The Tiller murder
Controversial abortion doctor George Tiller was shot and killed in church yesterday, and a firestorm of argument has erupted in response.
Some on the pro-choice side blame the entire pro-life movement, especially people such as TV talk show personality Bill O’Reilly, who referred to the doctor over the years as “Tiller the Killer,” as well as groups that publish names and addresses of abortion doctors in order to intimidate them and facilitate protests and reprisals against them.
My opinion? I hold each person responsible for his or her actions, and ultimately the Tiller murderer is fully responsible for what he did. The rest are examples of freedom of speech, which is (and should be) protected.
Almost all of the pro-life groups have condemned Tiller’s murder, although some on the other side claim that this is mere sanctimonious hypocrisy for public consumption, and that all those who criticized Tiller have his blood on their hands. But although anti-abortion forces are passionate about their cause, very few are killers or would promote such killing; among devout Christians, especially, it is antithetical to their pro-life stance. They believe that the proper avenue is to change public opinion through peaceful means, protests, and education.
Any and every group in which members feel strongly about their cause (including, for example, environmentalists) runs the risk of encouraging the extremists and killers in its midst. In this respect, the pro-life forces are hardly unique. Abortion is an issue that raises such powerful feelings that I’m surprised that more killings of this sort don’t occur, although every single one is a crime to be condemned.
Tiller became a lightning rod for the controversy because he was no ordinary abortionist. He operated one of only three clinics in America that perform late-term abortions on fetuses deemed to be viable, or probably viable, or possibly viable. These abortions were performed even on healthy fetuses, allegedly to preserve the mother’s health when other abortion procedures that could have preserved the life of the fetus were rejected as more likely to compromise the mother’s well-being.
This is by far the most controversial type of abortion procedure, one that even many pro-choice advocates condemn (in these situations the term “unborn child” instead of “fetus” seems especially apropos). It is certainly a practice that I consider very very troubling (you can read about some of the complex legal and medical issues involved here). So those who called Tiller a killer had a fairly strong case.
I unequivocally reiterate that this does not in any way excuse his murder. But it certainly does explain why he might have been a focus for criticism. To supress such criticism would be to suppress freedom of speech in an important arena.
Tiller himself certainly knew that he was a target; he’d been shot in both arms by an anti-abortion assailant in 1993. He maintained recently in a successfully-defended lawsuit that all of his abortions, even the late-term ones on healthy fetuses, were in compliance with Kansas law that:
…allows abortions after a fetus can survive outside the womb only if two independent doctors agree that it is necessary to save a women’s life or prevent “substantial and irreversible” harm to “a major bodily function,” a phrase that has been interpreted to include mental health.
That’s the law. The court ruled that Tiller was innocent of charges that he had not followed it, and acquitted him. The killer wrongly took the law into his own hands, and that is murder. And those who would use this murder for political ends are guilty of something, although I’m not sure what to call it.
Considering abortion is one of the most divisive moral and political subjects in the U.S., here Newsy does a good job of providing insightful perspectives from different sides on this recent controversial and tragic event
“. . . and ultimately the Tiller murderer is fully responsible for what he did.
Amen.
It is my understanding, that the most extreme anti-abortionist are also racists that oppose abortion on racial grounds. They do not oppose all abortions, certainly not of non-whites, but oppose white abortions in that to them, constitutes the thinning out of Aryan peoples. Eric Rudolf, the Atlanta bomber was one of those guys.
The guy who killed Tiller will be prosecuted as he should be. He’s a murderer. I highly doubt anyone will concern themselves with the root cause of why he committed the crime and nor should they. It doesnt matter. This is why we have a rule of law stemming from the will of the people, and not some “empathetic” judge.
Your fourth paragraph seems a bit odd:
Shouldn’t that be “Almost all the pro-LIFE groups”? Then:
Gads. Sorry, those last two paragraphs/sentences should not be blockquoted.
I too am very troubled by late term abortions and have a lot of medical questions about the necessity of the procedure. I lean more in the direction of seeing Dr. Tiller a killer. That said, I condemn the act of murder that took his life. It cannot be justified in terms of law and even morality.
I’m in the pro-choice crowd that wants a lot of conditions put upon abortion, since I see most instances of it as really a form of birth control of the worst kind. So, I am not considering myself to be “pro-abortion.” I don’t belong to any anti-abortion groups, for the obvious reason (it should be apparent) that the only circumstance that I would consider it the right thing to do would be to save the mother’s life. That’s why I think it should remain legal – and very rare. I do not buy the argument that the fetus is “property” or simply a collection of cells that can be easily flushed away, no questions asked and no qualms of conscience about it.
My greatest fear about this murder of Tiller is that it will be used by the federal government to put political and legal pressures upon conservatives, anti-abortion groups, and even those of us who are jealous to guard the 2nd Amendment. I absolutely do not trust Obonga and his coterie as far as I can spit. I am sure people like me are considered extremists. Hell, the leaked memo from Homeland Security does paint people like me as terrorists.
So, the Left now has a martyr they can exploit for political purposes.
Whether you’re pro-choice, pro-life or somewhere in the middle, all law abiding citizens should deplore with all their heart this murder.
lumpy—yes, I wrote that quickly and switched the terms. Will fix, thanks.
If I am not mistaken Tiller was under scrutiny again because according to Kansas law a partial birth abortion can only be performed in order to protect the health of the mother and there must be a concurring opinion from another doctor who is not financially dependent on the doctor who is going to perform the abortion. I guess the second opinion on Tiller’s abortions were coming from a doctor who was either working for Tiller or substantially dependent on him financially.
I abhor the taking of life. In no way, shape, or form condone what happened to Tiller I also think it is certainly disingenuous of all those blaming the whole pro-life side for the murder of one person yet had no admonishment for a man who absolutely murdered many.
I guess it is between him and his maker now. I hope he has his arguments defending his actions down pat.
Incitement comes to mind. Don’t we just love to stir a roiling pot.
““substantial and irreversible” harm to “a major bodily function,” a phrase that has been interpreted to include mental health.”
Seems that the interpretation to include “mental health” was, as it often is, the get-out-of-jail-free card.
Ironic, that.
[deleted by neo-neocon]
It confuses me completely. How could Tiller go to church and do what he did for a living? How could a believer kill another in church?
To me, neither of them had any business in church.
Tiller or his views were not my cup of tea. However, from the standpoint of the rule of law, I am deeply saddened by his murder.
This is no time, imo, to debate the issue of late-term abortion. If anything, it begs the question of First Amendment freedoms.
I wonder now do I get to blame the murder of a military recruiter on the Left? The recruiter must have been murdered because of all that hate filled rhetoric coming from those on the Left. We really need to do something about those people on the Left for they are a danger to society. Fair is Fair.
I mean here you have the President being friends with Bill Ayres and Bernadette Dorn who allegedly (sarcasm) killed people for political reasons and he is just aghast at Tiller’s murder. I wonder how he feels about the military recruiter being murdered. The military recruiter and the policemen that got murdered have something in common, they volunteered to protect the citizens of this country so ……….
I just love this selective angst from the Left though I suspect it is political expediency rather than actually caring about Tiller except that he was performing late term abortions.
“So those who called Tiller a killer had a fairly strong case.”
So, do you think the law should be changed so that abortion is illegal, doctors like Tiller are arrested for murder, and the women who abort their pregnancies are arrested for murder or for being accessories for murder?
Failing that, at what point does it become necessary to take the law into your own hands? I mean, if there’s a fairly strong case to be made that Tiller is, in fact, a murderer, and the law allows him to do continue murdering, how long should you sit back and do nothing?
“I unequivocally reiterate that this does not in any way excuse his murder. But…”
It’s not really unequivocal if you add “but” at the end. Why can’t you unequivocally condemn murder?
members.tripod.com/~joseromia/survivors.html
“I do not buy the argument that the fetus is “property” or simply a collection of cells that can be easily flushed away, no questions asked and no qualms of conscience about it.”
“Seems that the interpretation to include “mental health” was, as it often is, the get-out-of-jail-free card.”
Shouldn’t doctors make these sorts of decisions, and not, say, random anonymous internet commenters?
Unless you are doctors who do this in your spare time.
“Yep, agree with that, but if I’d been in that church at the time I would have stood up and cheered.
Didn’t shed a tear over Jeffry Dahmer either.”
See, that’s more like it.
“among devout Christians, especially, it is antithetical to their pro-life stance.”
I’d bet money that the murderer believed himself to be a devout Christian. I’d even bet that Tater is a Christian.
Sounds like “Christianity” is in the eyes of the beholder, and in the heart of the believer, and not whatever you want it to be.
Lots of bad things come from believing you have the right to judge the faith of others.
PS – For a bunch of folks who are pretty excitable when terrorism is committed by brown people professing to be Muslims, you’re pretty quiet when terrorism is committed by white people professing to be Christians. ie, this right here.
I hereby unequivocally condemn terrorism of any kind, including this act of domestic terrorism.
Anyone else?
Mr. rilbin,
Your mother upstairs wants to know what you are doing on the computer in the basement. You holding out on her on the room and board? Not telling her you have a job blogging for Axelrod for money?
phegis rilbin: I expected someone like you to come along pretty quickly, and right on schedule you did. And I expected you to purposely misunderstand and misconstrue what I wrote here, and characterize me as saying things I did not say and holding positions I do not hold.
I will reiterate, in case you really didn’t get it: nothing excuses Tiller’s killing. That “but” was for a totally different thought, which is that those who call him a killer have a right to say so, and an argument can be made for their saying so, because of his practice of late-term abortions of healthy and viable fetuses .
I do not believe abortion is the equivalent of murder, but I believe that late-term abortions of healthy fetuses are close to murder if done merely because the mother prefers it (and I am relatively certain that some of those “mental health” reasons are coverups for the fact that the mother doesn’t want to face the decisions she would have to make if the infant were born alive, which would be either to keep it or surrender it for adoption).
And for the record, I am completely against vigilante killings of perpetrators even in cases where said perpetrators are unequivocally murderers—for example, I would be against anyone who would shoot Tiller’s murderer rather than have him stand trial.
I also have no problem with states making the rules about abortion rather than the federal government, including banning late-term abortions of healthy and viable infants except to save the life/health of the mother. And yes, doctors should make the decisions about when the life and health of the mother is at stake; I approve of laws such as the one under which Tiller worked, which required two doctors to okay such abortions. But I also know that, even with those guarantees, the laws will at times be abused.
And of course no one ever suggested that random anonymous internet commenters should be in charge of such decisions. But that was one of your straw men.
And of course many people here have already condemned this act of domestic terrorism. They just haven’t called it that. I happen to think it’s more of a vigilante killing or assassination, but calling it domestic terrorism is okay with me as well. It certainly is a politically motivated killing designed to intimidate those who are performing abortions.
Leftist troll alert. Anyone referring to “brown people” is a leftist. Guaranteed.
Let me speak for the forum generally: we all condemn Tiller’s murder, as we do that of the recruiter in Alabama.
Now speaking personally, I believe both perpetrators, having been found guilty, should be put to death forthwith.
You?
neo,
The Leftist trolls are out tonight, heavily. Go on over to Wretchard’s blog and read through the responses on the same topic. The usual ones who are pests on PJM are really being obstreperous on this topic. This cannot be a mere coincidence. I think all these people are paid to do this (or are dedicated volunteers) and they get their alerts and suggestions from offices that get theirs from Axelrod and Emanuel.
The poor quality of their argumentation and reasoning suggests that they cannot be much older than college students.
The fact that the last murder of an abortion provider was ten years ago suggests that this type of behavior is extremely rare.
Fred, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the leftist trolls represent a coordinated effort. In predictable fashion they fan out to parrot leftist talking points right on cue, and yet clearly lack the intellect to have thought of any of this on their own.
Surprise! Surprise!
It turns out that the suspect who was arrested on suspician of the Army recruting center killing is named
“Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad — a 24-year-old Little Rock resident formerly known as Carlos Bledsoe.”
Yep, I saw that. Color me astonished. I’m sure the commies will be up in arms about the murder of a loyal American serviceman. /need I even bother?
The only suspense attaches to where Axelrod and Emanuel get their alerts and suggestions, which they forward to Obama and other minions. I’m still trying to figure that out.
“Your mother upstairs wants to know what you are doing on the computer in the basement. You holding out on her on the room and board? Not telling her you have a job blogging for Axelrod for money?”
Oh, I actually work for the Chinese. They pay me to provoke arguments on right wing blogs so true American heroes such as yourself get so caught up commenting on blogs that you are powerless to resist their insidious take over of your country.
OK, go collect your lousy $5 from Emanuel, and get lost.
“I believe both perpetrators, having been found guilty, should be put to death forthwith.
You?”
No, I think they should be given hugs and kisses.
“I do not believe abortion is the equivalent of murder, but I believe that late-term abortions of healthy fetuses are close to murder if done merely because the mother prefers it.”
Ok, so sort of like the difference between murder and manslaughter?
What does “close to murder” even mean?
Cute.
“The only suspense attaches to where Axelrod and Emanuel get their alerts and suggestions, which they forward to Obama and other minions. I’m still trying to figure that out.”
Oh, that’s simple. THE DEVIL!!!!!
Seriously, you people are ridiculous. Conspiracies within conspiracies within conspiracies…
“Cute.”
=)
For Christ’s sake, go collect your miserable pittance and be gone. Finals must be coming up soon.
“They just haven’t called it that.”
Why do they have such a problem calling terrorism what it is?
“For Christ’s sake, go collect your miserable pittance and be gone. Finals must be coming up soon.”
Verily, the Christ would tell you to love a fool such as myself, and heal me, and not drive me away into the cruel world.
Neoneocon, I’m curious about your blog roll link to Atlas Shrugs, who you refer to as a “citizen journalist.” She recently called for an insurrection against the U.S. government. Since you do not agree with vigilante justice (even against such near crimes as near murder), and condemn domestic terrorism, do you also condemn your blog roll buddy’s call for violence against the US government?
“Anyone referring to ‘brown people’ is a leftist. Guaranteed.”
Actually, I’m an acolyte of J.F. Blumenbach. I didn’t realize there was another usage.
Interesting to see that no one has said a thing about Tater. Guess you’re all cool with his sentiment?
It would be a good idea if the folks who are fine with leaving a newborn to die in a closet would have the public relations sense, if not the grace, to quit going on about the sanctity of life and leave this to the law and order folks who see it as murder to be punished as such.
I never realized that Regis Philbin had dyslexia.
Occam’s Beard Says:
June 1st, 2009 at 9:22 pm
I’ve been wondering how many right-wing trolls have been infesting left-wing blogs since the election. My guess is “not many”.
I could be doing it myself, but I’m just not interested, as I see it as a waste of my time.
“It would be a good idea if the folks who are fine with leaving a newborn to die in a closet would have the public relations sense, if not the grace, to quit going on about the sanctity of life and leave this to the law and order folks who see it as murder to be punished as such.”
Wait, who is the one who is fine with leaving a newborn to die in a closet? Is that supposed to be you or me?
“I’ve been wondering how many right-wing trolls have been infesting left-wing blogs since the election. My guess is “not many”.”
I’ve been wondering how many conservatives have two brain cells to rub together for warmth. My guess is ‘not many.’ Wow! Making up shit is easy! With bonus bias!
“I never realized that Regis Philbin had dyslexia.”
HOW DID YOU FIGURE ME OUT?
*POOF! Escapes into a cloud of smoke with a flourish of cape!*
We have been pretty lucky not to have many like phegis around here. One could try reason, but reason is wasted on him.
We could fight him with conventional weapons, but that might take years and cost millions of lives. I think we need to call in Max Brooks for a consult.
http://www.zombiesurvivalwiki.com/
rickl,
I’ve never been tempted to do it. On occasion I have gone over to the dark side just to read some, but have never been tempted to post in a pestilential way there. It is an utter waste of time. I just don’t understand the mindset behind what we see coming from the other side. It takes either a perverse character to do it, or one is politically and maybe financially motivated to do it.
Plus, we know they remove the posts of conservative views and sometimes ban the poster. I know a guy who posted at DU only a few times and he was only asking valid questions and inserting verifiable facts into the discussion. They banned him. That doesn’t happen on our side of the street, unless there are very good reasons for it (like violations of the site’s rules).
I read a few months ago an article somewhere… I wish I had saved it… where it was reported that White House operatives were organizing a network and operation to have bloggers go into conservative blogs and be disruptive. Their strategy was to wage a psy-op campaign to discourage the opposition. That fits the Alinsky/Marxist/Chicago way of doing things. They are not content to just win. They want to pound you into the ground and piss on you.
Nevertheless, I detect a certain vague kind of panic that is just below the surface that they won’t ever let anyone see in the light of day. I think they know they have a very limited window of opportunity to exploit their victories in 2006 and 2008, and want to create the impression that it is WE who are utterly on the fringes of politics and without hope.
They know the economy is not going to bounce back from recession in typical fashion and that it will be a very weak recovery. Joblessness in 2010 is likely to be even higher than it is today, which is going to hurt them in November 2010. And they may not want to look at it, but inflation may be getting out of control by 2012 and foreign policy disasters will be nipping at them too.
So, they have two years, max, to “get it done.” So, they need to do whatever they can to delay the opposition picking up steam. What better way to do this than to discourage us conservatives in our own warrens?
phegis didn’t see The Incredibles: “No capes!”
There is a threshold level below which one’s interloctutor is not worth bothering with. Let them get back to scrubbing toilets, their natural place in the order of things.
“phegis didn’t see The Incredibles: “No capes!””
LOL.
“There is a threshold level below which one’s interloctutor is not worth bothering with.”
You get the exact level of discourse you deserve, douchebag.
Like most trolls, our friend phegis shows his colors and style rather quickly.
And, like most trolls, he uses proxy IPs.
If I remember my Tolkien, sunlight turns the trolls to stone.
Does Axelrod turn the stoners into trolls?
“What better way to do this than to discourage us conservatives in our own warrens?”
Seriously, get over yourself.
“Like most trolls, our friend phegis shows his colors and style rather quickly.”
It’s true, I’m trolling.
I’ll stop if I receive satisfactory answers to the following:
What does it mean to say that abortion is close to, but not, murder?
Why hasn’t anyone condemned Tater for being morally reprehensible? Do you agree with what he said?
Why hasn’t anyone condemned Tiller’s murder for what it is, an act of terrorism by a terrorist? Imagine for a moment that Tiller’s murderer is discovered to be a Muslim. What do you feel now?
Why does Neoneocon continue to link to someone, approvingly, who calls for violence against the U.S. government?
I’ve never known neo to approve of anyone who calls for violence against the U.S. government. If you think this is so about her, then you had better go over thousands of pages of her posts before you lob that accusation. Nor is she responsible for the views of other bloggers, here or elsewhere.
Everyone here has stated their disapproval of Tiller’s murder.
You are nothing but a lowlife scumbag. And so are your masters.
There is a saying among actors that goes something like “Sincerity is the key. If you can fake that, you can fake anything.”
“Everyone here has stated their disapproval of Tiller’s murder.”
What about Tater?
Fred, we were talking yesterday about the Problem of Evil. It seems to me to be manifestly unjust that some people will treat Dr. Tiller as a martyr and write songs and plays about him WHILE the MSM will forget the name of William Long, 23, of Conway, AR by noon tomorrow. We should call Mr. Long’s story An Inconvenient Death. No problem, that’s what the Memory Hole is for.
I read Tater as expressing disapproval of Dr. Tiller’s murder but not of Dr. Tiller’s death. So Fred is probably technically right. Our hostess and the vast majority of the readers of this thread find the killing of Dr. Tiller to be both appalling and worthy of condemnation. I see no suggestion here that Dr. Tiller’s killer should receive any leniency from the law.
So Tater lacks empathy for Dr. Tiller. I’ve heard and seen a lot worse.
I hope you aren’t suggesting that an entire group is liable to criticism or harassment because someone with an uncertain relationship to it has said something provocative or outrageous. That is what is commonly called McCarthyism.
Oblio and “What About Tater”
It was only a couple of hours ago that I learned about the act of jihad that took Tater’s life. It was only a brief report that I saw on another blog and I found another *very brief* report about it on CNN’s site, where the name of the murderer is mentioned (a long Muslim name taken by a black man who was a convert to Islam – I’ll bet he was in prison when he converted). He said he killed the serviceman and wounded the two others for political and religious reasons.
Yes, I’ll bet it goes down the MSM memory hole.
About our troll interlocutor… it just occurred to me while I was in the shower awhile ago thinking about this attack on neo’s site: He’s using one of the Alinsky “Rules for Radicals” – point out the “inconsistencies” in the enemy’s ways of proceeding and belief system. Hammer on it and use it to discredit and demoralize the enemy.
“Demoralization” is very much a Marxist strategy for collapsing the West and capitalism. Those of us who have viewed Yuri Bezmenov’s video’s over on youtube will note that Bezmenov first expounds on how “demoralization” was the first stage of the attack on the capitalist West. Since Alinsky was a Communist, he must have have picked up this from the NKVD – later the KGB.
The presence of organized networks and organizations like such that get these trolls right to work is testimonial to how widely and deeply all of our society’s institutions have been penetrated by the Communists. Right now their only handicap is that there is no longer a Soviet Union to back them up. The Russian Federation may be some kind of Gramscian Marxist hybridization set in motion by Andropov and Gorbachev, but it is hardly a superpower that could project enough power to sustain the Left in the United States if the Left and its opponents come to blows in the future.
Alinsky guided the Marxists in this country to use democratic processes to undermine the Republic. One of the ways in which I now see this has been done is the prevalence among the population and the elites of the view that the United States is a democracy. It is not. It is a Constitutional Republic, which has elections where politicians must run for office. The U.K, Canada, and Great Britain are democracies, since they do not the set up we have with a written, formal Constitution with a durable Bill of Rights.
The Marxists are trying to use the democratic process to get niches of power from which they can leverage further power. Which they do by suborning the judiciary to gradually eat away at the Constitution and the rights of the states. That is why the Sotomayor nomination is so toxic. It’s not about her foolish statement concerning the privileged position of Latina experience. It’s about her record and statements of what is called judicial activism. That is the real danger. And yet much of the public has had sand kicked in its eyes and is now focused on the lesser thing.
Ooops, Oblio,
I got the name Tater mixed up with the incident involving the serviceman in AK who was killed.
I’ve had an incident of inattentiveness (neural flatulence) and beg your indulgence.
I wish we had an edit function here. Oh well…
So many things rattling around in my brain.
I didn’t agree with Tillers profession, but this is sad — Kansas law should have stepped in along time ago to prevent this. Shame on Kansas.
“What about Tater?”
I’m not sure I understand what the question is? Could you be more specific?
The way I see it, this is a damned hard thing to judge morally. To those who would justify the killing of Tiller, I say this:
“Everyone here has stated their disapproval of Tiller’s murder.”
This is clearly false.
Tater celebrated the murder of an innocent man by a terrorist. His comment was only belatedly removed by neoneocon after I (and I alone) repeatedly pointed out the simple fact that Tater was celebrating murder by a terrorist.
“The way I see it, this is a damned hard thing to judge morally. ”
This is also clearly false. It is actually very easy to judge morally the murder of an innocent man by a terrorist.
To suggest otherwise is to be no better than Ward Churchill, who also celebrated the murder of innocent people by terrorists.
“You are nothing but a lowlife scumbag.”
Exactly how the Christ would have put it, I’m sure.
Anything I’ve said here that’s so trollish as to deserve blocking this comment, neoneocon?
[from neoneocon: I removed Tater’s comment as soon as I saw it. I don’t read every comment here the moment it is posted—actually, I don’t have time to read every comment here at all. But I do attempt to police the comments section as best I can, and to remove comments such as “Tater’s”—which I found unacceptable—as soon as I do see them. I would have done so whether or not anyone had objected to it or not; it is my habit to regularly remove comments I deem offensive when I happen to see them.
And surely, Pop, you of all people should know what you’ve said that’s so trollish. For starters, you are a sock puppet. This is the fourth identity you’ve tried on this thread, all of them trolls.]
Seeing the trolls that scurry out from under their rocks at times like this is sometimes interesting just for what it says about the twisted mindset of big chunks of the contemporary left.
Here, for example, it’s their current fixation on labelling Tiller’s killer a “terrorist”. Now, all actual terrorists are killers, but not all killers are terrorists — not even all political killers, e.g., assassins, are properly labelled terrorists. So why this fixation on pasting the “terrorist” label on this particular nutjob? You think it might indicate a troubled conscience over their own labored and tortuous past attempts to mitigate, apologize for, understand the actual terrorists, with whom they just happen to share an abhorrence of Western industrialized, capitalist civilization? Yes, I think it might.
This morning Jihadwatch.com is reporting that “Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad — a 24-year-old Little Rock resident formerly known as Carlos Bledsoe” is recently back from a trip to Yemen, where he was studying Jihad.
Has it even been verified that the motive behind the murder was Mr. Tiller’s practice as an abortion doctor? Isn’t MSM jumping the gun again?
Now, I am really curious about what exactly Tater wrote that was so offensive? I guess we will never know since it was deleted. If he said something to the effect that he’s glad Tiller is dead because he will slice and dice no more, then I am in total agreement with him. The consensus here seems to be that we should be saddened by the murder of Tiller. I have no remorse for him.
Some late term procedures are more equal than others …
His death doesn’t bother me at all.
It’s odd to say that, but that’s honestly how I feel.
I also say that as someone who’s known people to have abortions for very flimsy reasons as well as very justifiable reasons. I’ve seen both sides of the argument and seen cases where I agreed and other cases where I disagreed with the practice.
Tiller engaged in a pretty ugly practice, one for which a good argument could be made should be illegal as a form of murder, and someone else committed murder to stop him.
Doesn’t make his murderer any less guilty, but I have a hard time drumming any sympathy for the Tiller or his family either.
Kind of like watching two gang members shoot each other…..
I’m with you, Scottie.
And that Tiller was a serious churchgoer says something about how many Protestant demoninations have lost their way, or been lead astray, by moral relativity.
What Tiller did for a living was reprehensible, but he gloried in it. He was just a few rungs above Mengele on the moral ladder. What meaningful difference between Tiller and Kevorkian? Dr Death went to prison.
Oh, you’re not Amish, sock — the Amish generally don’t need to obsess over the “terrorist” label because they don’t generally sympathize with mass murderers.
My point stands: Tiller’s murder was an act of terrorism. Using violence to intimidate doctors into providing fewer abortions (for fear of murder) is EXACTLY terrorism: using violence and the threat of violence to intimidate people so as to achieve a political goal. That political goal is alter the laws of the United States outside the judicial and legislative processes. What else could it be?
On the matter of neo’s site being under attack by the Left’s trolls, at every other major or interesting conservative blog site yesterday and today they are all under assault from them. In fact, it’s a swarm that I can only conjecture (logically) was organized and planned. They’ve been hitting PJM, Richard Fernandez’s blog, americanthinker.com, and others.
I wouldn’t doubt that “Tater” was a plant to put up red meat for these troglodytes to swarm to and to use to discredit neo’s blog.
These people are disgusting moral reprobates. And as I said earlier, I recognize the Alinsky tactics being deployed here.
Given the weight of their arguments, I think “gnats” might be a better descriptive label than “trolls.”
Congratulations NEO!!!!!
Way to go!
You have apparently been deemed such a threat now by the left that you are up for increased scrutiny, criticism, and trolling by the leftists/socialists/statists/democrats/Sorosminions/Obamabots….
You have truely hit the big time!
Sockpuppet: Call it terrorism if that is your belief. I prefer the word “retribution”. Others may like the more gentle word “karma”. Why parse words?
sock: My point stands
Actually, of course, his point is laying on its back — what does remain standing about this particular lefty spasm is what it says about their own bad consciences. Terrorism is a form of political violence, but it’s not the only form — violent demonstrations are another, war is another, assassination is another, etc. This case, bad though it is, was clearly a targeted killing as opposed to indiscriminate mass slaughter, and therefore is wrongly labelled “terrorism”. It wouldn’t matter much except, as I say, for the sad and silly spectacle of lefty trolls throwing that label around like monkeys flinging their own feces. Which I’m sure is because they hope it will finally take some of the pressure off their badly expressed sympathies of the past.
I would see terrorism as attempting to change politics via acts of violence. I don’t think anyone would argue too much with that view.
If the individual murdered Tiller to attempt a national change in abortion policy, the point could be argued as to whether it was a form of terrorism.
Not saying it would be a successful argument, just saying to COULD be argued.
On the other hand, if the killer simply murdered Tiller in order to prevent Tiller from committing what was seen as murders himself on unborn children – then it would seem not to fall under the definition of terrorism as it was a single act committed against a single person for a limited purpose.
In other words, instead of murdering Tiller to affect national abortion policy, the Tiller was murdered to prevent Tiller himself from murdering innocent unborn children.
There’s a difference.
“Terrorism”? I thought that the DHS, with our Dear Leader safely ensconced in power, had decreed the end of this.
Isn’t what you should actually call this killer something like “a man-caused disaster causer”?
What is the difference between a third trimester and a 243rd trimester “procedure”?
Scottie: thanks for the congrats. But troll invasions here by the Left are an old old story.
Sally: the reason one could argue that it might be terrorism is if one of the goals is to strike fear into the hearts of doctors and nurses who perform abortions, especially late-term abortions. I believe that this may indeed be part of the killer’s motivation: to make them afraid to perform such abortions even if it would be lawful to do so. That would be the “terrorism” aspect, even though I think it’s more of an assassination and/or vigilante killing.
FredHjr: I immediately had the same thought about “Tater” too. The timing was very suspicious, and I didn’t recall ever seeing him as a commenter at this blog before.
But I checked it out, and although “Tater” is not a regular poster here, he is a previous poster from quite a while back, and for various other reasons in addition I have concluded he is most likely bona fide and neither a troll nor the sock puppet of a troll.
neoneocon,
Troll invasions?
To the ramparts!!!!
I take your point, Neo, but I still think this label is a sloppy but revealing use of language. Assassins also commonly intend to strike fear into people for political ends (as, for that matter, do demonstrators who deliberately aim to provoke violence), but we don’t usually label them terrorists since that’s a name for those who perpetrate another kind of political violence — namely, mass and indiscriminate slaughter aimed at entire populations. I doubt that there’d be an issue about this at all, in fact, were it not for the fixation of a particularly loony portion of the left, for reasons I’ve already stated.
SAB:
“Tater” wrote that if he had been in that church when Tiller was killed he would have applauded.
That is an offensive statement. It’s a different thing from saying he wouldn’t have grieved; he was saying he would have applauded actually witnessing the bloody death, a vigilante killer gunning down a man who had just been acquitted of breaking any law in his medical practice.
Being “glad Tiller is dead,” your statement here, is also a problem as far as I’m concerned, although not as big a problem as what Tater wrote. I will tell you why I think it’s a problem.
Here is my reasoning: its okay to be glad he’s not doing these abortions any more–although, by the way, my strong suspicion is that someone else will be doing them instead, so his death won’t even matter in that regard. He is a martyr to the cause now, you know. But to celebrate or applaud his killing by a vigilante, assassin, or terrorist (whichever term one prefers) is excessive and I believe wrong. I am in much more sympathy with those pro-life people who are glad he’s not performing such abortions and yet who mourn his death and wish he had come to the conclusion to desist on his own. And his family members are suffering (and I believe innocent) human beings as well.
In addition, if the pro-life movement is truly pro-life, it should not be celebrating death. That is, among other things, hypocritical. As I said, it is fine to celebrate the fact that he’s not doing these abortions any more. But that is a different thing from celebrating or applauding his death. I think the distinction is both meaningful and important; not a trivial one at all.
I’m not a dirty leftist and I reject their false leftist dichotomy:
Abortion is murder, but that doesn’t mean government should, or even can prosecute it as a crime. It is a moral issue.
Killing an abortion doctor is murder and the government must prosecute it as a crime. It is a legal issue.
Terrorism is war, goverment must not prosecute it as a crime. It is a National Security Issue.
I see the left’s refusal to give any ground on late term abortions as analogous to the NRA insisting on access to armor piercing ammo. Reasonable people see both positions as nuts.
Mr. Frank: Roe v. Wade gave states the right to limit late-term abortions. Some pro-choice advocates would like that right to end; others see it as a reasonable restriction.
Mr. Frank,
Your typical 30.06 hunting ammo, available in a wide variety of bullet weights, has been capable of penetrating your typical police body armor for approximately 103 years.
That specific ammunition is only one of literally hundreds of different calibers that have been available, for anywhere from decades to about a century, that are capable of performing this simple feat of ballistics.
“Reasonable” should not be translated as “uninformed”. Perhaps another analogy is in order?
I see the left’s refusal to give any ground on late term abortions as analogous to the NRA insisting on access to armor piercing ammo. Reasonable people see both positions as nuts.
Except that late term abortions actually exist and the “armor piercing bullet” hysteria was manufactured to ban classes of hunting ammunition.
So, no… It’s not the f’in same at all.
Neo: I feel as if I have been chastised by my second grade teacher. “Pro-life” is a term that is generally understood to relate to defending the life of the unborn who cannot defend themselves. “Pro-life” was never meant to emcompass all of humanity. Those who are confused about the term “pro-life” and it’s specific meaning should look it up.
Personally, I’m quite ambivalent about Tiller’s murder.
I have no sympathy, and as neo points out he will simply be replaced by another, but a thought just occurred to me after reviewing some reactions on the blogosphere.
I’m wondering exactly how many who are so distraught over his murder are in the same group who thought it such wishful thinking to contemplate the assassination of Bush or Cheney while they were in office, or perhaps dreamed of the day Bush and Cheney could be tried and executed as war criminals?
Anyone have an answer? There’s no real linkage of course, but it’s interesting to observe how some reactions from certain factions are quite situational….
SAB: I’m not sure what the “second grade teacher” remark is about. Surely second-graders don’t have these sorts of discussions with their teachers as a rule.
I have my opinions and I am expressing them, and I find remarks such as the one you made about Tiller’s murder to be inconsistent with a pro-life stance. Tiller was innocent until proven guility, and he was in compliance with the law of the land, having just been acquitted in court.
You, of course, are free to disagree without feeling infantilized. We are all adults here. At least, I assume we are; one can never tell online, but most people, yourself included, who comment here seem to be adults. I try to treat them as such.
I have a different take on Tiller’s career and his beating the DA in court, but I’ll reserve that opinion as I do not think it is really central to the topic at hand.
I believe that murdering Tiller was wrong as well as against the law (I make a distinction between morality and the law, as they are not always synchronized). I don’t mourn his passing, but neither do I rejoice in it. I see it in pretty much the same terms as neo sees it: someone else will take his place.
In fact, if the president has his way there are going to be a lot of doctors taking his place. I am most upset with the way in which his proposed legislation would strike the “conscience clause” from the grasp of those health care professionals who wish to invoke it. That, folks, is a monstrous slap in the face to those people and it disrespects the long traditions in our civilization of respecting the conscience and religious convictions of a free people.
The people who mourn the passing of Dr. Tiller are, in large measure, the liberal and Leftist elites in the big cities where, I’m sure, some of them may indeed have had a late term abortion or fear that if they want one or need one that it won’t be available to them. Babies are such an inconvenience to their bed-hopping lifestyle. And I indict the men as well as the women for this immorality.
But, as I said, I only consider abortion a good thing if the life and health of the mother truly is at stake. I want abortion legal, safe, and very rare. There is very little in the way of excuse for kids needing abortions to clean up a “mistake” these days. There is such a thing as birth control, and why so many do not use it eludes my understanding. Here we are in the 21st century and people are still stupidly taking chances.
first question would be to ask if it was moral to kill in any instance, then work backwards. you will find that this trick works for what the murderer did depending on some degree, and not for what tillman did, which is why the collectivist left view and other views cant be reconciled to one.
that if one thinks that it is moral to kill to save others, the question is only one of degree and what point.
however, the left do not see babies technically in the womb as people. they follow the reasoning that the status of the fetus as a person is determined by the attitude of the mother (just as the status of a slave being free or not depends upon the attitude of the slave owner). as long as its inside her and attached she commands whether it gets person hood. like a ceaser she decides while she has that option.
to the left it would be presumptious that the person was saving any persons, as their mothers werent granting them personhood and so one could not consider it murder, and so there was no saving to justify the murder of tillman (if you think something can justify killing).
so depending on your world view as to this state of fetal development, you would have a different view of each point in the image of what happened.
However Artfldgr, the accused murderer, Scott Roeder, will not in fact save a single life by way of his assassination of Dr. Tiller. Dr. Tiller will be replace by one of his associates or some other abortionist and the regime of death will roll on. More likely S. Roeder, if guilty, will have retarded the pro-Life effort.
Can you Artfldgr present a coherent argument that the death of Dr. Tiller will indeed save actual lives? If so, tell us how. I expect that you will find that you will have to weave terror and mass killing of abortionists into your calculations before you can demonstrate a plausible decrease in the actual death toll of the innocent.
I also think you will find that the necessary moral standing to make the necessary moral argument against abortion is fatally compromised by the use of murder to stop abortion.
Just as I think you will find that the necessary moral standing to make the necessary moral argument against suicide bombing and jihad is fatally compromised by the Western practice of abortion. Perhaps the Left senses as much and chosen, in effect, to trade the long-term defense human rights and democracy against jihad for the “convenience” and availability of its use of abortion today.
Some abortion “procedures” are frowned upon:
A teenager “allegedly” hired a man to beat her up so she could miscarry. The baby survived. The girl was charged with criminal solicitation to commit murder, and the beat-upper was charged with attempted murder. …
http://tinyurl.com/oszak8
It may well be that Tiller’s murder DOES generate a pause in the minds of similarly inclined doctors who perform late term abortions.
If the murderer had this in mind, then as I said before, this could be argued as a form of terrorism.
However, if the murderer simply wanted to stop a single individual that he saw as being the most egregious practitioner of abortion then it still would not rise to the level of terrorism as that was not the intent.
The reduction in the numbers of doctors willing to practice late term abortions would be an unintended side effect of one doctor being murdered.
Those who advocate abortion do have their own fanatics as well, and there will be doctors I’m sure who will attempt to step into Tiller’s shoes just on the idea they don’t want the other side to “win”.
I’m inclined to believe however that most, while supporting abortion as a procedure, will if anything probably dial back their practice in this regard out of a sense of self-preservation.
As for the idea that murder can be justified, I’m always reminded in these kinds of arguments of the hypothetical situation of going back to 1920’s Germany and offing Adolf H., or perhaps going to the Soviet Union and offing Joseph S..
Would such an act be justified?
It depends on your view of morality and what you think the outcome would be.
My suspicion is that the murderer in this case would agree that it is moral, and would justify his own actions along those same lines of reasoning.
Of course such a view means one believes there would have been no other Adophs or Josephs out there capable of replacing the historical figures we know and loathe that were offed…..
Nevertheless Scottie, it will not play out that way.
.
To quote Tolkien:
Nevertheless Scottie, it will not play out that way.
.
To quote Tolkien:
Frodo: It’s a pity Bilbo didn’t kill him when he had the chance.
.
Gandalf: Pity? It was pity that stayed Bilbo’s hand. Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends. My heart tells me that Gollum has some part to play yet, for good or ill before this is over. The pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many.”
.
I think we will find that the necessary moral standing to make the necessary moral argument against abortion is fatally compromised by the use of murder to stop abortion.
Just as I think you will find that the necessary moral standing to make the necessary moral argument against suicide bombing and jihad is fatally compromised by the Western practice of abortion. Perhaps the Left senses as much and chosen, in effect, to trade the long-term defense human rights and democracy against jihad for the “convenience” and availability of its use of abortion today.
Mike O’Malley,
First, just to be clear, I’m not making an argument defending the murder of Tiller.
Now that I’ve said that, I would point out that historically the killing of another human being has been an acceptable practice for the entire history of the human species as long as certain rules were followed.
What is war if not the state sanctioned killing of others?
What is execution of criminals if not state sanctioned killing of someone society feels violated the most basic rules of society?
Would anyone condemn a mother killing someone who was in the act of suffocating her baby in it’s crib?
The moral argument that killing is not/never justified is false, at least based on historical evidence.
The issue seems to be more a matter of what society deems justified killing, and it varies depending on historical time frame, location, and other factors.
If the left is tying itself into knots of ineffectiveness regarding defence against jihad because of their support of abortion, then they are lunatics.
Mike,
When Gandolf shows up at an abortion clinic and does his flashy showy wizard thing, I’ll place more credence in his ideas….
A “procedure” was performed on a young soldier in Little Rock by a religious nut …
Some religious nuts are more equal than others …
Thank you G6log.
Unfortunately, while you are correct, “some are more equal than others”, you bowdlerize Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad and Scott Roeder.
Scott Roeder’s longstanding psychological issues seem profound enough to absolve him of some or all moral responsibility for his criminal action. Moreover Roeder’s acted in clear contradiction to the teaching of Christianity and the role model of Jesus (Yeshua).
There is no indication whatsoever that Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad had any debilitating psychological issues. If any thing Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad’s actions reflect spiritual issues and appear to be consistent with the moral imperative of normative Islam as practices and taught by the Ulema (traditional Muslim clerics) over the centuries.
You know — mentioning the fact that people blame public personalities — for what must seem to some very few, deranged individuals like impassioned or coded calls to action — reminds me of the same thing I thought about during the siege of the Davidian complex in Waco Texas — I blamed some conservatives and their crazed response and hated for the Clinton Administration for fanning the flames that lead to the aftermath of Waco — which of course we all know as the Bombing of the Murrow Federal Building in Oklahoma. I have mixed feeling about this now.
One thing that hasn’t changed in regards to Waco, then and now, I see those adults in that complex, who stayed behind with their children in that fire, those are real demons if their even are any — to hold your children back in the flames to make a statement is demonic — if the word demonic can ever mean anything then that would be one example.
Mike,
You’ll have to quote for me in the Bible where Jesus said it was wrong to kill an abortionist.
And don’t bother with the “Thou shalt not kill” thing.
My understanding is there are certain subtleties in how it was translated originally, it’s clear the ancient Hebrews had no issues with killing their fellow man (further supporting my previous statements regarding “normal” human views on killing) – and in fact believed they were directed by God to do so on many instances.
So this only leaves the New Testiment. “What would Jesus do?”, is the question you are left with, I guess.
I’m not at all sure He would have been quite so forgiving of the good Dr. Tiller, given the full scope of how He conducted Himself in various situations and even resorting to violence in at least one recorded instance over something as simple as money.
On the other hand, He was also quite cognizant of the social rules of behaviour and how one had to interact with official government agents in His day.
Since no one alive today was alive then, we all have to arrive at a conclusion on our own, and no one view is going to be more valid than another in this case as long as that view is consistent with the historical record that we have to go on regarding how He conducted himself.
nyomythus,
Personally I think the Davidians were completely looney and following a false messiah. There are also practices which, if true, makes their leader a true creep.
Having said that, I don’t think they did anything that rose to the level of capital punishment – which is basically what happened in the end, and accusations of child abuse were never proven and remain only accusations by the government without evidence.
I’d also point out the ATF doesn’t involve itself in child abuse cases – but they attempted to use that as an excuse for their actions after the fact when things went so badly.
It also does not appear as clear cut as the parents holding their children back so they deliberately burned to death.
It does appear that many may have been trapped in a burning building – which caught fire via actions of government officials.
Yes, I know the Davidians supposedly set fire themselves, but did you know there was infrared video showing fires breaking out in places where government forces were – but Davidians weren’t – during the seige?
Driving a tank through a building can do that.
I doubt the government did it deliberately, and feel it was probably accidental, but it was also convenient to blame the corpses after the fact and absolve the government of any responsibility.
Unfortunately, the OKC bombing was still the result as you noted of the antagonism that botched raid created.
Thank you Scottie.
The condemnation of abortion likely turns up in Revelations. See J. M. Ford’s commentary, Revelations, in this regard. That repeated condemnation is incredibly strong but as I recall Revelations includes no imperative or even any license for believers to summarily extra-legally execute an abortionist.
I’ll see if I can find some citations for you later. But first I want to return to Tolkien. Tolkien was perhaps one of the more insightful anti-Modernist and anti-Nietzscheans of the 20th Century.
The Ring, Gollum, Biblo, Gandalf et al can inform our understanding of the murder of Dr. Teller.
Here is a teaser for you to ponder Scottie:
Dr. Teller = Sméagol
Dr. Teller’s assassination = Gollum’s fall into the Crack of Doom….
More later if time allows 😉
Mike,
I do get the whole Tolkien reference, but the decision against slaying Gollum was based upon a magickal being, Gandolf, having some psychic insight into what the future held and knowing this creature had a role yet to play in the future.
Your average person is not going to have to such mystic insight, and must deal with life as it comes and not as it might be.
Regarding biblical references to abortion in the Bible, you may be correct that there are no commands to slay an abortionist – but I doubt there are prohibitions in the Bible against killing them either.
So, we’re back to square one. Would Jesus hold that murdering Tiller was a violation of Christianity?
No, Gandolf was a Maiar, and an angel. Gandolf’s understanding, foresight if you will, was based upon his experience with, his observation of the “Hand of Providence”. Mature faithful Christians will have just that sort of “insight”.
Although we pray this is not the case, Dr. Teller’s death is perhaps comparable to no less than two notable passings into the empty hopelessness of eternal damnation in LotR: Gollum’s fall into the Crack of Doom, which is … well … the Crack of Doom.
“The phrase “crack of doom” is the modern English for the Old English term for Ragnaré¶k, the great catastrophe of Norse mythology. The term became used for the Christian Day of Judgement”
The second is the passing of the Lord of the Nazgé»l on Pelenor Fields. The Captian of Despair, unquestionably a Nietzchean antiChrist figure, who vanishes into nothingness, with no little irony, with a trailing wail of despair.
However we may feel about such passings at such a moment as this it is best to be humble enough to reflect upon our own utter reliance upon Grace; and to be mournful of such a frightful loss.
Mike,
OK, I gotta admit – I get a laugh at every reference to “Crack of Doom”….been on too many construction jobsites where plumbers had wardrobe issues….lol.
Sorry, now back to your regular programming…
Already having spoken on Gollum, I’ll just note that the arch-villain in the book didn’t go into the great beyond on his own.
He had a little help – namely, someone wacked his a$$.
Presuming Scott Roeder is both guilty and sane, he has engaged in a counter productive nihilistic act of lawlessness. This is not good.
Nor is it wise to contribute to the metastasizing pathologies of the Left with any instances of actual violence. Our internal hostilities such as they are stoked by the Progressive, Post/Modernist, Gramsician, Alinskian Left are toxic enough. The Secular Left has no sense of the “sacred”, so they have no brake upon their own violence beyond the residual and resented cultural memories of Christian ethos. If they start down the road to intra-communal violence the American story is not going to have a “and they lived happily ever after” ending.
The left always accuses of what they’ve been doing …
Yah, You and I are not the only ones who have noticed that G6loq.
Projection? Yes at times.
Straight out cynical fraud and character assassination? Yes that too. The Stalinists were rather adept at that. Poliwood, Hizballahiwood and Lancet have have accomplished a great deal of damage with similar fabrications of late.
kgov.com/gallery/abortion/wichita-memorial/memorial.html
Wichita abortionist George Tiller offers a memorial service in his facility after he performs a partial-birth abortion. The mom and the dad in the pictures below paid Tiller a few thousand dollars to kill Tess, their baby girl. A pro-life sidewalk counselor had failed in her effort to dissuade the mother from entering the abortion mill, but did succeed in giving her address to the mom. Afterward, the mother and the pro-lifer corresponded and became friends. In that way, the pro-life community obtained these photos. We at KGOV.com have decided to share with our listeners the mother’s pain, and the photographic proof of the depravity of abortionists, in hopes of furthering our battle against legalized child killing.
the link below is a scan of the mothers letter.
http://www.moonbattery.com/confession.gif
THIS is why women are unhappy. they are too gullible to others outside influences
(which maybe why most cultures protect them, as did ours till we threw the sheep in with the wolves).
women live huge lives of regret because thats what you get when you follow the collectives advice and realize that you werent really a part of it, and so forth.
with women, all this stuff overlaps, since they are the ones with a dictating leadership telling them waht it is to be a woman, what women do, what they can or cant wear, and on and on (mostly through fun sassy and kicky articles).
this mother showed that she was mentally dysgenic
regardless of what you want to spin it too, she is less a good mom than another who could not be tricked into killilng her own offspring voluntarily (And not have any one to blame and so no one to stop)
the contrast between the letter and the pictures and how the pictures woke the mother up are a real eye opener.
basically the majority are not capable of doing the same things a sociopathic fringe minority can, and end up sick and such when they try. some women love to be sluts and used, but thats not most of them. some dont care if they have an abortion, but thats not most of them. and the ability of the few, and the pretenders that cover the problem, all mak e the rest gullible to copy them.
now we are financing that same misery in other countries…
Mike O’Malley read me again VERY carefully.
i took no side in my writing…
in fact i said the real view was a supposition of states depending on which mental spin you want to color reality with.
you obviously subscribe to the thought that the mother determins personhood like a slave holder does.
you have to be VERY carful debatig with me, as you cant tell what position i subscribe to by how i debate!!!!!!!!!!!!!
most of the time i am showing that once you allow the immoral act in, there is no happy solution.
which was the point of my post…
that there was no way to reconcile the propagandic spins…
Can you Artfldgr present a coherent argument that the death of Dr. Tiller will indeed save actual lives?
sure i can..
I expect that you will find that you will have to weave terror and mass killing of abortionists into your calculations before you can demonstrate a plausible decrease in the actual death toll of the innocent.
not at all…
lets first state your premise in a way that we can discuss it.
your first paragraph gave a futility argument. why bother to lock away murders and killers and criminals beacuse another criminal will come along.
right? well, i dont think i have to debate that point now that i put it in terms that arent so clouded.
do you actually subscribe to no prisons beause its futile for whiping out all crime? i dont think so. but you let me know (i know that you might say so just so you can pretend to win the argument).
ok… so obviously the futility argument is invalid. you dont not bild a dam because someday it will be gone. if that was the case, then there is no point to doing anything, becasue the universe itself isnt even permanent!
ok.. onward.
i can show that today, tillman is not providing abortion services. that for a while, there will be one less capitalist business providing a presumptive muturally benificial transaction (that later is too often regretted, but caveat emptor, and buyers remorse is not an argument against it)
he is the doctor that does the actual acts, so thats how. he ALSO does the latest term abortions. which means that a delay of having one of a day or so, can mean giving birth to a live baby!!!
[you obviously didnt follow my link where you could read about the one armed child that was delivered after the doctor ripped her arm off. back then obamas law wasnt in place so she was allowed to become a person since she lived. but with obamas law the intent of the mother do deny personhood can be followed outside the womb and persue the little living being that is on its own, and finish the job.]
so i know, and can give names of those who survives such abortoins without the death of the doctor.
is it safe to assume that if there was no doctor at all, their surivial just went up by leaps and bounds? that nurses (excdept in california) cant do this job? that they have to spend time to find and hire anotehr doctor?
so there was no contorting necessary to show that if the doctor that does the operations is dead, he cant do the perations any more.
will you argue with that logic?
and that the lag between his absence and the replacement of such creates a window where the time to birth is smalelr than the time to reoplacement of usch a doctor. so for a short time, fewer will die.
so i didnt have to show terror or anything.
all i had to show was that the person doing the job cand do it from a coffin or an urn.
do you concur?
now lets get to the interesting part and why i even bothered.
also think you will find that the necessary moral standing to make the necessary moral argument against abortion is fatally compromised by the use of murder to stop abortion.
not at all.
thats because i understand morals. and in the past those that did these things didnt need a moral excuse to free them from it.
does the murder of hitler absolve the murderer of moral crimes?
well, as a liberal with situational morals, you think that it does!!!!!!!!!
but i dont. i dont think that one can kill someone for a reason and that reason (other than direct immediate self defense), be moral.
i do not agree with the fruit bat that shot him.. becaause all the moral argumetns to doing an immoral thing and sacrifice oneself this way do not apply!!!!!!!
soldiers and kings are nobel bcause they know that the actions required of them will damn them for all time.
they, unlike our relativists and flaky moralists (like you), understood that their acts were moral acts of immorality.
you on the other hand have such a contorted vioew of things and are making such a dare to me because you are comfortable with the situational moral absolutive argument of the socialists, that you think i have to contort myself or the story to resovle it.
no no no… because my morals are not situational as your are, i CANT argue that the morality of the outcome makes an act moral.
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
No, Gandolf was a Maiar, and an angel. Gandolf’s understanding, foresight if you will, was based upon his experience with, his observation of the “Hand of Providence”. Mature faithful Christians will have just that sort of “insight”.
will you stop with the cultural mash up crapola?
it doesnt make you sound smart but to other idiots, and its like trying to clean up with a nudist epileptic with explosive diarhea…
The Orcs are restless performing “procedures” galore:
An affiliate of Al Qaeda in North Africa said Wednesday that it had killed a Briton it abducted in January because its demand of freedom for a jailed cleric had not been met…
http://tinyurl.com/pbbs8p
Some say the Orcs are insurgents or even freedom fighters. They greatly contributed to civilization once upon a time …..
Some say that babies can be quite inconvenients …
G6loq,
First trolls, now orcs?!?!?
We need higher ramparts.
Hmmm…“The password-protected Web site, called Al Falojah, carried a two-page message in Arabic saying the British authorities had been given time to negotiate Mr. Dyer’s release but had shown indifference to his fate.
“The British captive was killed so that he, and with him the British state, may taste a tiny portion of what innocent Muslims taste every day at the hands of the Crusader and Jewish coalition to the east and to the west of the world,” the statement said.”
And team Obama thinks we need not worry about holding Gitmo jihadists in American high security prisons …
hmmm …
“A senior U.S. official tells FOX News that more targets were found on the computer of a man charged in the fatal shooting at a military recruiting center in Arkansas – suggesting the accused gunman may have been part of a larger plot to attack military targets and may not have been acting alone.
Officers found maps to Jewish organizations, a Baptist church, a child care center, a post office and military recruiting centers in the southeastern U.S., New York and Philadelphia, according to a joint FBI-Homeland Security intelligence assessment obtained by The Associated Press….
The latest information seemed to contradict a local police official’s denial earlier Tuesday that the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy, though details of possible accomplices and their involvement weren’t immediately disclosed.”
http://www.foxnews.com/stor/0,2933,524833,00.html
… a day care center …
perhaps President Obama should have a private heart to heart conservation with former VP Cheney …
he might also might do well to ponder the fate of the children of Beslan … and how much time he will be afforded to negotiate a release.
Elie Wiesel speaking about the WWII german socialists camps
saw: Perpetrators, Victims and bystanders.
Short of the mark!
He missed the Enablers and Kapos … Mengele couldn’t have performed “procedures” without the Kapos and enablers.
Enablers can appear far removed …. they’re there … inside the gates.
G6loq:
Thank you for your meaningful post about enablers and German Nietzschean Social Darwinism.
If you want to learn how the kappos and enablers got inside our gates you can read:
Intended Consequences: Birth Control, Abortion, and the Federal Government in Modern America
by Donald T. Critchlow
I’ve enjoyed discussing this with you.
Intended Consequences: Birth Control, Abortion, and the Federal Government in Modern America
Thanks. On the list.
Eugenics used to be all the rage. Planned Parenthood founder [Margaret Sager] was a major proponent. Given the gross ethnic bunching of abortion “procedures” one could say that “Zee dream has Komt true” … incrementalism work!
As if the dialogue over abortion isn’t confusing enough:
“Feminists for Life”
“Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians”
“Pro-Lifers Against Clinic Violence”
“Libertarians for Life” – founded by Doris Gordon, an atheist