted at frepps@ctkcec.org. The church has a website at www.ctkcec.org. Much of this article was drawn from www.abortionfacts.com.

It was not included in the online edition but that is not under my control. Perhaps I should have said "72.1%of this article was drawn from www.abortionfacts.com." But i did say, "much." No plagarism here. Credit was given and the source cited. I may be a Marine and a pastor---but I am no thief, sir.

Thanks for noting the omission
in the online version.

Father David Epps

I'll take your word that the PRINT version of the article contains the disclaimer you indicated.

Having said that, in my opinion your column remains guilty of both plagiarism and theft.

A generic toss-off in a byline "Much of this article..." still does not excuse the fact that you lifted 70+% of this weeks column WORD FOR WORD from someone else's research and wordsmithing and presented it as your own.

Now, I realize you are writing an opinion piece and not a scholarly research article. Footnotes and/or endnotes would have been impractical here. Nonetheless, were you to present a side-by-side analysis of your column versus the website you filched your column from, most newspaper editors, journalism professors, heck even high school English teachers would agree that your column this week fails basic Journalism Ethics 101.

Secondly, plagiarism charges not withstanding, unless you obtained permission from the original site, you stole the work in question. The original article clearly states copyright 2006. All rights reserved. Let me ask you this: if you had a "no trespassing" sign on your house, and I nonetheless opened your front door, went into your kitchen and swiped that nice roast beef you and the missus were planning to have for dinner, would you consider that "theft"? Most people would. Is "intellectual theft" of property that much different than "physical theft"? Would I be absolved from my theft if I left you a note on my way out your door saying "Hey, by the way, I took your roast"?

We obviously hold two diametrically opposed viewpoints on your journalistic integrity, or lack thereof. As such, I'd welcome someone like Cal Beverly to weigh in on the relative merit of each of our arguments, and would abide by his professional judgment.

Who knows, I might even be in the wrong here!

Father Epps' entire article is only filled with well-known scripture verses, writings of the early Fathers, and arguments familiar to anyone that attends a pro-life Christian church (e.g., personhood issue, etc.).

Aren't you the same person that recently attempted a goofy smear of Gov. Palin by posting a link to faked (and ridiculously low) SAT scores? Doesn't that make you guilty of calumny?

Did you click the link? Hmm?

Epps copied and pasted virtually the entire article, all the Bible verses (in sequence) together with the original author's commentary.

Theft. plain and simple.

By the way, to actually call me a thief and, again, to accuse me of "theft" when you were in error may actually be considered "libel"--or "slander"--I forget which. Perhaps a local attorney can write in and see if I have a case against my hasty but passionate friend. I probably won't pursue it but it would be interesting to know...hmmmm.

Father David Epps

What a disgrace calling Father David Epps a thief.

I am glad that Cal cleared this up. I think that you still owe Father Epps an apology for calling him a thief.

Cal, obviously we have a rather large disagreement here as to what constitutes intellectual theft.

Can anyone post copyrighted works of others here without permission or is this a "perk" afforded only to your columnists?

Please advise....one of us here is obviously in the wrong.

If, in your professional judgment as an editor and publisher Cal, you believe I am out of line with my accusation, Cal, I will honestly and openly apologize to your columnist.

The original work in question can be found HERE

The bottom of the work in question clearly states "©2006 Heritage House ‘76, Inc.and its licensors. All rights reserved."

There is a disclaimer at the very bottom of the page that further specifies "Most brochures that are © Heritage House ‘76 can be referenced with the author of Michael Monahan."

Since neither Mr. Monahan's authorship or the copyright was referenced in your columnist's work, I feel I have the superior argument here.

Plagarism ? Intellectual theft ? Ask Joe Biden what is is. He has had experience in this area, and it is why he dropped out of one presidential race.

He's back in. It was in all the MSM.

I, do actually, think you are right about the copyright issue. I seem to recall, years ago, when I was writing my thesis that there are very strict ethical and legal guidelines by which one must adhere.

You're correct in that this format is informal and does not require footnotes; however, one should always give credit to their sources when applicable.

I know that with the visual arts (I'm a copyrighted artist), the work , in order to be considered original, must be at least 80% changed from any referrence the artist my have used. For example, if I'm inspired by the work of another artist, my style will respectfully have been influenced by said artist but cannot be more than 80% in similarity.

I don't know if that helps you.

In response to your post: "stay classy dawn" I don't know if you were being sincere or sarcastic. But, you're right about that too. I completely lost my grace with the 'penis tucking' commment. I was trying to be funny and offensive but am truly better than that comment conveyed. I do try to remain respectful with my blogs.

I'll get back to you on the socialist issue. I've been up all night researching Obama's healthcare plan, etc. I've been reminded that when one makes a thesis statement, it is customary to support that statement with research and evidence. Otherwise, it is mere speculation.

We'll continue that conversation later. Good night or, rather, good morning.

One of our fellow bloggers has said that you claim to espouse the Christian faith, so why this invective against one of our co-religionists?

Who has the time (or inclination) to run plagiarism checker software over a local pastor’s blog column in a small town newspaper‘s website? You have to admit, this makes you look slightly unbalanced.

Also, what is up with the Father Epps announces his “absolute failure as a Christian Evangelist” stuff? He seems like he is doing quite well, and his local parish appears very active (and growing) based on the frequent baptisms and confirmations I always read about in the Citizen.

Actually, as a practicing Catholic, I really wish we had a fine man like Bishop Epps (and his parish) in our Church!! Maybe this will happen (soon?) with the on-going turmoil in the Anglican Communion.

In life we sometimes need to choose the lesser of two evils. You speak big and tough. Are you tough enough to watch this very short video? www.durarealidad.com
Bishop Epps has the valor to speak his heart; you throw stones at him. What am I missing!

Yes, sniffles IS one tough dude, gelato. But he possesses sensitivity and compassion towards women and realizes that the difficult decision of whether to go forward, or not, with an unwanted pregnancy should be a woman's decision, as well as her partner's.... not the government.

Viva la compassionate males!!

Father Epps, et al: If you are against abortion, do not have the procedure done. For anyone, christian or otherwise, to vote for an avowed warmonger instead of someone who respects the right of a woman to control her own body because of this issue is completely illogical. Put your efforts into making all children welcome and supported in this society, and when they are, watch the abortion rate plummet. When you can prevent males from impregnating females when it is not practical or acceptable to do so, then consider making regulations regarding forcing women to stay pregnant.

"I can't wait until tomorrow, because I get more lovable every day."

All the anti abortion folks should be required to register as counsellors at abortion clinics around the State and entire U.S. - they could preach their opinions about right to life and for every woman they can convince against having an abortion, they could sign a lifetime contract with the State promising to adopt and financially support every life they save. That would put an end to abortions and all these right to lifers could be saddled for the rest of their lives with unwanted children. This would be a huge relief to the fragile pregnant women and potential grandparents who are unable to emotionally, financially or otherwise raise a child.

I'm afraid doglover those poor girls would be waiting a very long time. These anti abortion groupies don't even like to pay for the kids in need now let alone take on someone else's baby. I always say to the people I know that spew this anti abortion crap, just how many unwanted babies have you adopted, put up or shut up...what do you think they do...a a a a a. Yea, that is what I thought, I tell them.

The ones that talk the most about doing away with abortion rights should adopt at least a dozen of those unwanted rugrats...have you noticed, these are the same anti government people, that is, unless it's about abortion, then they want Government to interfere in a women's right to choose. Go figure..Or maybe it isn't about abortion at all...ummmmmm

Really, when has ending another innocent human's life ever been the decision of an individual, man or woman? Even in times of war there are murderers and they pay the price when caught. You 'ladies' need to get over yourselves. That is not your property growing inside of you, it is a human being. With the rationalization that this is 'your choice', then why stop at the first or second trimester? Why not just suffocate the baby after it is born when it cries too much? Is that baby no longer your property and therefore ending its life your choice? If your Dr confirms that your life is in peril if the child is allowed to grow inside of you, then there is a reasonable argument to abort. If you are the victim of rape, then again there is a reasonable argument. To say that it is simply 'your choice' places you in a position typically saved for despots and murderers.

This is and always has been a moot argument.

Regardless of what anyone else believes, a woman WILL always have the decision of whether or not to complete a pregnancy. A woman never has to tell the man (or anyone at all if the government disallows safe medical abortions). It isn't his decision, as much as a perfect world would involve everyone. So, bring on the laws and the morals and the ethics and the Bible verses. I don't disagree with morals and ethics and the Bible, but the government and the neighbors and other bloggers will never have the ability to prevent abortion. It is always and will always be an individual decision.

So, talk it to death (no pun intended) and kick your feet and pass your laws; you won't change the facts. Abortion is a choice.

ZoeS

"Never love anything that can't love you back."

If we can't sway them with the 'woman's right' argument, then lets fall back to the ever present anarchist argument. Of course abortion is ultimately an individual choice. So is drinking and driving, so is slashing someone in the face because you don't like how they look, so is shooting at someone who cuts you off on the road, so is relieving yourself in front of a school yard, so is forcing yourself on a woman who does not desire your attention. These are all personal choices, they just happen to have penalties associated when one chooses to do what society (that is the community) deem dangerous or abhorrent for the common good. The fact that you might just get away with murdering someone does not make it acceptable, that is apparently unless it is an unborn.

of a technique that I seen used by a carpenter whenever the foreman or other authority would come around where he was working: put a 12 foot board on your shoulder and start spinning around.

"I can't wait until tomorrow, because I get more lovable every day."

I understand that the native American Indian women knew of herbal combinations to terminate a pregnancy that they never told the braves about. I knew of situations when I was in high school in the late sixties where girls went to New York City to get abortions illegally. No one can stop it, and that is why it is really a medical issue, to make it safe.

"I can't wait until tomorrow, because I get more lovable every day."

'nuff said on that issue. alanf33, give your definition of a terminated pregnancy for me please. Does it include the action of the birth control pill that prevents a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall? Does it include a miscarriage that could be blamed on preventable causes? You included a few "ifs". Could there be more? No one is pro abortion, and reasonable people know that there has to be limits on it.

"I can't wait until tomorrow, because I get more lovable every day."

"To say that it is simply 'your choice' places you in a position typically saved for despots and murderers."

Then tell us, alanf33, what should the punishment be for the woman, the murderer as you call her, for choosing to have an abortion, if abortion becomes illegal?? One year imprisonment? Two to five years? How about 20 years for knowingly killing a fetus inside her womb?

Please enlighten us with your legal opinion as to what her punishment should be.

If I were in the legislation business, I might reply to your question Main Stream, but really the point I was making, and that I am sure you understood, was that this 'personal choice' argument is weak and ridiculous. You speak of a 'woman's choice'. What of the father's choice? By definition there is one, and even though the pregnancy could be hidden from him, should he not have a choice? What about prospective siblings? Likewise, they may not know but should they not have a right to know and a right o choose? What about society at large? Should we as a community (a word so often used by the left) be involved in choices that effect the whole? The 'woman's choice' argument as it applies to abortion is the lack of personal responsibility flag flown on its highest flagpole. And this is the sociological point. We tell our daughters that they are equals in out society but then tell them that they have the right, based solely on their gender, to choose life or death for another. This really is a case of simply treating women the way that they have been treated throughout history...since we assume that they cannot control their emotions, they should not be held accountable for their actions. I guess that a woman in a powerful position like Gov. Palin, who never considers abortion even knowing the lifetime struggles she and her husband will endure with their latest child would not qualify as a feminist in most of the left's circles. She has far to much personal integrity.

if men and women were truly created equally. If a man could carry a child then he could determine to have that child and face everything that goes with that decision.. As it is, the male impregnates the female and, if he wishes to do so, moves on with his life with no entanglements. Not so, for the female. She is left to raise this child on her own. "Society" wants to be involved in her choice as to having or not having that child but that is as far as it goes. How much does society do for these young females except throw more and more welfare their way? You also hear that old stand-by that there is always someone to adopt that child--but with the system we have very often those children stay in the system until they are deemed unadoptable. We are fast becoming a nation of absent "baby daddies". They often brag about impregnating many women and producing many children. This has become a symbol of the macho man.

Alan, if you truly want to do something about putting an end to abortions, why don't you establish a truly workable system of teaching young men that the true description of a real man is one who can wait until he marries the person who will become the mother of his children? Teach him that he is responsible for more than that sperm that he is so quick to spread around. Pregnancy should be a two-way street--the person carrying the child and the person who impregnated her. As I have said before-if he kept that rocket in his pocket, there would be no pregnancy. Until this equality is achieved I do not believe we will do away with abortion.

You bring up some great points, carbon. We need to move away from the notion that all the responsibility should fall on to the woman, regarding unwanted pregnancies.

Can you imagine if we, as a society, required all males to harness their penises until they were married and only then could those lil' rascally appendages be free to impregnate their wives, then we could really reduce the number of abortions!

Harness those things, guys, and let's get some REAL laws on the books. Stop impregnating women and walking away from your responsibilities, and the number of abortions will go down... seems like a no-brainer.

Main said the "P" word!!!! Anyways, it takes two to tango. That is, a male and female to do that dance. (I wanted to make this point clear!)

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Ah Main, excuse me. I just checked and I don't have one of those womb thingies.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

you have one of those male appendage thingies-LOL. I just have one question for Alan--how many pregnancies have you yourself personally had? Thought so!

"I just checked and I don't have one of those womb thingies."

You're lucky!

Hey, were you riding your bike on Robinson Road late afternoon today, in a yellow t-shirt?? I thought I saw a fellow that looked like you.

I might ride to the coffee house next Saturday.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

You disgust me. you are a worthless, yes WORTHLESS, piece of sub-human refuse.
(don't expect me to respond to any of your pitiful attempts to come that you will use to try and disparage me or anything I have said.)
You are a waste of precious oxygen)

"Your, yore, you're all idiots." (T.Floyd)

You sure do talk tough!

Why don't say it to my face? Hmmmm?

Saturday October 25th at PTC Starbucks. 9 a.m.

I'll be waiting for you!