Late-Term Abortion Provider Gunned Down In Church

I oppose late-term abortions, but this is not the way to fight it. Gunning down a man in church in front of his wife? What kind of sick loser thinks that's a good idea? Change the law, don't resort to domestic terrorism. Waaaay too reminiscent of Theo van Gogh.

A thoughtful reaction:

"If anyone has an urge to kill someone at an abortion clinic, they should shoot me. ... It's madness. It discredits the right-to-life movement. Murder is murder. It's madness. You cannot prevent killing by killing." — John Cardinal O'Connor

Another:

The murder of George Tiller at his church is a heinous crime, without any sense or justice. Regardless of how one feels about George Tiller’s profession, his murderer is nothing more than a domestic terrorist — someone attempting to impose by force a policy that one cannot get in place through democratic means. Tiller’s killer is no better than William Ayers, Kathleen Soliah, and Eric Rudolph, people who attempted to use violence for their extremist ends. Those who value life know that murder is the antithesis of the pro-life movement. [...] Circumstantial evidence suggests that the motive was indeed political.

Beliefnet has an interesting article about how this links to the much-hated DHS report.

I was thoroughly dumbfounded at the conservative reaction to that report in April. If you read the report, it was quite clearly aimed a serious, violent, insane extremists. Yet mainstream conservatives took great offense, accusing the Obama administration of chillingly targeting the free-speech of conscientious anti-abortion citizens, veterans and conservatives writ large. [...]

Roeder seems exactly the sort of person that the DHS warned about.

The report suggested that the bad economy and the election of a black president could stimulate more anger and activity from "violent anti-government groups." Far from attacking anti-abortion activists in general, as many claimed, the report instead noted white supremacists' "longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion."

We'll see if Roeder maintained his ties to the militia groups or had shifted his focus to abortion only, but at a minimum, conservatives have to make a new choice: take seriously right wing extremists -- the real ones, not the bloviators -- or run the risk of truly being lumped together.

In a way, conservatives now face a choice similar to what liberals in the late 1960s and early 1970s faced during the heyday of the Weather Underground.

There is now exactly one doctor who is known to provide late-term abortions. I expect he's a marked man as well.

There's a right way and a wrong way. Murdering to score political points is the wrong way.

I agree completely, Lemur. As horrific as Dr. Tiller's crimes against humanity have been, murdering him to stop them does nothing.

I pray for mercy for the souls of Dr. Tiller & Mr. Roeder.

It was wrong, but it's hard to feel sorry for such a monster.

It would be a different story if it wasn't late term abortions. I sympathise with abortionists views when the baby is no more than a lump of cells, but you can't be right in the head to carry out late-term abortions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I agree completely, Lemur. As horrific as Dr. Tiller's crimes against humanity have been, murdering him to stop them does nothing.

I pray for mercy for the souls of Dr. Tiller & Mr. Roeder.

---

QFT

Lemur, you will be (hopefully) pleased to know that almost every pro-life group I know of has condemned this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I agree completely, Lemur. As horrific as Dr. Tiller's crimes against humanity have been, murdering him to stop them does nothing.

I pray for mercy for the souls of Dr. Tiller & Mr. Roeder.

---

:bow:

:no:

Sad story in so many ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

It was wrong, but it's hard to feel sorry for such a monster.

---

Oh come on - this Doctor was performing a completely legal operation and was killed for it.

That sickens me quite frankly. That you would put your own anti-abortion views above feeling sorry for a man who was just murdered is utterly reprehensible.

In church as well... sickening...

My condolences to his family

Edit: I wonder if maybe a military man involved in guantanamo bay, would you struggle to feel sorry if that monster was killed ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Lemur, you will be (hopefully) pleased to know that almost every pro-life group I know of has condemned this.

---

I don't know if "pleased" is the right word; "relieved" would describe my feelings more accurately. Although you say "almost" every group has condemned the killing — who has abstained? Scary to think that any mainstream political group could condone this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

I wonder if maybe a military man involved in guantanamo bay, would you struggle to feel sorry if that monster was killed ?

---

Not sure to whom this question was directed, but I'll bite: I don't think anyone involved with our torture policy should be murdered. Not the men who carried it out, not the lawyers who enabled it, not the executives giving the orders. This is America. We should never murder people with whom we disagree. If something is heinous and wrong, eventually we pass a law. Like Winston Churchill said, “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing — after they've tried everything else.”

The great late Bill Hicks described the irony of this situation better than I could have ever done..

'these are pro-life people...who murder doctors...'

it´s irony on a base level, but it´s a hoot!:rolleyes2:

Yeah basically Lemur i agree... it was kind of directed at rythfelwyr. Its a much greyer area if were talking about mass murdering dictators (though i still don't approve death penalty) but if were talking about people who do unsavoury things for thier Job, like say late term abortion doctor, enhanched intergation officer/solidier but things that aren't nessecarily illegal and are more of a grey area then thier murders are shocking and i do feel for them and thier family...

It may be unsavoury but they are just doing thier job, a job that through whatever process is legal in your country...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Although you say "almost" every group has condemned the killing — who has abstained?

---

Nobody that I can think of. Why are you relieved rather than pleased? I doubt that any of the major pro-life groups would condone this.

As I said his murder was wrong, but I don't care if he was just doing his job, or if it was legal. The Nazi guards at the concentration camps were just doing their jobs, and it would have been perfectly legal, but that doesn't make it right.

To be honest, I think you have to be a very sick person to carry out late term abortions.

Better yet, show me a pro-life group that condones it. It's absolutely antithetical to both those organizations and Christianity as a whole. "Love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you" doesn't translate well into "blow away those you disagree with."

/in before all-faith-is-evil

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

It was wrong, but it's hard to feel sorry for such a monster

---

Yeah, that's where I am. The doctors murder was unhelpful and just plain wrong. Whatever he did, you can't justify his murder- but I can't feel sorry for the man anymore than I could a concentration camp executioner.

For a living, this man took babies who, were old enough live if born prematurely, and ripped them from their mother's wombs and killed them. The clinic even offered baptisms for aborted babies- how monstrous is that? I'm incapable of shedding any tears for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Yeah basically Lemur i agree... it was kind of directed at rythfelwyr. Its a much greyer area if were talking about mass murdering dictators (though i still don't approve death penalty)

---

Well, hang on a second, I wasn't making an argument against the death penalty. If a person has a fair trial and is found guilty and sentenced, then so be it. I was saying that people should not be killed by other private citizens for their political actions, or to prove a political point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Why are you relieved rather than pleased? I doubt that any of the major pro-life groups would condone this.

---

I am relieved because the abortion issue can bring out the extremist in people, and some of the rhetoric that gets used is kind of out-there. If pro-life groups are taking care to distance themselves from a clearly criminal man, why shouldn't I be relieved? I want an abortion compromise to be reached within my lifetime, and that means that people on both sides of the issue need to be rational and legitimate.

I could too easily see people saying, "It's a good day for 'Merica!" as some hick was shouting on Left4Dead last night. (I realize that a zombie-killing game is not a representative sample of the electorate.)

Got to love the hypocrisy of those pro-life protesters. So this guy deserved to be shot because he killed babies but by killing him they some how have to moral high ground? Hmmmmm

Similarities can also be drawn to those who are Christians yet support the death penalty. "Jesus told me to love thy neighbour and turn the other cheek but I support the death penalty because some people don't deserve my forgiveness" . It's a mad, mad world..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tibilicus

Got to love the hypocrisy of those pro-life protesters. So this guy deserved to be shot because he "killed" babies but by killing him they some how have to moral high ground? Hmmmmm

---

Do you always use outliers to judge groups, or is it only with people you don't like?

The Nazi guards at the concentration camps were just doing their jobs,

I was going to put a sentence in but i figured i would give godwins law a rest...

Its a little different shoving thousands of jews off to thier deaths every day.... i was thinking more american torturer in Gauntanamo bay than nazi gaurd...

Well, hang on a second, I wasn't making an argument against the death penalty. If a person has a fair trial and is found guilty and sentenced, then so be it. I was saying that people should not be killed by other private citizens for their political actions, or to prove a political point.

Basically i was agreeing... the part in brackets was more a side point not connected the rest...

Basically the part in brackets was saying despite the fact i would be less bothered about someone killing a mass murdering dictator like they killed this doctor... i still wouldn't approve of giving them the death penalty..

You know... incase any dictators were reading the .org and thought i was wishing them harm...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tibilicus

Got to love the hypocrisy of those pro-life protesters. So this guy deserved to be shot because he killed babies but by killing him they some how have to moral high ground? Hmmmmm

Similarities can also be drawn to those who are Christians yet support the death penalty. "Jesus told me to love thy neighbour and turn the other cheek but I support the death penalty because some people don't deserve my forgiveness" . It's a mad, mad world..

---

:no:

Are you done trolling or are you ready to actually see people've been saying about the story? NOBODY here has said "way to go, buddy!" The man acted on his own, and received nearly zero support from every pro-life group. Stop being a total :daisy:

This wasn't what the Pro Life Lobby wants, they want to end abortions, especially late term abortions. What this man is, is a cold blooded killer, not a representative for what Pro Lifers want. Of course he will be condemned, and will serve the rest of his days behind a steel curtain. He will never be the martyr, he thinks he is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

As I said his murder was wrong, but I don't care if he was just doing his job, or if it was legal. The Nazi guards at the concentration camps were just doing their jobs, and it would have been perfectly legal, but that doesn't make it right.

---

Its irrelevant - the consequences of such a death are felt mainly by the family of the victim. Feel sorry for them. (and I would seperate him from Nazi guards, he was apparently 1 of 2 people, they can truly claim to be binded by orders + fear, he could not)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tibilicus

Got to love the hypocrisy of those pro-life protesters. So this guy deserved to be shot because he killed babies but by killing him they some how have to moral high ground? Hmmmmm

Similarities can also be drawn to those who are Christians yet support the death penalty. "Jesus told me to love thy neighbour and turn the other cheek but I support the death penalty because some people don't deserve my forgiveness" . It's a mad, mad world..

---

I don't see why its neccessarily hypocritical for Christians/ Pro-Lifers to support the death penalty, afaik Pro-Lifers only argue everyone should be given a chance at life. As has been said, he is clearly not representative of the Pro-Life lobby anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

This wasn't what the Pro Life Lobby wants, they want to end abortions, especially late term abortions. What this man is, is a cold blooded killer, not a representative for what Pro Lifers want. Of course he will be condemned, and will serve the rest of his days behind a steel curtain. He will never be the martyr, he thinks he is.

---

Meh, iv heard from ex-brainwashed women that used to be part of the pro-life movement the exact opposite, one a certain "Sciwoman" over at Richardawkins.net and another a neighbor . They can tell some heavy stories that went on when they were screaming and harassing women going to the abortion clinics. I got no doubt in my mind that "mainstream" pro-lifers are praising this terrorist behind closed doors.

Iv heard from other forums that the doctor that got assassinated only performed on 3rd trimester babies when it was apparent they would have severe birth defects, anyone else have information on this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

I got no doubt in my mind that "mainstream" pro-lifers are praising this terrorist behind closed doors.

---

Alright, so amount of people who know nothing about the pro-life movement in this thread tallies at: 1. I'll keep a running total, don't worry.

Well, it certainly sounds as though a measurable percentage of people opting for late-term abortions are folks with severely damaged babies. Examples:

My wife and I are/were staunch choice advocates; we'd both done our share of marching on Washington for the cause. Actually enduring the process gave us a much more nuanced opinion about abortion.

For us, it was Trisomy 21 -- Down Syndrome. The test came after my wife awoke one night in a pool of blood screaming and thinking she'd suffered a miscarriage. After she ran to the toilet, it fell upon me to call her doctor and then scoop out the remains--that actually turned out to be huge clots--and take them to the doctor the next day. The geneticist said that because of all the bleeding and other complications there was almost no chance the fetus would make it to 20 weeks let alone full term.

My wife says one of my finest moments as her husband came when I somehow made her laugh while she awaited the abortion. My wife doesn't talk about her feelings of the abortion and the "failed" pregnancy. But we've been together for more than a decade and I know she will always be crushed by it. I know we made the right decision for us but it still hurts badly. This was the son we would never have.

----------

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. My wife just called with the news of his murder, weeping. I can't really come up with some profound political statement just now, so let me just list some memories of Dr. Tiller.

I remember him firmly stating that he regarded the abortion debate in the US to be about the control of women's sexuality and reproduction.

I remember he spent over six hours in one-on-one care with my wife when there was concern she had an infection. We're talking about a physician here. Six hours.

He told the story of his previous shooting, where a woman shot him twice in both arms as he drove out of his clinic. At first he wanted to run her down with his Jeep, but then he thought "she shot you already George, she'll do it again!"

I remember being puzzled about a T-shirt he was wearing, which said "Happy Birthday Jennifer from team Tiller!" or something similar. Turns out it comemmorated the birthday of a fifteen year old girl who was raped, became pregnant, and came to Tiller for an abortion. As luck would have it, she was in the clinic the same week as her birthday. So the clinic threw her a party.

The walls of the clinic reception and waiting room are literally covered with letters from patients thanking him. Some were heartbreaking - obviously young and/or poorly educated people thanking Dr. Tiller for being there when they had no other options, explaining their family, church etc. had abandoned them.

I remember my wife, foggy with sedation after the final procedure, being helped from the exam table. He had her sit up and put her arms around his neck, and then he lifted her into a wheelchair. "You give good hugs" she whispered. He paused just for a moment. "You're just fine," he told her.

--------

My brother and his wife received a diagnosis at the beginning of the second trimester's ultrasound that their child had anencephaly - a condition where the fetus' skull does not completely close and the brain forms partially outside the skull. It is a neural tube defect, similar to spina bifida, but it happens higher up on the body. They were told the child would die before, or shortly after, birth. There was no doubt about the diagnosis. My brother and his wife were encouraged by their doctor to go to Kansas for an abortion, the closest place where they could obtain one in the second trimester.

It was an agonizing decision, but they chose not to have the abortion for religious reasons. The pregnancy went to term and the baby lived for several weeks. She was surrounded by love for the brief time she was here.

I wish I could say unequivocally that they made the right decision, but the long-term effects on my sister-in-law's mental well-being have been serious. She is very much changed from the person that she was before.

Imagine what it is like to walk around in your third trimester, obviously pregnant, while well-meaning people ask you about this baby that you don't expect to be taking home from the hospital. Innocuous comments become incredibly hurtful in this context. Then imagine the baby survives and days later you take home this child who will die. In case you might relax and pretend for a little while that everything is okay, a hospice nurse comes to your house every couple of days and reminds you the signs and symptoms of death. Every time you open the refrigerator you see the narcotics you've been given to ease the baby's suffering once things get really bad.

Eventually, this baby dies a grueling death in your arms and you go home to an empty house. You want another baby, but are paralyzed by the thought of having another child with the same condition, yet you desperately want a child that is related to the child you lost. You find yourself unable to conceive and resentful of those who have many healthy children so easily. The infertility takes its toll on your marriage. The suffering and injustice takes its toll on your faith.

I often wonder what would have happened if they had the abortion. I'm not sure my sister-in-law could have lived with that decision, but at least she was given the gift of making a deliberate choice and this did make a difference in how my brother and his wife perceived their circumstances. How do people respond when they feel trapped?

I agree with those who believe abortion is a selfish choice, but in some cases the cost to the self is too high and the benefit to the other is too hard to determine. I'm afraid that the murder of Dr. Tiller will hasten the decline in doctors willing to do this work and deny desperate people of options.

Well I can't say more than what's been said by Don Corleone.

Quote:

---

Oh come on - this Doctor was performing a completely legal operation and was killed for it.

---

Legality has nothing to do with morality. It was once legal to own slaves and treat them horribly. Would calling a brutal slaveowner, who was killed by a radical abolitionist, a 'monster' offend you?

Now the murder was, of course, wrong, and goes against the principles of those who are pro-life.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

Meh, iv heard from ex-brainwashed women that used to be part of the pro-life movement the exact opposite, one a certain "Sciwoman" over at Richardawkins.net and another a neighbor . They can tell some heavy stories that went on when they were screaming and harassing women going to the abortion clinics. I got no doubt in my mind that "mainstream" pro-lifers are praising this terrorist behind closed doors.

Iv heard from other forums that the doctor that got assassinated only performed on 3rd trimester babies when it was apparent they would have severe birth defects, anyone else have information on this?

---

I understand that some of the extreme elements are certainly clapping their hands. However, Leadership had better distance themselves from the extremists, make their organizations far more transparent, and had better do it quickly. In the end, little cases like these, actually make Pro Choice stronger. Which is fine.

The man was sick. Unfortunately he lived to destroy life. What do you do with monsters like that when the state refuses to lock them up?

I'll pray for him, but is name will be at the end of the list of the 60,000 infants he has killed, so it may take a while.

This man did not deserve to die, no one does. To suggest otherwise is to miss the point of Christianity as a religion. This man was not a murderer, he was a doctor; he no doubt thought he was helping people by offering this service, aliviating suffering and making lives better. The fact that he was killing upborn children is itself hgorrific, but it says more about American society than this one man.

I see no evidence he was anything other than normal and well adjusted, no doubt he also had a support staff and family and friends who thought his job was acceptable, I doubt he enjoyed parts of it very much. The fact that he felt this particular evil was necessary is truly dreadful, but those condemning him here should examine the world around them and ask how he was brought to this state.

As to those Christians condemning him here, I say two things: "Love the sinner, hate the sin" and remember that Jesus went to the prostitutes, thieves and tax collectors, I'm sure he had dinner with a Greek doctor who performed abortions as well.

This man is dead, he and his family deserve compassion, sympathy, protection, forgiveness and love; not hate and recrimination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Well I can't say more than what's been said by Don Corleone.



Legality has nothing to do with morality. It was once legal to own slaves and treat them horribly. Would calling a brutal slaveowner, who was killed by a radical abolitionist, a 'monster' offend you?

Now the murder was, of course, wrong, and goes against the principles of those who are pro-life.

CR

---

The women getting the late term abortions didnt do it for the lulz. It was either that or bringing up a invalid,something most people dont have the mindset/financial situation to do.

Quote:

---

Alright, so amount of people who know nothing about the pro-life movement in this thread tallies at: 1. I'll keep a running total, don't worry.

---

Was raised in a fundamentalist christrian environment. Know more about it then I really care too.

Im glad to see people can fully seperate nutters causing death and destruction from the group they are associated with, I look forward to all you people supporting me next time we get into a discussion about Islam!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

The women getting the late term abortions didnt do it for the lulz. It was either that or bringing up a invalid,something most people dont have the mindset/financial situation to do.



Was raised in a fundamentalist christrian environment. Know more about it then I really care too.

---

Speaking as a Theologian and Christian, I don't rate fundamentalist Christianity, it, by definition, isn't mainstream and tends not to stick once you enter the real world. The tragedy is that many people, yourself included, ditch the whole thing rather than just the rotten bits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Speaking as a Theologian and Christian, I don't rate fundamentalist Christianity, it, by definition, isn't mainstream and tends not to stick once you enter the real world. The tragedy is that many people, yourself included, ditch the whole thing rather than just the rotten bits.

---

So your actually advocating cherry picking? (Choosing the parts you like, ditching the parts you dont). Thats a riot, most people at least try to make it more subtle by saying to "focus on what Jesus said, he made it so the old testament doesnt need to be followed ", even though Jesus said the exact opposite.

Fundamentalist Christianity may not be the mainstream, but in the Bible Belt (Tulsa, Oklahoma) it certainly is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

So your actually advocating cherry picking? (Choosing the parts you like, ditching the parts you dont). Thats a riot, most people at least try to make it more subtle by saying to "focus on what Jesus said, he made it so the old testament doesnt need to be followed ", even though Jesus said the exact opposite.

Fundamentalist Christianity may not be the mainstream, but in the Bible Belt (Tulsa, Oklahoma) it certainly is.

---

Your statement implies Southern Baptism is "complete" Christianity, that rejecting some of those doctrines makes you "less Christian". That is by no means definitively so, conversely I could argue that fundamentalists cherry pick because they do not adhere to the Creeds, which predate the canonisation of the Bible by 50-70 years.

That denomination and it's ilk are neither the last word, nor representative. Nor is Jesus attitude to the Old Testemant simple or especially clear, particually in translation; what is explicit is that he rejected certain parts (eye for and eye, divorce etc.) Further, the denomination you refer to is known for a high level of litteralism in scripture and a low level of contrextuality.

If you want to attack my faith or my scholarship, feel free to open a dedicated thread for that purpose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Your statement implies Southern Baptism is "complete" Christianity, that rejecting some of those doctrines makes you "less Christian". That is by no means definitively so, conversely I could argue that fundamentalists cherry pick because they do not adhere to the Creeds, which predate the canonisation of the Bible by 50-70 years.

That denomination and it's ilk are neither the last word, nor representative. Nor is Jesus attitude to the Old Testemant simple or especially clear, particually in translation; what is explicit is that he rejected certain parts (eye for and eye, divorce etc.) Further, the denomination you refer to is known for a high level of litteralism in scripture and a low level of contrextuality.

If you want to attack my faith or my scholarship, feel free to open a dedicated thread for that purpose.

---

I never said a thing. You said precisely

Quote:

---

ditch the whole thing rather than just the rotten bits.

---

Which to me means cherry picking, maybe to you it means status quo.

Jesus said in the new testament that he came not to discard the old laws, but to reaffirm them. Maybe not those exact words, its been a while since I heard the quote but its definitely there. I chose that example because the old testament is horrific, the doctor in this thread went after unborn babies, the old testament god went after men, women and children in genocide like fashion. Hence why growing up I was severely discouraged from even touching the old testament. It was just a example.

I choose not to attack your faith or scholarship, but im very curios as to what you consider is "the last word" and "representative" of the christian faith at whole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

What do you do with monsters like that when the state refuses to lock them up?

---

The state "refuses" to punish the doctor because of the law. We should work on changing that law, not on vilifying and murdering the people who perform procedures that we find abhorrent.

I have to tell you, in cases where the baby is found to have a defect that guarantees a painful, prolonged and expensive death, I don't know what's right. I just read an account of a child who was brought to term who required three (three!) heart surgeries before suffering an inevitable death at one week of age. This child's entire existence was open-chest surgery and pain.

I wouldn't inflict that on my dog, much less my child.

I guess if I had to make that call, I'd support my wife in either an abortion or a DNR with the hospital (assuming they'd allow it). And plenty of narcotics for my baby, to send him or her out on a sea of morphine.

Non-viable fetuses are what make me stumble in my opposition to late-term abortions. Thoughts?

Just another day in Taliban America.

Pro-lifer killed doctor... I just cant keep myself from stating the irony.

On the other hand, one might argue that the shooter carried out a very-very-late abortion...




On a more serious note: I do not believe the doctor made abortions for giggles and laughs... When one decide to have an abortion late there is usually a reason for it, no?


It's a sad day when something like this happens, my condoleances to the family and friends.

Just another day in Taliban America.

Show some respect, thats no better than trolling...

I have to say im opposed to late Abortions as well but in cases like Lemur mentions i fully support it... does anyone know what what proportion of this doctors abortions would be such a case... and in contrast what proportion of completely healthy fetuses did he perform late term abortions on ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Show some respect, thats no better than trolling...

---

Seriously. It's not helpful to use this incident to throw fecal matter at people of faith or pro-lifers. That's just not conducive to a discussion.

The vast majority of pro-lifers are law-abiding citizens who exercise their freedom of speech and assembly to agitate against a policy they find amoral and inhuman. Please don't use the actions of a single lunatic to paint them with the crazy brush. Note that pro-life organizations have been distancing themselves from this act as fast as they can press release.

Save any Christianity-bashing and America-bashing for an appropriate thread, please.

-edit-

That said, people who used every rhetorical trick in the book to paint Tiller as a monster might want to re-think their approach. If you keep telling your listeners and viewers that a man is an evil horror, one of them might take you seriously.

It is a statement that is accurate in direction if not magnitude. Religious nutters killing others because they don't obey their warped code. Just remember that the real Taliban in Afghanistan are only a tiny minority that push their non-mainstream religious view by killing those who oppose them. That the killer is getting even an iota of succor while the victim is vilified as a Nazi camp guard in this thread gives credence to the hyperbola of the Taliban America statement.

Also the strange double take given to religion in that it is okay to smash apart the Doctor but to point out the rot within a religion is a no-no.

One thinks that we wouldn't be so forgiving if the killer's philosophy was centred on Jedism or LOTR or a Trekkie. But change the frock and age the belief system a tad it is not ok to turn the lens on them. Tsk tsk tsk ageism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I see no evidence he was anything other than normal and well adjusted, no doubt he also had a support staff and family and friends who thought his job was acceptable, I doubt he enjoyed parts of it very much.

---

Take this link: www.drtiller.com/remembrance.html

and put it in to google. Then, Cache the page and look at what this "clinic" used to promote. They would photograph dead babies as a part of their "services". They would perform baptisms of the babies after death. Does that sound normal to you?

The fact remains that the man made millions killing tens of thousands of pre-born infants. He was also one of 3 doctors in the US who performed the most blatantly outrageous forms of infanticide that the law is still gray on. The media didn't need to take a moment of silence for Mengele. Their rememberances betray their much denied bias. The sad thing is that this barbarism hasn't been dealt with in the 21st century.

Every human has elements of humanity in them. It should be no suprise when even the worst of them have loving families. Evil is the sum of the acts that you take in life. By reasonable standards this man was human being who commited a myriad of crimes agaisnt the most innocent among his own people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

It is a statement that is accurate in direction if not magnitude. Religious nutters killing others because they don't obey their warped code. Just remember that the real Taliban in Afghanistan are only a tiny minority that push their non-mainstream religious view by killing those who oppose them. That the killer is getting even an iota of succor while the victim is vilified as a Nazi camp guard in this thread gives credence to the hyperbola of the Taliban America statement.

Also the strange double take given to religion in that it is okay to smash apart the Doctor but to point out the rot within a religion is a no-no.

One thinks that we wouldn't be so forgiving if the killer's philosophy was centred on Jedism or LOTR or a Trekkie. But change the frock and age the belief system a tad it is not ok to turn the lens on them. Tsk tsk tsk ageism.

---

I don't think anyone is objecting to criticisms of the kind of narrow and unchristian belief system that says this is ok. What I think people are objecting to is taking this one particularly unchristian action and saying "those Christians are all the same, murdering people for their God all the time." That's my problem anyway. For instance,

"Religious nutters killing others because they don't obey their warped code."

I think the emphasis should be on the "nutters" part because there are all sorts of murderers out there who kill others because they don't obey the murderer's code(s).

How awful. The sheer hypocrisy in this action dumbfounds me. How could someone possibly be so stupid as do something like this? What the doctor was doing was entirely legal, and could have been opposed by nonviolent means. While the pro-life movement in America has said they don't support this, they clearly need to start sending clear messages not to get violent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

They would photograph dead babies as a part of their "services". They would perform baptisms of the babies after death. Does that sound normal to you?

---

This is the second time that you're brought baptism up [edit, my bad, I see it was Xiahou who jumped on this first]. I can very easily imagine a situation where a couple terminates a non-viable fetus and still wants the blessing of baptism for their child.

Before we started successfully spawning, my wife and I went through a miscarriage at three months. Let me assure you, just because I never met that child doesn't mean I don't love it have tender feelings. Sorry, but your emphasis on services that might help a grieving couple don't wash, and they smell of unthinking hype. Whether it's a miscarriage or an abortion, losing a baby hurts. A record of baptism and a picture might help a hurting mother and father get through what must be a traumatic experience.

Some (many?) abortions are due to non-viable fetuses. Not everyone is using abortion as birth control. Consider this before you fire your next fusillade.

-edit-

Here's the text you're referring to:

Many patients request a remembrance of their baby to take home with them. The following lists items and services that some of our previous patients have found helpful in their emotional recovery. Everyone approaches this experience with their own unique emotional, spiritual, and cultural background. There is not right way or wrong way, just "your way". Once the process of healing has begun, you may want to consider a token of the precious time you and your baby had together. All of these features of our program will be discusssed with you while you are with us:

• Viewing your baby after delivery
• Holding your baby after delivery
• Photographs of your baby
• Baptism of your baby, with or without a certificate
• Footprints and handprints of your baby
• Certificate of premature miscarriage
• Cremation
• An urn for ashes
• Arrangement of burial in either Wichita or your home state
• Arrangement of amniocentesis/autopsy
• Medical photographsand x-rays for your health care professional

Grief is a very complex emotion which is expressed in many different ways. We will attempt to accommodate your individual requests to the very best of our abilities.

This does not sound ghoulish to me, having lost a child to miscarriage. This looks like an attempt to help people deal with grief. Although I oppose late-term abortions, I don't appreciate your attempt to score theatrical points from what appears to be a well-meaning attempt to let parents connect with the child they will never know.

There have been men, who made millions and stood behind the Pro Life Banner, using less than Scrupulous means to attain their wealth. Or do televangelists not exist anymore? I'm not sure if stealing old people's pensions to line one's pocket is morally sound... and yet at the same time feel they can blast abortion doctors, who legitimately believe they are doing a necessary evil. It may be the "devil's" work, but its honest in it's intent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Some (many?) abortions are due to non-viable fetuses. Not everyone is using abortion as birth control. Consider this before you fire your next fusillade.

---

It's an irrelevant argument to me. I never had any doubt that the man provided some percentage of "abortions" to terminate a non-viable pregnancy. If that were all he performed, a lot of people would likely have viewed him more kindly. However, his practice also provided and advertised elective late-term abortions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by website

At Women's Health Care Services, we specialize in "late" abortion care. We are able to perform elective abortions to the time in the pregnancy when the fetus is viable. Viability is not a set point in time. Viability is determined by the attending physician and is based on sonogram results, physical examination and last menstrual period date (if known). Our telephone counselors will ask you a number of medical questions to determine if you are eligible for an elective abortion. If you have visited another clinic or physician, we will ask for the results from a recent ultrasound.

Kansas law allows for post-viability abortion procedures when continuing the pregnancy is detrimental to the pregnant woman's health. Each person's circumstances are reviewed on a case-by-base basis. Please call so that we can discuss admission criteria with you.

---

They're taking care to state Kansas law and then go on to explain the many loopholes for terminating viable pregnancies electively.

It was a disgusting practice. Trying to put a better face on it by saying that some of the abortions were non-viable doesn't change the fact that many were.

In this thread: The Irony of the Pro-Life Campaigners.

Godwin's in 15 posts. Well done Xiahou.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good

Do you always use outliers to judge groups, or is it only with people you don't like?

---

Sarcasm intended also generalising yes, but obviously that doesn't portray my view. I'm not stupid, I know only a small majority of pro-life groups act in a violent manner instead of going through the political system.

Also I don't hate pro-life groups, but I don't endorse the killing of another human.

Please note, message was posted late at night, I was tired and thought a 4 line sentence could some up my "general view". Didn't realise some people would read so deep into it..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shinseikhaan

:no:

Are you done trolling or are you ready to actually see people've been saying about the story? NOBODY here has said "way to go, buddy!" The man acted on his own, and received nearly zero support from every pro-life group. Stop being a total :daisy:

---

Should of stated that I'm referring to those extreme pro-lifers. I mean I don't particularly support abortion unless circumstances are extreme. And no it's not just one person, there are some very extreme sects of pro-lifers who have repeatedly attacked doctors who perform abortions homes and seem to see violence as a way of acting against people opposed to their beliefs.

Obviously a vast majority of of pro-life supporters prefer to use the correct legal method but the fact is there's a nubmer which doesn't.

Also my post has clear sarcasam and is obviously not serious. You seem to be getting worked up over nothing. Also what's the purpose of this thread if not to open the abortion debate and highlight the actions of those crazys who take it to far. But yer you cursing me was really productive, gratz.
Partly my fault yes, for not expanding on what I meant but as I mentioned I was tired and the only intention of my post was to highlight hypocrisy, your wrong to portray me as a troll. It's not who I am nor is it what will ever be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

Jesus said in the new testament that he came not to discard the old laws, but to reaffirm them. Maybe not those exact words, its been a while since I heard the quote but its definitely there. I chose that example because the old testament is horrific, the doctor in this thread went after unborn babies, the old testament god went after men, women and children in genocide like fashion. Hence why growing up I was severely discouraged from even touching the old testament. It was just a example.

I choose not to attack your faith or scholarship, but im very curios as to what you consider is "the last word" and "representative" of the christian faith at whole.

---

Sorry for being somewhat off topic, but I just want to clear this up. I agree that Jesus did not reject the OT, the verse you are thinking of is IIRC Matthew 5:17 - "I did not come to abolish the law or the prophets; I did not come to destroy, but to fulful".

But I also think PVC is right, in that you do not need to take this interpretation. Of course, if you view the scripture as authoritative as the Southern Baptists or myself do, then you must. But other denominations are not so big on the scriptures authority, and some even happily say that it will contradict itself.

Quote:

---

I have to say im opposed to late Abortions as well but in cases like Lemur mentions i fully support it... does anyone know what what proportion of this doctors abortions would be such a case... and in contrast what proportion of completely healthy fetuses did he perform late term abortions on ?

---

You could also look at this from the exact opposite way; are there cases in which soon to be parents ask a doctor to perform an abortion on a (seemingly) semi functional fetus ? There's also some hypocrisy in the targetting of doctors in cases such as this, it's the soon to be parents who decide - the doctor can only inform on any risks and actually do the procedure. If one wants to vilify the doctors and call them murderers, then the would-be parents are just as guilty if not morally more so.

:balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dutch_guy

You could also look at this from the exact opposite way; are there cases in which soon to be parents ask a doctor to perform an abortion on a (seemingly) semi functional fetus ? There's also some hypocrisy in the targetting of doctors in cases such as this, it's the soon to be parents who decide - the doctor can only inform on any risks and actually do the procedure. If one wants to vilify the doctors and call them murderers, then the would-be parents are just as guilty if not morally more so.

:balloon2:

---

But the parents are spending their own money to destroy their own children. As much as that sickens me, the guilt itself should be unbearable, I believe that the party that makes money from the procedure and actually takes the life should be jailed. The parent should be ashamed to look in the mirror for the rest of their life.

Quote:

---

To be honest, I think you have to be a very sick person to carry out late term abortions.

---

Well Rhyfelwyr, without saying whether I agree or disagree, couldn't the same be said about trying to heal a cancer? I mean, it is going against the laws of nature/God after all? What IF the chances of a miscarriage are substantial (40% up) and the woman would know this, and then would get a late term abortion (I'm not sure whether this is even possible, but I'm not a doctor). Where do you draw the line?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

I never said a thing. You said precisely Which to me means cherry picking, maybe to you it means status quo.

Jesus said in the new testament that he came not to discard the old laws, but to reaffirm them. Maybe not those exact words, its been a while since I heard the quote but its definitely there. I chose that example because the old testament is horrific, the doctor in this thread went after unborn babies, the old testament god went after men, women and children in genocide like fashion. Hence why growing up I was severely discouraged from even touching the old testament. It was just a example.

I choose not to attack your faith or scholarship, but im very curios as to what you consider is "the last word" and "representative" of the christian faith at whole.

---

That depends on your view of your particular upbringing. If you think it's the "whole hog" of Christianity, then I would be cherry picking. If, on the other hand, you view it as one tradition in a fallable world you are free to choose another, different one, without rejecting central tenets of the Faith. If you were discouraged from reading a part of the Bible because it conflicted with what your church taught then your denomination was most definately "cherry picking".

Look, I don't want to get into this, but its possible to take a lot of different messages from scripture as a Christian, even taking into account the whole book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Sorry for being somewhat off topic, but I just want to clear this up. I agree that Jesus did not reject the OT, the verse you are thinking of is IIRC Matthew 5:17 - "I did not come to abolish the law or the prophets; I did not come to destroy, but to fulful".

But I also think PVC is right, in that you do not need to take this interpretation. Of course, if you view the scripture as authoritative as the Southern Baptists or myself do, then you must. But other denominations are not so big on the scriptures authority, and some even happily say that it will contradict itself.

---

Bingo, my particular view is that Jesus is being slightly ironic, because this claim is followed directly be rejection of several points of the Old Law. Why say this anyway, unless he appeared to conflict with the Law. What I think Jesus is really saying here is:

"You think you know the Law, but you don't; I do know God's Law, this is it."

He's making a point that what he says conflicts, but he's claiming that the priests etc. are the ones in the wrong, this is why Jesus needs to apply a corrective. I think it's a perfectly reasonable interpretation, and it accords with the Messiah's sense of humour (I think he was a really funny guy, it's why people invited him to dinner).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Take this link: www.drtiller.com/remembrance.html

and put it in to google. Then, Cache the page and look at what this "clinic" used to promote. They would photograph dead babies as a part of their "services". They would perform baptisms of the babies after death. Does that sound normal to you?

The fact remains that the man made millions killing tens of thousands of pre-born infants. He was also one of 3 doctors in the US who performed the most blatantly outrageous forms of infanticide that the law is still gray on. The media didn't need to take a moment of silence for Mengele. Their rememberances betray their much denied bias. The sad thing is that this barbarism hasn't been dealt with in the 21st century.

Every human has elements of humanity in them. It should be no suprise when even the worst of them have loving families. Evil is the sum of the acts that you take in life. By reasonable standards this man was human being who commited a myriad of crimes agaisnt the most innocent among his own people.

---

Sorry, saw it and I don't read it the way you do. "Late" is a relative term, as far as I can see they only terminate viable foeti if the child is expected to have a severe handicap. I still don't agree with what he was doing but it's not what you are making it out to be.

This guy was an usher at a Lutheran Church when he was shot, do you really believe he was a sociopath?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Sorry, saw it and I don't read it the way you do. "Late" is a relative term, as far as I can see they only terminate viable foeti if the child is expected to have a severe handicap. I still don't agree with what he was doing but it's not what you are making it out to be.

This guy was an usher at a Lutheran Church when he was shot, do you really believe he was a sociopath?

---

Are you saying that all church goers are decent people and that none of them are sociopaths? In fact, the simple fact that he was a church goer should damn his sanity in the eyes of some forum members, I would think.

The reality is that in a church full of 100 people that Tiller was a part of, If I was forced to guess which one of them was a sociopath, my guess would be the guy that has killed tens of thousands of children for money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

But the parents are spending their own money to destroy their own children. As much as that sickens me, the guilt itself should be unbearable, I believe that the party that makes money from the procedure and actually takes the life should be jailed. The parent should be ashamed to look in the mirror for the rest of their life.

---

I believe you're still advocating a double standard here, as taking the money and the life (which in this case is somewhat of a dubious definition) would never have happened were it not for the parents. A doctor could possibly say no (and probably risk a silly lawsuit or whatever), but then he would not be helping the patent or patients (the parents to be) who come to his office to receive help he's been trained to give. If one upholds the extreme viewpoint of the doctor as a murderer, then wouldn't the parents in question be guilty of premeditated murder ? Sentencing the doctor to a life in jail and the ex-parents to a life of shame seems unfairly balanced to the side of the family who made the decision in the first place - and found the funds to make it happen.

:balloon2:

Membership, even active participation, is no guarantee of one's true character. The BTK Killer was an Elder in his Lutheran church. Surely we're not going to argue that that justifies his actions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

Well Rhyfelwyr, without saying whether I agree or disagree, couldn't the same be said about trying to heal a cancer? I mean, it is going against the laws of nature/God after all? What IF the chances of a miscarriage are substantial (40% up) and the woman would know this, and then would get a late term abortion (I'm not sure whether this is even possible, but I'm not a doctor). Where do you draw the line?

---

I don't think there's anything wrong with doctors treating illnesses. The only time I think abortion would be OK is if the mother is likely to die, because then obviously the foetus would die with her. I'm not a doctor either and I've no idea of what exactly a foetus would do if removed prematurely, but I would not like it to be killed deliberately in such a procedue (ie brains sucked through a tube upon removal), should it be involved in an operation due to the mother's health. It's a grey area I don't know a lot about to be honest.

The murder is a sad event, I feel sorry for the victim's family and am in awe of his ability to carry on his work after surviving a previous attempt. It's a necessary service and like it or not, healthcare of any type involves costs and charges, this is no different. You cannot expect someone to remove financial gain from the healthcare system in the US just because of what their work entails

Britain has a position of it actually being illegal, but no doctor would be done for it as long as they followed protocol as it is a legally defensible position (one defence being that not being pregnant is better for the mother's psychological health - or so our ethics and law lecturers tell us). You don't perform a late term abortion unless there are serious developmental defects (e.g. neural tube closing failures) which probably entail stillbirth or early death and my GP tutor is still hallowed by his experience of having to do a relatively later term one in an emergency once (as required by UK law - you are culpable of not performing an emergency procedure because of personal beliefs if you are the only one around) and I don't belive anyone can see it as a trivial or everyday thing. But it is definitely better to have a safer place to do these operations than to push it back out to the back alleys, especially if someone has psych, neurological issues. How do you justify telling a schizophrenic patient who can be mentally unable to make difficult decisions that she should have gotten it together sooner?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Are you saying that all church goers are decent people and that none of them are sociopaths? In fact, the simple fact that he was a church goer should damn his sanity in the eyes of some forum members, I would think.

The reality is that in a church full of 100 people that Tiller was a part of, If I was forced to guess which one of them was a sociopath, my guess would be the guy that has killed tens of thousands of children for money.

---

Still, these people knew his proffesion, and they still accepted him as a Christian. It is suggestive of his character.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Membership, even active participation, is no guarantee of one's true character. The BTK Killer was an Elder in his Lutheran church. Surely we're not going to argue that that justifies his actions?

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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.

---

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 Rhyfelwyr

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.

---

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.

Instances like this are why I think "fundamentalist" Christianity is fundamentally wrong.

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.

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 Rhyfelwyr

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.

---

"Unfortunate" is the word Gerry Adams used to describe the recent IRA attacks, he was attacked by politicians accross the board.

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.

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.

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.

---

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:

---

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.

---

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"?

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good

I don't think anyone is objecting to criticisms of the kind of narrow and unchristian belief system that says this is ok. What I think people are objecting to is taking this one particularly unchristian action and saying "those Christians are all the same, murdering people for their God all the time." That's my problem anyway. For instance,

"Religious nutters killing others because they don't obey their warped code."

I think the emphasis should be on the "nutters" part because there are all sorts of murderers out there who kill others because they don't obey the murderer's code(s).

---

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.

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

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.

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.

---

Cheeky. Some people kill people and are themselves killed. The whole situation is tragic and unfortunate. Moral posturing is fun, though, eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I personally said I would pray for the repose of his soul, despite how horrific I found his crimes.

---

It's hard to commit a crime when you're not breaking a law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlXII

It's hard to commit a crime when you're not breaking a law.

---

Semantics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Cheeky. Some people kill people and are themselves killed. The whole situation is tragic and unfortunate. Moral posturing is fun, though, eh?

---

Not cheeky, serious.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Not cheeky, serious.

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 Lemur

Well, it certainly sounds as though a measurable percentage of people opting for late-term abortions are folks with severely damaged babies.

---

Is there anyone left who doesn't know this?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

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.

---

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.

The killing of this man was totally pointless as well as tragic and morally disgusting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

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.

---

That wasn't particually aimed at you, Don, but even you feel the need to add "despite", why?

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.

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"?

---

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.

They aren't comparable.

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.

---

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.

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

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 miracle. We thank God for saving him', despite the fact that said God could prevent it in the first place. None brands God a criminal.

I do not say this as a criticism but it always perplexes me.

---

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.