Response to comment [from a Christian]: "I have been called a "liar" by another poster on TOL. I have not lied on this web site.  To be called a liar is terribly insulting and demeaning even though it is untrue.  We may misunderstand each other or do a poor job of communicating our thoughts but that can be cleared up by people of good will.  We are not defined by the words of others, but, insults and slanders may be taken for truth by newcomers.  So, one must address such slanders even though the likelihood of a change in view by the slanderer is unlikely..."

This is to be expected (Mt 24:9, Pr 6:16,19). They won't get away with it (Ro 14:12).

Response to comment [from a Catholic]: "...[S]uppose I accuse someone of supporting abortion just because they don't vote [R]epublican and I say this after they say they are against abortion

does that make me a liar?"

Yes.  You would be misrepresenting their position in that case.  They are against the RePublican party while remaining pro-life.

Response to comment [from a Catholic]: "But I believe that voting Republican is the only way to address the problem of abortion and have stated my reasons many times..."

Strawman

Response to comment [from a Christian]: " By his peculiar reasoning he's a baby killer. But he doesn't self examine worth a darn."

If you support abortion, Plan B, etc. I think it's fair to call you a child-killer (Pr 23:7). If you won't vote RePublican because you believe they are Democrat light, I think it's unfair to call you a child-killer. Are you pro-life? Rusha, are you?

Why don't we let people tell us what their position is.

Response to comment [from other]: [Re: Chrysostom] "And you wonder why individuals refer to you as being intentionally dishonest and deceitful..."

Or ignorant (not an insult just uninformed).

"NRTL Doesn't Need "One More" Justice: They need five. To get a pro-life majority on the U.S. Supreme Court we need, not one, but five more Justices. More than thirty years of NRTL's influence leaves America without a single pro-life Justice, suggesting a timeframe of centuries before NRTL's strategy might succeed, if ever. When NRTL opposes Personhood efforts saying that, "This is not the right time," because of the make-up of the court, they are effectively admitting their 30 years of failure. After NRTL's decades of "leadership," Notre Dame Law School's professor emeritus Charles Rice wrote, "Every justice now on the court accepts the Roe holding that the unborn child is a non-person... The situation remains as described by Justice John Paul Stevens in Planned Parenthood v. Casey." For Stevens had written that "the Court... rejected, the argument ‘that the fetus is a "person"'. ... there was no dissent..." And Clarence Thomas wrote in his Stenberg dissent that "a State may permit abortion," and Antonin Scalia wrote in Casey, "The states may, if they wish, permit abortion-on-demand..." Pro-Life Profiles.com

Response to comment [from other]: "I am anti-abortion and believe the current Republican candidates only pay lip service to the pro-life position in hopes of getting elected."

I agree. The Republicans are not committed to life. Chrysostom, listen to Bob Enyart's Focus on the Strategy.

To call someone a liar...