That is true, but we can't tell them that their sins are OK, least of all something that from our point of view has such an impact on innocent souls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
Printable View
That is true, but we can't tell them that their sins are OK, least of all something that from our point of view has such an impact on innocent souls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
That makes his death no less a tragedy. You're also now voicing a far more nuanced view than ealier. Regardless of what you think of his actions, he should be accorded no less the basic respect due to all human beings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Instances like this are why I think "fundamentalist" Christianity is fundamentally wrong.
I always said his death was unfortunate. In any case, why do you blame this on "fundamentalist" Christianity? That's not a whole lot different to when people use this to troll Christianity in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
"Unfortunate" is the word Gerry Adams used to describe the recent IRA attacks, he was attacked by politicians accross the board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
In this case I think, tragic, brutal and "betrayal of Christian values" aren't even a good start.
What disturbs me is that I think some people here think this man deserved to die because of what he did, which is a decidedly un-Christian response.
Well what can you do, Gerry Adams thinks Orangemen are evil and doesn't care if they die, I think people that kill babies are messed up and though he should not die at the hands of a vigilante, I would be lying if I said I would lose sleep over it.
I've said his killing was wrong, but common, would all the people telling me that my views are terrible apply the same standard to themselves? How many of you would get upset if Bin Laden got mowed down by someone without getting a trial? You would probably say it was wrong, but after what he's did, it's hard to feel sorry for him.
We must be reading different threads. I haven't seen anybody claim he got what he deserved. I personally said I would pray for the repose of his soul, despite how horrific I found his crimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
How is that a strawman? You made the point that since he was an usher at his Lutheran church, he was no monster. I responded that the BTK killer was an Elder at his (as it turns out, a Deacon to boot), and you call "strawman"?Quote:
Something of a strawman, as he was not hiding the fact he was an abortionist. So your comparison doesn't work.
None of this affects my origonal point, it is un-Christian to reject someone because of their actions, especially if we find those actions repulsive.
Reject a person? Yes, un-Christian. God reserves judgment of people for Himself. Reject their actions? Not only is it permissable, it is required. It is an act of divine charity to speak truth to sin in your brother. Pretending that performing elective 3rd trimester abortions is no different than removing melanomas is gauche and un-Christian. Love of your fellow man does not mean you accept all of their sins so that you don't hurt their feelings.
would all the people telling me that my views are terrible apply the same standard to themselves?
I feel for the family and the victim whatever his sins... not a fan of christianity but i am a big fan of some of jesus' work. Love the sinner hate the sin as Philipvs mentioned...
Not sure if im going deep into some left wing thought or some christian though but i don't think people are inherently bad and through mistake, wrongs done to them, brainwashing, mental illness, just plain ignorance people can be led to all kinds of sick things. But at the end of the day they are still human and it is a tragedy...
Agreed, this is the problem with most prejudice is that we take the actions of a few and apply that to the whole. The flip side as I see it is that we are very active in stopping prejudice if it is against a religion, but if the thought system is outside of that it can be actively torn apart with aplomb.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good
Hyperbole has it place as long as people recognise it's use as a device, but much like irony and sarcasm it often muddies the water rather then shines a light on what is happening.
I think it is far more productive to not go straight to 'there's a monster in there them hills' and focus on 'he was a man, with a family and that he was a human just like the rest of us'. For me evil is when we reject the humanity in others and it is what allows us to slaughter those we disagree with. First we vilify them and reject them as one of us and the eases the pain, as we would find it much more difficult to kill someone we recognise as a fellow human. That is the succor that is given to the murderer in this thread. By making the Dr a monster rather then a human we are aiding and abetting the mind set that takes the next step of 'freeing us of that monster'.
Actions are first formed in the mind. Mindsets are choices, and all choices have consequences.
Think a little bit before taking that step that others are not human because their choices and their consequences are not those that you would wish to take for yourself and your loved ones. It doesn't have to be love or hate, and we can all be polite to people even if we don't like their choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
Cheeky. Some people kill people and are themselves killed. The whole situation is tragic and unfortunate. Moral posturing is fun, though, eh?
It's hard to commit a crime when you're not breaking a law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
SemanticsQuote:
Originally Posted by KarlXII
Not cheeky, serious.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
This is from my throne of reckoning.
Please note that the throne of reckoning is a glass toilet seat, in a glass toilet room, in a glass house. My guilt in group think and righteous rage is more then most, so I'm pontificating well and truly from the guilty spectrum. Also I probably should use the neighbours toilets, but Banquo's has too much artillery and that makes me feel inadequate. Lemurs has too many monkeys and their spanking is distracting, while Kukrikhan's has more knives then the Bobbets.
You act like I'm not in the room right next to you, giving the kitchen counter a righteous reckoning. I told you I needed to use the glass toilet, and your deaf ears have lead to me punishing the glass counter with a fresh brown paint job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
Is there anyone left who doesn't know this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Early abortion is the "I can't have a baby now!"-abortion. Late-term is the "something's :daisy: 'd up" abortion.
Let's face it, late-term abortion is a needed procedure. Just as needed as the earlier version.
I would apply the same position to Bin Laden, if he has to be killed it is yet another failure of the War of Ideas we are currently engaged in. In Bin Laden's case, however, his death might have some (debatable) strategic value, it might lessen the fighting for a time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
The killing of this man was totally pointless as well as tragic and morally disgusting.
That wasn't particually aimed at you, Don, but even you feel the need to add "despite", why?Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
He's one of God's children, he's dead; why does there have to be a "despite"?
Maybe it's just me, but this seems incredibly simple from my point of view, and I also apply the same view to his murderer.
Yes, because the BTK killer was a closet serial killer and a cociopath (tortured animals, apparently), his congregation didn't know what he was doing to his victims. Conversely, you could hardly not know what Tiller's job was, because he was shot before and had his place of work blown up. They aren't psychologically equivilant, nor is their treatment by their respective congregations.Quote:
How is that a strawman? You made the point that since he was an usher at his Lutheran church, he was no monster. I responded that the BTK killer was an Elder at his (as it turns out, a Deacon to boot), and you call "strawman"?
They aren't comparable.
The term "monster" has been banded around here. I don't agree with his actions or his choice of proffesion, but at the end of the day I think you have to accept that society at large and his community were by-and-large happy that he was a normal human being.Quote:
Reject a person? Yes, un-Christian. God reserves judgment of people for Himself. Reject their actions? Not only is it permissable, it is required. It is an act of divine charity to speak truth to sin in your brother. Pretending that performing elective 3rd trimester abortions is no different than removing melanomas is gauche and un-Christian. Love of your fellow man does not mean you accept all of their sins so that you don't hurt their feelings.
Which leaves us to consider how a normal human being can think it is better to kill a foetus than let it live, that's the real tragedy.
I wish the term 'sinner' would not be flying around so much in this thread.
We can of course agree, disagree and pass judgment on people and their decisions. However, accusing people of sin is like putting words in the Gods' mouths. But what do I know, I am an Atheist.
Those without sin cast the first stone...
Hey! where'd all the stone throwers suddenly go ?!
I find myself agreeing with philipvs position in this thread...
I don't think anyone really disagrees, its just for some people the shock factor of what Tilller did for a living numbs them to his murder. It's probably not the 'right' way to feel, but I guess its a natural reaction, maybe not all that different from what led to the killer shooting him, but I can't help it.
When it comes to what some people see as baby-killing, there's always going to be emotional responses.
When a human 'kills' fetuses he is considered a criminal by some people. (I am not trying to defend his actions here, the point has been discussed already. Just stating the fact)
When a baby dies by an 'act of God' (i.e. cancer, a congenital defect, freak accident) the same people say things like 'we thank God for bringing him/her to our lives' and 'they are now flying with the angels' and things like that. If said baby survives horribly disable and in a word of permanent pain, they say 'Oh it is a mircacle. We thank God for saving him', despite the fact that said God could prevent it in the first place. Noone brands God a criminal.
I do not say this as a criticism but it always perplexes me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rasoforos
The best people I know have undergone the most serious hardships imaginable. It makes you a stronger person. It is simply heartless bigotry to believe that being handicapped makes someone a miserable waste of life. No one should be executed because their parents refuse to let them experience life. It is all about selfishness. I've seen severely handicapped children enjoy their lives while their parents care for them. The state gives money for the childcare. Some children actually do get better, but even if they don't - some of the happiest children are the severely handicapped or retarded. To kill your own child because you refuse to take responsibility is the highlight of selfishness and it makes me sick.
Meanwhile, people with everything going for them can be the first ones to hate their lives, make the world worse for others, and lack any kind of perspective. When you abort you end a human life out of selfishness. You can try to warp it any way you'd like, but that fact is inescapable. Men like Tiller kill people for money. They have families, go to church, visit littler league games, crack jokes, wink at you when irony is in the air and decapitate and suction tens of thousands of unborn children with no remorse.
I don't believe God has a decisive role in human affairs. pretty much everything I see around me is the immidiate result of human action.Quote:
Originally Posted by rasoforos
That may sound like a cop out.
You do see that :Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
a) I explicitly mentioned that I am not trying to discuss his actions
b) Your post has nothing to do with my post whatsoeverQuote:
(I am not trying to defend his actions here, the point has been discussed already. Just stating the fact)
...a misquote?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rasoforos
Potentially. I read "disablility" and my senses were inflamed. I take offence at the various posters who have no problem with late term abortions when they target the disabled, but then aknowledge viability at that stage. To me sayign that a mentally retarded baby can and should be killed on a technicality 2 weeks before he/she is born while 2 seconds after birth it becomes immoral is a massive cop out. You (not you) say you shouldn't kill a viable normal baby at a late stage, but it is ok or understandable to kill a baby with downs syndrom at the same stage. Nonsense. Your belief system is corrupt and barbaric - in need of an audit
You know who you (not necessarilly you) are.
Sure it happens out of, as you call it, selfishness - but again you're on shallow ground there. I completely understand why a raped woman would want to have an abortion, how a 16 year old girl does not view pregnancy as God's birthday present and I completely understand why a family would want to abort a fetus who shows signs of chromosomal irregularities and or anatomical defects. I can understand that said parents are able to make the decision, which is probably never ever easy, based on the quality of life both for themselves and for the fetus - soon to be child. And I also understand that the only person capable of actually doing said procedure is a doctor, and not your friendly neighborhood cop.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
I've said this before but I'm surprised at your hatred against the people doing the procedure and not against those who ask for it (in the literal sense). Morally it's just as bad, even if one of the two get's paid for it. I believe at least in the US the person who pays the killer for hire actually gets more jail time, or is at least just as guilty as the person wielding the gun or whatever. They don't let him or her off under the pretense that 'they'll live the rest of their lives in shame'.Quote:
Men like Tiller kill people for money. They have families, go to church, visit littler league games, crack jokes, wink at you when irony is in the air and decapitate and suction tens of thousands of unborn children with no remorse.
:balloon2:
I would be interested in any breakdown of how many of Dr. Tiller's patients were there because of damaged fetuses versus true "convenience" abortions. Interesting article here:
Susan Hill, President of the National Women's Health Foundation, who knew Dr. Tiller for over two decades and referred girls and women to his clinic, said in a phone interview, "We always sent the really tragic cases to Tiller." Those included women diagnosed with cancer who needed abortions to qualify for chemotherapy, women who learned late in their pregnancies that their wanted babies had fatal illnesses, and rape victims so young they didn't realize they were pregnant for months. "We sent him 11-year-olds, 12-year-olds who were way too far along for anybody [else] to see," said Hill. "Eleven-year-olds don't tell anybody. Sometimes they don't even know they've had a period."
Since the news of Dr. Tiller's murder broke, personal narratives from people who used his services have been appearing around the Web. A commenter at the blog Balloon Juice told the story of finding out in the eighth month of his wife's pregnancy that she was carrying conjoined twins. "Conjoined twins alone is not what was so difficult but the way they were joined meant that at best only one child would survive the surgery to separate them and the survivor would more than likely live a brief and painful life filled with surgery and organ transplants." They chose to terminate the much-wanted pregnancy, rather than bring a child into the world only to suffer and die. "The nightmare of our decision and the aftermath was only made bearable by the warmth and compassion of Dr. Tiller and his remarkable staff." A commenter on Metafilter tells a similar story: "My wife and I spent a week in Dr. Tiller's care after we learned our 21 week fetus had a severe defect incompatible with life. The laws in our state prevented us from ending the pregnancy there, and Dr. Tiller was one of maybe three choices in the whole nation at that gestational age." [...]
A 2001 article originally published in Glamour relates the experience of Gloria Gonzalez, who learned that the twins she was carrying were gravely ill and threatening her own health. "As a Christian and a married woman who desperately wanted a child, I'd never given much thought to abortion. Like many others, I assumed that only women with unwanted pregnancies had the procedure." Yet after she and her husband consulted with several doctors and their pastor, "We knew what we had to do. Letting the girls die on their own didn't seem like an option, because we believed they were suffering while endangering my own health." The Web site A Heartbreaking Choice, which compiles stories from women who have chosen to terminate wanted pregnancies, has a section devoted to "Kansas Stories," from women who traveled to Wichita after receiving catastrophic diagnoses too late in their pregnancies to obtain legal abortions in their own states. The stories are painfully similar: A couple is thrilled to be expecting a baby, only to see a doctor's face turn grim during a routine ultrasound. Something is terribly wrong. And whatever the specific diagnosis is, the prognosis is essentially the same: If your baby lives, it will suffer constantly and die young.
Sounds like he was a hero, huh Lemur?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
It sounds like some people were there for reasons that were far more complicated than you are willing to admit, certainly. Why not crawl down off that high horse and actually address the points I have raised?
Also, didn't your mama raise you better than to quote the entirety of a long post only to add a single-sentence comment? She'd slap you silly for such bad posting etiquette.
This rather tallies with what I was expecting, and sadly proves my point. Underage rape victims, undiagnosed conjoined twins and threats to the mother's health. In the first case I don't believe abortion should be allowed, I'm sorry, I realise how incredibly hard that is for the mother but I can't ever condone it. In the second case one has to wonder how doctors do not stop such defects before eight months (Rory may have insight on this). In the final case, in the final case, where the children cannot survive and the mother's life is in danger I see only one option, which is the one she took.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
The question though, is how many of Tiller's patients should have never been in such a position.
Your point is that people should kill other people if they feel that they must and the law allows them to. Your point seems to be that Tiller was a defender of life. I won't entertain your equivocation here. You are an enabler and apologist of killers in this instance and are content to be one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Pro-life doctors would perform an abortion to save the life of a mother.
TuffStuff, if you can bear to address "an enabler and apologist of killers" for a moment, you might want to unpack your statements there. "Pro-life doctors would perform an abortion to save the life of a mother?" Examples, please? Can you back this up, or is this you speaking from your gut? I've now read accounts of women who couldn't get already-dead fetuses removed from their bodies because doctors didn't want to do anything that even resembles abortion. I take it you know something the rest of us don't?
Also, I'll say the same thing to you that I've said to those who demonize Christians: Dismissive, extremist rhetoric does not advance this conversation. If you are so certain that you have all of the answers to this problem, you should be able to articulate your reasoning without resorting to broad attacks sans logic.