Abortion debate: Pro-lifers differ on abortion provisions found in the healthcare bill 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Pro-life reaction
WORLD’s Jamie Dean reports on the reaction from leaders of the pro-life movement to the killing of late-term abortionist George Tiller:
As questions surfaced about [suspect Scott] Roeder’s ties to pro-life causes, prominent pro-life leaders braced for damage to a decades-long, peaceful pro-life movement in America. They also worked to strike a tense balance: Condemning Tiller’s murder while also condemning his life’s work.
Read Jamie’s complete report here.
Topic: Newsworthy, WorldMagBlog
Keywords: abortion, George Tiller
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
back to top166 Comments to “Pro-life reaction”
I guess they were right.
Federal agency warns of radicals on right
“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the warning says.
Report comment to moderator
You know if a guy who spent most of his life sleeping with married woman, or cheating employees or picking fights in bars finally pushed some nut too far and got killed no would blame the people who tried to tell him his action were wrong.
Report comment to moderator
4000 abortions a day, 40,000,000-plus since ‘73. And an isolated incident. So there’s a rash of radical right-wing violence?
Report comment to moderator
From Wikipedia:
The pushmi-pullyu (pronounced “push-me-pull-you”) is an antelope which has two heads at opposite ends of the body. When it tries to move, both heads try to go in opposite directions. Dr. Dolittle meets it on his voyage to Africa to save monkeys
[In the not very accurate movie version, the pushm-pullyu is portrayed as a llama. I can't make this stuff up, but in Christianity somebody (probably a lot of people) made up a heck of a religion.]
Dr. Tiller’s execution? murder? is the “perfect storm” of this moral crisis.
Report comment to moderator
Oh, Yeah is back. I was worried about him.
Yeah, what do you propose to do about abortion in China?
Report comment to moderator
#!, RPN, they were wrong then and they are wrong now. It reveals a deeply bigoted distortion of logic to project the guilt for the actions of one man (deranged or not, right or left or whatever) on to an entire group. It’s just not fair-minded.
Report comment to moderator
All decent people can find common ground denouncing this lawless act in a Lutheran church in Kansas.
Report comment to moderator
But, who would expect RPN to be fair-minded, impartial, or even logical?
Report comment to moderator
The killer was judge jury and executioner. And of course the abortionist had cast himself in a similar role in his “clinics”. But still, as a consistent proLifer, since Tiller had never been convicted of any punishable crime in any court of law I must join others in condemning this violent act.
Report comment to moderator
Random: Do you think rape is wrong? What are you doing to curtail rapes in Bolivia?
Why were you worried about me?
Also, you make up an entire moral code. That’s a heckuva something, too, isn’t it?
Report comment to moderator
““It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the warning says.”
Homeland Security assassinated Tiller..you heard it hear first!! Blamed it on some poor single issue guy…
Report comment to moderator
I heard a report that this constitutes the 4th abortionist doctor killed in the history of the United States of America. I wish the total were zero. None of those slayings brought an end to the moral outrage of abortion or even diminished it.
Report comment to moderator
Are the Muslims speaking out?
Report comment to moderator
Joel-
The Rightwing Extremists warning does not indict broadly. Would it pain you to acknowledge this murder as an act of violent extremism by an individual dedicated to his opposition to abortion, as it so obviously is? What happened to Dr. Tiller is exactly what we were warned about.
“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”
Report comment to moderator
Where’s your proof he has a single issue…or that the issue was abortion?
Maybe Scott didnt like his fashion sense…
Report comment to moderator
Violence in response to abortion isn’t new but it isn’t rampant either. Dr. Tiller was the 5th doctor to be murdered since 1973.
This murder (like all murders) was evil, the perpetrator usurped the authority of both the government and God.
By his very actions, this man declared that God was unable to intervene for the sake of the unborn. So he pridefully charged himself to do what the judicial system seemed too inept to do and what God seemed unable to do.
It was an assault not just on Dr. Tiller’s person but the laws of our country and the prerogative of God who reserves for Himself the right of vengeance (Rom. 12:19).
Report comment to moderator
Suspect Is Identified in Killing of Abortion Doctor
WICHITA, Kan. — The suspect in the fatal shooting of one of the nation’s only doctors to perform late-term abortions had professed an anti-government, anti-abortion philosophy in years past, some who knew him said on Monday.
Scott Roeder, 51, of Merriam, Kan., whom authorities have described as a suspect in Sunday’s fatal shooting here of George Tiller, the doctor who had been a focal point for abortion opponents for decades, was once a subscriber and occasional contributor to a newsletter, Prayer and Action News, said to Dave Leach, an anti-abortion activist from Des Moines who runs the newsletter. Mr. Leach said he and Mr. Roeder had met once, and Mr. Roeder had described similar views to his own. Of Dr. Tiller’s death, Mr. Leach said, “To call this a crime is too simplistic,” adding, “There is Christian scripture that would support this.”
Homegrown terror cell?
Report comment to moderator
So they met once…discussed that abortion was wrong based on Scripture..and your callling it a terror cell??
So because Obama sat under Jeremiah Wright for 20 years and his hate America speeches…Obama must be a single issued America hater…and possibly a homegrown terror cell…
Report comment to moderator
Everyone of those anti-choice organizations got it wrong.
They should have condemned Dr. Tiller’s assassination and left it at that.
Their moral complicity is obvious.
Report comment to moderator
Thorn-
Here is a cache of Roeder’s post at Operation Rescue (they have been doing some damage control scrubbing lately) suggesting they go to Tiller’s church.
“Bleass everyone for attending and praying in May to bring justice to Tiller and the closing of his death camp.
Sometime soon, would it be feasible to organize as many people as possible to attend Tillers church (inside, not just outside) to have much more of a presence and possibly ask questions of the Pastor, Deacons, Elders and members while there? Doesn’t seem like it would hurt anything but bring more attention to Tiller.”
I’d say the guy is a pretty dedicated pro-lifer to drive 6 hours round trip to kill Dr. Tiller.
Report comment to moderator
Lawlessness is wrong.
Tiller is a victim. I don’t personally work up a great deal of sympathy for him, but killing him was wrong.
Report comment to moderator
Thorn 18-
It says “To call this a crime is too simplistic,” adding, “There is Christian scripture that would support [Dr. Tiller's murder].”
If these were Muslims, you know Fox News would be calling it a terror cell.
Report comment to moderator
“I’d say the guy is a pretty dedicated pro-lifer to drive 6 hours round trip to kill Dr. Tiller.”
I’d say Obama is pretty dedicated to Jeremiah Wright after 20 years….
But the excerpt you mention, assuming its the same Roeder, says nothing about murder, inciting anyone, or being violent.
He’s pretty dumb though if he uses his own name on the internet…
“Their moral complicity is obvious. ”
They just called a spade a spade…..both of them….why are you so in a tizzy over it?
Report comment to moderator
For those interested in learning more about the Roeder’s right wing extremist tendencies:
Suspect in Tiller’s death supported killing abortion providers, friends say
Report comment to moderator
don’t feed trolls.
Report comment to moderator
#17
Whatever newspaper that was quoted from has NO legitimacy, because it still refers to “pro-life” people as “anti-abortion.”
It is a negative portrayal that most newspapers and legitimate sites have long-since stopped using, because it “takes sides.”
Use the positive term that the people themselves use about themselves. To do otherwise, is to show profound disrespect.
Report comment to moderator
#19
A good example of profound disrespect.
Report comment to moderator
Wow! Six HOURS vs. 20 YEARS.
Amazing the depths of ill-logic that Liberals have fallen to.
Report comment to moderator
In re: 24
Thanks RPN..that whole article proves that Roeder was not single minded on his issues.
The Freeman group was not an antiabortionist group, but one that advocated well almost anything anti government.
Yes, he is an extremist…but I wouldnt even paint him “right wing” as there are plenty of liberals that like to avoid dtheir taxes too. He also was not incited by Leach or anyone else.
Report comment to moderator
KRM,
Maybe you could work up some sympathy for his wife, children, and grandchildren.
I generally don’t think pro-life movements deserve a lot of the blame for this. It is not a single movements fault. But the conservative movement has been so paradoxically life-centric while advocating violence in other interests, that the mindset of this guy isn’t outside the norm for conservatives (minus the murdering). If the pro-life movement wants to avoid these kinds of situations in the future and the media follow-out that they didn’t ask for but are sure to get, they should start by combining their opposition to abortion with violence prevention advocacy, gun-control, opposition to the death penalty, and anti-war causes. While they struggle to make a rhetorical link between abortion and violence, they take complicit or sometimes explicitly pro-violence positions. Can you simultaneously demonize abortionists while painting guns and execution of criminals as morally praiseworthy and not expect to catch flak when these kinds of things happen. Rhetorically speaking, I’m not sure you can. There are reasons why some people who might favor limitations on abortion don’t view the movements leaders as 100% good-natured or reasonable.
Anlir, actually gets this one completely right. By refusing painting Tiller’s execution as wrong ONLY because it happened outside of the law, they invite suspicion and they signal that the final outcome is still something they can live with–or be happy for. It’s the same as some marriage-equality advocates saying, “I don’t like that marriage had to be won in the courts rather than the ballot box.” Sure you signal that one is preferable, but the outcome still gets endorsed either way.
Report comment to moderator
#14, RPN, “The Rightwing Extremists warning does not indict broadly.”
That’s false on its face, RPN. Even your disclaimer betrays your denial. To use the phrase “Rightwing Extremeists” for the target in that statement from Homeland Security shows their selective focus too broadly on just one side of the spectrum.
RPN, here is the quote you yourself provided at #1: “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the warning says.”
RPN, what part of “groups and individuals” do you not understand??”?
So, that so-called warning indicts far too selectively and too broadly on one side of the spectrum.
_________
Report comment to moderator
Thorn- The Freemen rejected authority. I would say a guy who goes and murders a doctor because he performs abortions as rejecting the authority of law to enforce his own misguided perception of justice. No?
Report comment to moderator
“Can you simultaneously demonize abortionists while painting guns and execution of criminals as morally praiseworthy and not expect to catch flak when these kinds of things happen.”
Yes, but I would gladly compromise if it meant making abortion illegal. In other words, despite them being convicted criminals, we can stop death sentences, if youll trade us the legality of abortion.
Criminals have at least been tried by their peers, often have appeal after appeal….what does an unborn have?
“Anlir, actually gets this one completely right. By refusing painting Tiller’s execution as wrong ONLY because it happened outside of the law, they invite suspicion and they signal that the final outcome is still something they can live with–or be happy for.”
Anlir makes up fantansies in his head. WHO HERE HAS STATED SUCH CRAP???
Everyone here has condemned the murderer of Tiller inside and outside the law. No one here is happy that he was murdered, for any reason.
Quit slandering conservatives.
Report comment to moderator
Mynock,
Thanks for your suggestion about which causes are proper for conservatives. Where should I send my list of demands for what liberals must do?
On second thought, maybe we can come up with our own list for conservatives, and let you work on the liberal list. Thanks anyway.
Report comment to moderator
I disagree, Joel 31, but that’s ok.
Report comment to moderator
RPN wrote; “Would it pain you to acknowledge this murder as an act of violent extremism…”
RPN, would it pain you to actually read that I have already denounced it? As to his motives, I am waiting for the authorities to do their jobs. I could have denounced this horrible act whether they had a man in custody or not.
It is highly likely that this deranged individual opposed abortion, but that is still a presumption to my knowledge and it is also irrelevant to the reason for denouncing his lawless action in a Lutheran church. What if it was a pro-abortionist pretending for decades to be an abortion opponent and now trying to discredit abortion opponents (unlikely, but who knows FOR SURE at this point)? I would still condemn his actions under those speculative motives too.
Report comment to moderator
And Joel, I’m not sure why you think we should not be concerned about dangerous rightwing extremists? This guy was obviously dangerous and his beliefs led him to commit murder in a crowded house of worship.
Report comment to moderator
Yes, but I would gladly compromise if it meant making abortion illegal. In other words, despite them being convicted criminals, we can stop death sentences, if youll trade us the legality of abortion.
******Yes, especially since there have been 25 executions in 2008, yes TWENTY-FIVE…of hardened criminals, and there were almost 1 MILLION abortions during the same year.
Those are SO comparable. 25 criminals executed by the state vs. 1 MILLION innocents executed by their parents. /sarcasm
But, yes, I would give up those 25 in order to save that million any time.
Report comment to moderator
“The Freemen rejected authority. I would say a guy who goes and murders a doctor because he performs abortions as rejecting the authority of law to enforce his own misguided perception of justice. No?”
I dont disagree with you here. My point is that Roeder is not a “single minded” radical which you claimed he is.
Report comment to moderator
RPN, would you think it fair now for Homeland Security to issue warnings about Lutheran worship services?
Why do prejudice and blanket stereotyping come so easy for some? How does group hatred get so deeply ingrained in some? Blae the criminal himself, not those who are condemning what he did and who had NOTHING to do with it. Is that too hard?
Report comment to moderator
#37
ONE person out of MILLIONS. That’s why.
I don’t think you understand numbers.
It would be like worrying that my neighbor was going to go off half-cocked and kill me over my weeds, because some neighbor, some time, did so (and you know they did.)
Report comment to moderator
One person out of millions? There is a reason Dr. Tiller’s clinic had bulletproof glass, and Federal Marshals provided security for him at times. Sheesh.
Report comment to moderator
“I’m not sure why you think we should not be concerned about dangerous rightwing extremists?”
Are you concerned about leftwing extremeist like Jeremiah Wright?
That’s the point. HS singled out one view point…as if only one sect of extremism can lead to murder and terror…
How many leftwing environmental groups have been accused of violence????
Report comment to moderator
RPN has said enough that, the next time a Christian is murdered, I think they ought to look at RPN. Spewing hate on a Christian site? Blanketly condemning an entire group of people?
Obviously, he is trying to incite people to murder pro-life Christians.
Report comment to moderator
The murder of Dr. Tiller was a political murder, a killing designed to make or effect a political point. So I can understand the need to go to the barricades about the politics.
But what really got me in the murder was its location. Church. There’s a collective violation there in this violence. This strikes me as so wrong, so evil.
Report comment to moderator
“Whatever newspaper that was quoted from has NO legitimacy, because it still refers to “pro-life” people as “anti-abortion.””
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/us/02tiller.html
Report comment to moderator
“One person out of millions? There is a reason Dr. Tiller’s clinic had bulletproof glass, and Federal Marshals provided security for him at times. Sheesh.”
I’m sure Stalin had body guards too…what does personal safety have to do with it?
Report comment to moderator
#37, RPN wrote; “And Joel, I’m not sure why you think we should not be concerned about dangerous rightwing extremists?”
Where did I ever say we should not be concerned about ANY type of extremist?
Where, RPN? Where?
Please tell me where I ever said that we need not be concerned about any type of extremist, right or left or otherwise? That’s not what I think, sir. Why must you mis-state my points, RPN?
But let’s be careful about excessive selectivey and broad-brushed stereotyping. We can be more honest and fair-minded without dispensing with our legitimate and honest concern for the safety of all.
Report comment to moderator
#46
Well, that kind of makes sense. Christians have long been saying the NYT is beyond biased.
Sounds as if we should be writing letters to them, though.
Report comment to moderator
#46
Nothing like proof that the NYT is biased against Christians and pro-life causes. And, people are always trying to tell us that we’re just paranoid.
Report comment to moderator
#40 should read; “Blame the criminal himself, not those who are condemning what he did…”
Report comment to moderator
44-
What in the world are you talking about, TRS? I am opposed to abortion and opposed to violent extremism.
Report comment to moderator
#42
Most dictators and other prominent people have safety concerns too, for the stray nut-cases that might be out there and latch on to them.
But that has nothing to say whatsoever about a movement, and it does have a lot to say about the kind of prominence this guy brought to himself through his horrendous activities.
Report comment to moderator
#52
Yeah, like you were opposed to Obama. Sure you are.
The things you have said on this site are worse than anything any of the pro-life sites say that you and Anlir are so on about.
But, free speech be dam*ed! You believe that it incites violence, and the things you’ve said on here would be caught right up with the same net.
Report comment to moderator
Thorn 47-
I am “concerned about personal safety” and keep aware of my surroundings, but have not needed to install bulletproof glass or have armed Federal Marshals provide security for myself and my family members due to death threats, bombings, and shootings. My point is I seriously doubt Roeder is just one in a million. There are more Scott Roeders out there.
Report comment to moderator
Sorry TRS. I’m not going to engage you any further.
Report comment to moderator
RPN #32,37
Yes, this guy rejected the authority of law. I don’t see anyone here saying otherwise.
And extremism should concern all of us whichever side it swings to and it swings to both.
Far from having his actions supported by Scripture, I think you’ll find, he violated Scripture. Instead of being justified, he’s condemned by it.
Report comment to moderator
“And extremism should concern all of us whichever side it swings to and it swings to both.”
I agree, Deet.
“Far from having his actions supported by Scripture, I think you’ll find, he violated Scripture. Instead of being justified, he’s condemned by it.”
I agree here too, but there are those who do disagree, like Mr. Leach at the Prayer and Action Network.
Report comment to moderator
#46 TRS
It could be the violent nature of this event that has prompted the NYT to distinguish between anti-abortion and prolife. They did make several references to the anti-abortion position, and only one or two references to ‘prolife”. But would you really want the NYT to refer to Tiller’s murderer as “prolfe”? Wouldn’t that be a little incongruous?
Report comment to moderator
“My point is I seriously doubt Roeder is just one in a million. There are more Scott Roeders out there.”
He’s about 5 in 300 million…or 1 in 60 million…assuming the previous 4 abortionists killed were by the same extremist views.
You appearing on this blog does not dictate that you believe everything at WMB…nor does it dictate taht every subscriber of the same newsletter that advocated justifiable homocide, agreed with Roeder’s specific position. Nor does it for Leach.
Further, are you justified by evidence to say that justifiable homocide included killing abortionists according to this newsletter? Justifiable homocide, may simply be self-defense.
My point is that we simply know little, and the NYT article makes no statements about what the newsletter’s position is or how it defines justifiable homocide.
Also the NYT article states that Scott has been mentally ill.
Report comment to moderator
#55
You are not a prominent person.
Report comment to moderator
#59
That is a good argument. That may well be the case, in which case, my apologies to the NYT.
I remember reading about most newspapers going over to using the term(s) that the groups use about themselves in order to show less bias. So, I was surprised when a national newspaper (more or less), even with a somewhat Left bias, was using the term “anti-abortion.”
But, your explanation makes sense, and I agree that it would be less biased to use it in this case than “pro-life.”
Report comment to moderator
He’s about 5 in 300 million…or 1 in 60 million…assuming the previous 4 abortionists killed were by the same extremist views.
******Thank you for looking up these numbers. I like numbers.
Extreme Liberals don’t. They don’t seem to get them.
Thankfully, there are regular Liberals, mainline people, and Conservatives who DO get numbers and won’t paint with a broad brush.
Let’s hope their views get heard.
Report comment to moderator
I wouldnt worry about it too much TRS and DJ…the NYT also said Mr. Obama and failed to use President Obama….kinda disrespectful and prideful if you ask me.
Report comment to moderator
#56
Of course not. I have you dead to rights.
It’s much harder when the shoe is on the other foot, isn’t it?
Report comment to moderator
This is a thoughtful article written by former pro-life writer Frank Schaefer:
How I (and Other “Pro-Life” Leaders) Contributed to Dr. Tiller’s Murder
Like many writers of moral/political/religious theories my father and I would have been shocked that someone took us at our word, walked into a Lutheran Church and pulled the trigger on an abortionist. But even if the murderer never read Dad’s or my words we helped create the climate that made this murder likely to happen.
In fact that very thing has happened before. In 1994, Dr. John Bayard Britton and one of his volunteer escorts were shot and killed outside an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida. Paul Hill, a former minister, was convicted of the killings and executed in 2003. Paul Hill was an avid follower of my father’s.
Hyperbole from the pulpit from religious leaders, be it from my father or from President Obama’s former pastor the Rev. Wright, is par for the course. But once in a while someone “does something” about it and then everyone says that they were only speaking metaphorically or “spiritually” when they called for violence or for the overthrow the state or when they said things like “God damn America!” or that “abortionists are murderers like Hitler!”
More at the link.
Report comment to moderator
haha I was guessing on the numbers…there’s probably been more than 300 million Americans during Tiller’s 3 decades…but we’ve only had 4 or 5 abortionists killed.
Not justifying it in any means for the record…just stating that I highly doubt there are very many Roeder’s out there who would go to such extreme’s. Roeder is also apparently mentally ill.
Report comment to moderator
Cheryl,
Please post your list on any appropriate thread. Some constructive criticism would be a welcome change of pass from the veiled accusations and ridiculous charactatures that make up the typical WMB post about liberals.
Report comment to moderator
On a more positive note: Let me say how refreshing it is to see so many conservatives come to hold such a reasonable position on guilt by association scare tactics. Unfortunate that Rev. Wright was brought up though, a fly in the soup of your new found reasonableness.
Report comment to moderator
That was merely my point Mynock…i think its a little unfair to have dragged Wright in Obama’s face. But there are some here attempting to blame the majority of anti abortionists for incitement despite the lack of affiliation. Yet the Obama/Wright 20 year connection was readily excused by the same people.
I’d like both sides to be consistant. But each side in the end only listens to whats favorable to them.
Report comment to moderator
Didn’t Frank Shaefer leave the church and repudiate his beliefs (to a great extent?)
Isn’t he someone his father would be sorely disappointed in?
Then why we should listen to him is beyond me.
Report comment to moderator
William Saletan’s columns at Slate get noticed here occasionally because he has a lot to say about abortion. Today Saletan is saying that the pro-life reaction across the board is a concession that abortion really isn’t murder, despite their anti-abortion rhetoric.
Report comment to moderator
A thought experiment. Two soldiers gunned down in front of a recruiting office in Little Rock, one died. Extreme leftists such as Code Pink and ANSWR brand US soldiers as war criminals. Should we regard all people who have objected to the war in Iraq, waterboarding terrorists etc., implicit in this crime for fostering a climate of hatred and violence toward our military?
If not, why is that different from the left wing blogosphere’s eagerness to condemn all who oppose abortion as morally wrong implicit in the Tiller atrocity?
Report comment to moderator
I was also going to post the Frank S. piece so I’ll just respond to this: “Didn’t Frank Shaefer leave the church and repudiate his beliefs (to a great extent?)…Then why we should listen to him is beyond me.”
You should listen to him, because listening to others is a basic requirement for understanding and just, ethical decision making.
Thorn,
Since I am not one of those trying to throw this in the face of every pro-lifer on the block, I’ll assume you and I have found something on which we can agree and I’ll thank you for what I assume (or chose to assume) is a compliment to me and consistency.
Report comment to moderator
Number for top Operation Rescue staffer found in suspect’s car
The phone number is written on an envelope with the name “Cheryl” and “Op Rescue.” Cheryl is Cheryl Sullenger, Operation Rescue’s senior policy adviser, who in 1988 was convicted of conspiring to bomb a California abortion clinic. She served two years in prison.
Report comment to moderator
Ken, your “thought experiment is ridiculous.” Beyond me basically agreeing with you–your analogy is bogus, because Code Pink doesn’t combine their associated link between U.S. military planners (I don’t think Code Pink call each individual soldier a war criminal, but I could be wrong) and war crimes with a call to execute war criminals — in the same way that the religious right does follow up their link between doctors and murders with a call to execute murders. “Murder is bad so don’t murder murderers” only works when one is in fact opposed to murdering murderers.
Report comment to moderator
#37, RPN wrote; “And Joel, I’m not sure why you think we should not be concerned about dangerous rightwing extremists?”
RPN, where did I say or imply we should not be concerned about ANY type of extremist, right or left or otherwise? I just believe that every actual case should be taken on its own merits and beyond specific cases, we can show our concern in fair-minded ways.
Report comment to moderator
#75
Does this remind anyone of all the posts that RPN made during the campaign impugning Sarah Palin and her team and the Republicans that were later shown false??
I think that RPN thinks we don’t have memories.
Report comment to moderator
RPN,
We aren’t well here by the constant news feed of the 24 hour cycles that give us speculative “updates” rather than complete stories. Knock it off please. It’s not mature.
Report comment to moderator
we aren’t served* — one of these days I’ll hire a blog proof reader, just waiting on that first million.
Report comment to moderator
#73, Ken, the only problem with your “thought experiment” is that it requires people to actually think in an intellectually honest way. Post #76 proves that this requirement is just too stiff for some to meet.
Report comment to moderator
#79
Well, now, I respect that Mynock. We don’t often agree, but maybe you are one of the more reasonable opponents, and can join the likes of DJ and SteveG.
Report comment to moderator
What my post has that yours is missing, Joel, (and the reason mine is better than yours) is the word “because.” You might want to see if you can use “because” in a sentence, before you talk up your intellectual-anything.
Report comment to moderator
Myknock-
Your writing is fine.
Forgive me, but it does seem pertinent to the discussion that a convicted abortion clinic bomber and Operation Rescue senior policy adviser’s phone number was found on the dash of the suspect’s car.
Report comment to moderator
Oh, well i hope my #83 snark hasn’t totally eroded my new found standing with TRS.
Report comment to moderator
LOL!
Report comment to moderator
The anti-choice movement is under moral indictment for creating the conditions that have enabled this terrorism to go on and on for years now. And it is terrorism by any reasonable definition.
Report comment to moderator
87
This from people who are always defending Islam from the “small minority” who commit terrorist acts against us.
You have zero credibility, man.
Report comment to moderator
I think Francis Schaeffer would be saddened by what his son turned out to be.
Report comment to moderator
#89
Me too.
It seems to happen to preacher’s kids. I think, sometimes, that their parents give so much time to the ministry, that their kids lose out on the time they needed.
It’s hard to be in the lime-light too as a famous preacher’s kid.
Report comment to moderator
#87
I don’t know why we respond to such silliness, other than to have the response “on the record” as it were.
Years and years of terrorism?????? Give me a break.
And, I totally agree with #88.
Apparently, 5 abortion doctors have been killed over the years. And, yet we have MILLIONS of people in the pro-choice movement.
Weird, huh? You’d think they’d been being gunned down regularly in the streets.
Report comment to moderator
Since this thread is about the pro-life reaction, I’ll post a few of them here.
First, Sarah Palin: “I feel sorrow for the Tiller family. I respect the sanctity of life and the tragedy that took place today in Kansas clearly violates respect for life. This murder also damages the positive message of life, for the unborn, and for those living. Ask yourself, ‘What will those who have not yet decided personally where they stand on this issue take away from today’s event in Kansas?’
Regardless of my strong objection to Dr. Tiller’s abortion practices, violence is never an answer in advancing the pro-life message.”
Robert P. George, Princeton University Professor: Whoever murdered George Tiller has done a gravely wicked thing. The evil of this action is in no way diminished by the blood George Tiller had on his own hands. No private individual had the right to execute judgment against him. We are a nation of laws. Lawless violence breeds only more lawless violence. Rightly or wrongly, George Tilller was acquitted by a jury of his peers. “Vengeance is mine, says the Lord.” For the sake of justice and right, the perpetrator of this evil deed must be prosecuted, convicted, and punished. By word and deed, let us teach that violence against abortionists is not the answer to the violence of abortion. Every human life is precious. George Tiller’s life was precious. We do not teach the wrongness of taking human life by wrongfully taking a human life. Let our “weapons” in the fight to defend the lives of abortion’s tiny victims, be chaste weapons of the spirit.
National Right to Life: National Right to Life extends its sympathies to Dr. Tiller’s family over this loss of life.
Further, the National Right to Life Committee unequivocally condemns any such acts of violence regardless of motivation. The pro-life movement works to protect the right to life and increase respect for human life. The unlawful use of violence is directly contrary to that goal.
(same link as above) Susan B. Anthony List: The Susan B. Anthony List condemns this anti-life act in the strongest of terms. The heart of the pro-life movement is one founded in love. Without this driving powerful center no justice can possibly be achieved. Authentic progress in women’s rights has always encompassed the protection of human rights of every person across the board. The rights of one human being can never be honored by diminishing or ignoring the rights of another. This week as we gather for our annual June Tea event, themed Love Lets Live, we will lift up George Tiller’s loved ones in prayer.
(same link again) Tony Perkins: We are stunned at today’s news. As Christians we pray and look toward the end of all violence and for the saving of souls, not the taking of human life. George Tiller was a man who we publicly sought to stop through legal and peaceful means. We strongly condemn the actions taken today by this vigilante killer and we pray for the Tiller family and for the nation that we might once again be a nation that values all human, both born and unborn.
Report comment to moderator
KEN #73 thought experiment asks, “What’s the difference?”
The Kansas killing will be treated as a law enforcement matter. The “Little Rock” shootings most likely as terrorism.
Wouldn’t your experiment be more elegant if the victims in Little Rock were war criminals? Then you could compare reaction to vengeance killings that have some sort of rhetorical support within highly polarized groups.
Your experiment seems outlandish. We don’t hear all soldiers blamed for the crimes of a few. Most leftists want war crimes prosecuted, but I’ve never heard them demand the death penalty, or object in principle to lesser penalties. Therefore, I don’t think leftists are agitating for assassination of war criminals, let alone for the killing of innocent soldiers.
Abortion is legal, war crimes are not. Therefore, the experiment compares apples and oranges. Your thought experiment inadvertently underlines the difference between abortion and murder.
Report comment to moderator
I’ll bet if 5 of the leading conservative Christian leaders in America had been gunned down in cold blood, the conservative Christians would be going bananas. I’ll bet if every leader in the conservative Christian movement was under constant death threats and having their churches bombed, the conservative Christians would be screaming that it was “terrorism”.
Report comment to moderator
Ken #73,
I saw those murders mentioned elsewhere on the Web as well, and I agree with the commenter, who urged that all such crimes be condemned without using them for political reprisal. Remember that we can rise above their cheap attacks. We don’t have to blame them for the murder of this military recruiter just to score political points. We are better than that.
Report comment to moderator
#94 I’ll bet if every leader in the conservative Christian movement was under constant death threats and having their churches bombed, the conservative Christians would be screaming that it was “terrorism”.
Yeah. And you’d yawn and turn the page on your Kindle. What’s your point.
Report comment to moderator
What are the Muslims saying?
What are the Mormons saying?
Are all the Homosexual Christians speaking with one voice?
What about the Buddhists?
Report comment to moderator
Scroop Moth #72: So because we believe that abortion is murder, we should applaud the murder of abortionists?
The fallacy in such reasoning is that it assumes a utilitarian thought process regarding who should live and who should die – and the entire point of being pro-life is that human life is too precious to be viewed through a utilitarian framework.
Human life is universally precious, including the unborn baby’s as well as George Tiller’s. Anyone who would shoot another person in cold blood and outside the law has no business calling himself pro-life.
Only God has the authority to give and to take life, and He has granted the government the authority to use the sword on evildoers (Romans 13). It is not our responsibility to take the law into our own hands as vigilantes, usurping the role of lawful government.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir’s posts are so stupid that they are hardly worth reading . When I do read them it is just to remind myself that there are nut cases in this world. Anlir’s insanity is the root cause of a lot of the terrorism in this world.
Report comment to moderator
MFW,
Have a care; you can be banned for personal attacks.
Report comment to moderator
Pro-life reaction
This wouldn’t have happened if the SCOTUS hadn’t legalized abortion 36 years ago. And the other two branches are equally culpable for not exerting their powers to keep the SCOTUS in check. This abomination is infused at the highest levels of government.
Report comment to moderator
MATT Y. #98
The Psalms say, “Oh Lord, slay the wicked!” Religious poetry often celebrates the violent “casting down” of evildoers from their places.
The taboo against vigilantism loses power when individuals resort to force, not to punish past crimes, but to save people from being killed in future crimes, when the legal authorities are inadequate.
The intellectual leadership of the pro-life movement has broadly condemned the assassination. I interpret this response as a retreat from the logic of the rhetoric that characterizes abortion as murder, even if it the movement retains the rhetoric.
Here’s another thought experiment. Imagine a killer of babies, not fetuses, at large in a country with corrupt laws and no enforcement. In that circumstance, vigilantism in the cause of preventing deaths might be a virtue. The Kansas assassin erred in taking pro-life rhetoric literally and then reacting as if fetuses really are babies. But they are not, literally, and abortion therefore never will be treated as murder by anyone who isn’t schizophrenic.
Report comment to moderator
This wouldn’t have happened if the SCOTUS hadn’t legalized abortion 36 years ago.
Yet another justification for the murder of Dr. Tiller.
Sick.
Report comment to moderator
MONTYFISHERWOOF — were you ever a llama?
Report comment to moderator
Sane person’s reaction to CCC’s post:
Huh? The Supreme Court and the other two branches of government are all to blame for a right-wing screwball murdering a doctor in a church?
Instead of the hundreds of thousands of people who have demonized law-abiding abortion providers and sanctified those who kill them?
Incidentally, the death toll from the “pro-life” extremists is at least six doctors and 3 or 4 others who died in some of the many, many clinic bombings.
Report comment to moderator
Scroop: “The intellectual leadership of the pro-life movement has broadly condemned the assassination. I interpret this response as a retreat from the logic of the rhetoric that characterizes abortion as murder, even if it the movement retains the rhetoric.”
Can you explain? B/C I think it reinforces their argument – as in…murder is wrong, in the womb or out…
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, yes, and (between me and you–seriously no one else read this part) the U.S. was partially responsible for creating the conditions that motivated 9/11. But we should and do draw lines between behavior that indirectly facilitates atrocities and the individuals who bear the actual fault for committing them. Like 9/11 did for many (though certainly not the majority of) U.S. Americans, this kind of event should be used to promote reflection, not blame.
“The fallacy in such reasoning is that it assumes a utilitarian thought process regarding who should live and who should die – and the entire point of being pro-life is that human life is too precious to be viewed through a utilitarian framework.”
Yet this isn’t consistent with the rest of conservativism. The lives of “other humans” (most often the people who don’t look like Sarah Palin’s “Real Americans”) are put into utilitarian frameworks all the time, whether it be the utility of “checking tyranny” against the plague of gun violence or the utility of a strong national defense against the violent reality of cluster bombs, shock and awe, or employment discrimination in the military. All conservative supported.
Until the pro-life movement harmonizes its messages with an actual anti-violent worldview, comments like yours will continue to sound disingenuous to people like me.
Report comment to moderator
105.
So I guess it’s Pro-lifers 10, Pro-choicers 40,000,000+
If the strategy was to out-butcher the abortion advocates we’d be losing pretty badly.
Report comment to moderator
The Frankie Schaeffer asks a good question: To what extent are acts such as Roeder’s a product of the hyperbolic rhetoric of the so-called pro-life movement?
For decades, the pro-life movement has scarcely engaged in any discussion of abortion with anyone but ardent supporters of the movement. While such discussions may help change hearts and minds on abortion, they are not useful for raising money. To raise money, you have to preach to your choir. And to keep them giving, you have to keep raising the volume and adding more spice to the rhetoric. Otherwise, people may donate to another cause.
The pro-life movement feeds off of this hyperbolic, fundraising-driven rhetoric. They have perpetually exploited Dr. Tiller and lied about the nature of his practice, so that they could rouse a few more folks to write out checks for $50.
Of course, these groups never expect anyone to take them at their word. When they imply that Dr. Tiller should die (as pro-life groups have done on countless occasions), they don’t expect anyone to kill him. Instead, you’re just supposed to write out a check to your preferred pro-family para-church organization. But Roeder seems to have taken the pro-life movement at its word.
I don’t suggest that the pro-family carnival-barkers are necessarily responsible for Roeder’s crime. On the other hand, I have received innumerable fundraising letters from pro-family groups whose hyperbolic rhetoric suggests that Roeder’s actions yesterday are morally justified.
The pro-life movement speaks with no moral authority in our culture. Many on this blog believe that this is because society has been brainwashed by the MSM to loathe pro-lifers. I disagree. No one listens to the pro-life movement because they have bargained away their moral authority by engaging in populist, hyperbolic rhetoric — rhetoric that detracts from the moral gravity that their message might otherwise possess.
If the pro-life movement wants to be taken seriously, its leaders must come across as something other than carnival-barkers. If we have to condemn Roeder for taking the pro-life movement at its word, are we to praise those who ignore its message altogether? Or maybe it’s time to shut down the para-church carnival, and turn our energies to serving within the local church.
Report comment to moderator
#66 RPN, Thanks for that link.
Quite interesting. I haven’t read any of Frankie’s stuff or very much of his father’s. I was unaware that Francis advocated violence as a viable response to abortion. That’s unfortunate.
Political activism is not the call of the church. You don’t change hearts and minds through politics. And abortion is an attitude of the heart, first and foremost, an attitude of “Me and what I want.” What I want for my body. My future. My finances. My social life, etc.
Only the Gospel can change hearts. And THAT is the call of the church, individually and collectively.
Report comment to moderator
There is some information out from Mr. Roeder’s former wife.
Seeking Clues on Suspect in Shooting of Doctor
“He wanted a scapegoat,” Ms. Roeder said. “First it was taxes — he stopped paying. Then he turned to the church and got involved in anti-abortion.”
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know how many books you have read by Francis Schaefer, but the remark which is made by Frank in your post #66 which reads:
Exactly what do you know about Francis Shaeffer? How many of his books have you read, or how many of his close friends to YOU KNOW?
What is thoughtful of thrashing ones father who was a wonderful man, who led many to Christ, and was a good father no matter how much a son desires to dishonor him?
Report comment to moderator
Scroop: I fear llama is still holed up in his bunker. Probably drowning his sorrow over the demise of what was once the mightiest corporation in the world, GM. MFW is a pale imitation, lacking both llama’s limited vocabulary and endless frothy loathing of the looney left.
Report comment to moderator
A couple of facts, yes facts from the NARAL site:
BOMBINGS AND ARSONS:
For people working to help women exercise their freedom to choose, the threats of bombings and arsons are quite real. Between 1977 and 2007, at least 41 bombings, 175 arsons, 96 attempted bombings and arsons, and 631 bomb threats have been directed at abortion providers. Moreover, abortion clinic arsons and bombings have resulted in over $8.5 million in damages since 1990.32 The following are just a few examples of the arsons and bombings that have been directed gainst abortion providers…
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Violence.pdf
The suggestion that anti-abortion activity is not organized terrorism is utterly ridiculous in the face of those numbers, not to mention the deaths and injuries caused.
Report comment to moderator
I’ll try it again.
Weird error.
Nope the quote won’t run. Anyway, Between 1977 and 2007, 41 bombings, 175 arsons, 96 attempted bombings and 631 bomb threats against clinics. And $8.35 million in property damages.
Report comment to moderator
I just saw Franky Shaeffer on Rachel Maddow and he was wonderful. His word echo what I’ve been saying on here today about the anti-choice movement creating the climate where violence and murder is used.
We can only hope that the anti-choice movement will finally get serious about ridding itself of the extremist rhetoric and extremist followers and unequivocally renounce terrorism. But given all the comments here today, I’d say the movement is on it’s way to becoming even more radical and violent.
Report comment to moderator
VICKI-
I have not read Francis, and will not be impressed when you name drop and claim to know his close friends — even if it’s your daddy. Frank’s opinion is his own, and if you disagree take it up with him. You can contact him at the link. btw, saying someone’s dad used hyperbole is hardly thrashing him.
Report comment to moderator
#109 by RSD is a thoughtful comment on this very difficult subject.
I will repeat: give people as many reasons and opportunities as possible not to have abortions as possible. I think this is compatible with what RSD says about the anti-abortion movement painting themselves into a corner and not communicating in a serious way with anybody but others who feel exactly the same.
Ranting feels good I guess, but it doesn’t build many bridges or save many fetuses. A culture of “pro-life” will not be built around rage and hyperbole and accusations against everyone who does not agree with you in every respect.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know, Anlir. There are some reasonable people here who seem to understand the gravity of what has happened. Yes, there are a few insistent on digging a deeper hole, and preface their regrets with “Tiller was a horrible demonic murderer, but” rhetoric, but for the most part I think most people don’t support the extremist anti’s and their violent methods.
For the record, I doubt many here would have knowingly encouraged the murder of Dr. Tiller. A few, maybe. But not many. Isn’t there someone here who thinks gay people should be put to death? We have the full spectrum.
Report comment to moderator
The Supreme Court didn’t declare “murder is ok”. That’s a monstrous lie promulgated by the anti-choice extremists to justify the terrorism and murder of clinic workers.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, and when is the pro-abortion contingent going to stop their FAR more violent crusade against Americans? It’s downright stupid for thr pro-abortion side to characterize the OTHER side as the violent ones. Oh, wait a minute, I suppose it’s not stupid after all. Maybe it will stop people from actually looking at the violence that is the very definition of abortion, at the multiple millions of bloody corpses, and look instead at the extremely rare violence on the other side.
Anyway, our side has condemned this week’s violence roundly, and made clear it doesn’t represent us at all. Now, your side’s turn to condemn the violence on your side . . .
(Crickets chirping.)
Report comment to moderator
Random 118-
I too found RSD’s comment thoughtful, but for a different reason. Mr. Roeder has murdered the fund raising demon for Operation Rescue. They had a website dedicated to “Tiller the Killer” where you could focus your outrage by giving them money. It has become apparent that many right wing political candidates use abortion as a tool for fund raising, but do little once elected. If they actually followed through and banned abortion, the cause would have no reason to exist, and with it the flow of campaign money would die. Now Dr. Tiller has been eliminated, who will be their new demon for fund raising?
Report comment to moderator
As I’ve said all day RPN, the anti-choicers should have condemned the murder of Dr. Tiller and stopped there. But many of them didn’t. So they need to be taken to task.
Report comment to moderator
There is no violence and murder on the pro-choice side CherylD. We’ve never bombed anti-choice clinic or ministries. We’ve never murdered an anti-choice worker or leader. We don’t call in bomb threats and send death threats to the anti-choice movement. There have been no blockades of Christian crisis pregnancy centers. There have been no harassment of the women using those services. The terrorism and murder has come from your side of the aisle.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, I understand. It is distressing to see people qualify their regrets with the same rhetoric that likely brought us all to this point. Did you see Randal Terry distance himself and OR, then suggest they all go out for Irish beer and hot wings? Sick people.
Report comment to moderator
RPN: Appreciate at least your effort in #120 in saying that there are “some” reasonable people here (I haven’t done a count, but I’d say most Christians, if not all, on this site have roundly condemned the killing).
Look, none of the Christians here think what Dr. Tiller did for a living was very honorable (to put it mildly). We are not going to whitewash that.
But as many of us have said (over and over again now), violence is contrary to Scripture, killing the man was a reprehensible act.
Report comment to moderator
I doubt anyone is trying to impress you, I certainly have no reason to do so. If you haven’t read Francis Schaeffer than you most likely have little to contribute. Franks say what he likes, but that has nothing to do with those who knew his father – obviously you are more interested in a disgruntled son, than the many people who knew and admired Francis Schaeffer, who was not only a scholar but a gentleman, and so were his friends – that says more for the father than…….
The comment made by Frank Schaeffer in your post LINK #66 -
Anlir, let me spell it out more slowly.
Abortionists have killed m i l l i o n s of innocent lives–unborn, yes, but millions of innocent human beings. One radical extremist this week killed one person, an act that has been roundly condemned. Again, your turn–can you condemn the blood your side has shed? “There is no violence and murder on the pro-choice side” would be funny if the subject matter was anything that could be laughed about. The pro-abortion side is all about violence and murder; violence and murder isn’t peripheral to the movement, it is the act that pays the bills. Ignoring that fact will not make it go away.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know why RPN is condemning us for right wing extremism. Are there any right wing extremists here? (chirp, chirp) Didn’t think so.
I don’t remember RPN and other leftist extremists condemning those who bombed the Pentagon and killed cops or the candidates who befriend them. Tiller’s killer is a murderer and should face the full penalty of law, but no leftist ever said a word about the 60,000 children Tiller the Killer killed. 60,000 murders does not justify one, but the silence from the left is quite loud.
Report comment to moderator
“If you haven’t read Francis Schaeffer than you most likely have little to contribute.”
She has spoken.
Report comment to moderator
130-
I’m a leftist extremist who does not condemn bombers of the Pentagon? Please elaborate, Xion.
Report comment to moderator
Here’s an interesting test. How many of the political liberals and the non-Christians here support the death penalty for Tiller’s murderer, if he is convicted? I’m sure that most, if not all, of the conservative Christians do. Tiller’s life was worth that much, despite what he did for a living.
Here’s another new thought, I think. If the goal of the pro-life movement was to kill all the abortionists, don’t you think that we could have done so? During the last 36 years the 10’s of millions of pro-life activists could certainly have mudered every doctor who performs abortions. That’s not the goal. That’s reprehensible to us.
Anlir, you have repeated yourself but you have not answered any of the challenges or questions put to you. What is that?
Report comment to moderator
VICTORIA – 133
Perhaps it’s a difference of opinion, VIKIE. Instead of being defensive about Mr. Schaeffer’s son’s continued interest in the issues he was instructed in as a young man, we should give consideration to what he has learned and is sharing from the experience.
Report comment to moderator
Kyle-
I oppose the death penalty.
Report comment to moderator
125.
You’re right, you don’t have to use methods like that when the murder is state-sanctioned. Heck, you can get U.S. Marshals, paid for by taxpayers, to guard the human butcher-shops.
Report comment to moderator
RPN,
That’s interesting. I support the death penalty for precisely the same reason that I oppose abortion. Human life has inherent, sacred value. The only thing worthy of a human life is another human life. That is why Tiller’s murderer, when convicted, should forfeit his life to make up for the life he took.
Report comment to moderator
Has anyone verified that Tiller will be buried ten feet down instead of the usual six…????… I understand that deep down he was a good person.
Ever notice that the news reports that Tiller was acting as an usher, but they don’t tell you what the sermon was about.
Report comment to moderator
MOUNTAINEER #106.
Consider that Frank Schaeffer has apologized to the Tiller family on behalf of his father and himself for creating a rhetorical climate that fueled the brains of the assassins who inevitably associated themselves with the pro-life cause.
Frank says that his father’s book, A Christian Manifesto, declares that Christians have the moral right and duty to resort to the same measures against abortion that they could have taken against Adolf Hitler [!]. Frank says that he, his father, and C. Everett Koop understood the dark forces that they unleashed when they injected their “baby killer” rhetoric into a culture that was mixed up with guns and violence.
In order to understand the “concession” that has been made by the pro-life leadership, you have to evaluate the prohibition against vigilantism. Mohler and other leaders are emphasizing the doctrine that the individual citizen has no right to “take the law into his own hands.” This is a very familiar principle of civic order. It isn’t absolute, however. The prohibition against vigilantism relaxes to let people take personal action to save life when legal authorities fail to act. Individuals may not take it upon themselves to punish past crimes, but they are morally justified in using force to prevent those crimes from being perpetuated. Saving life is more important than proper agency. So, when Mohler tells you that you cannot kill to stop abortion, he is telling you that abortion is not literal murder. The Kansas assassin thought it was, but he was wrong. Stopping abortion is not the same thing as stopping Hitler.
Report comment to moderator
Kyle-
We disagree, and that’s ok.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t “like” the death penalty one bit. I find it tragic and terribly sad. It genuinely grieves me and I think it should be carried out only with the strongest of eye witness testimony (two witnesses, as the Bible requires).
But the biblical understanding and foundation that Kyle A expresses in his post #138 is exactly right. And that is why it is consistent also with opposing abortion, though it may seem on the surface to be inconsistent to those unfamiliar with the Scriptures.
It is based on the understanding that human life is so sacred and made uniquely in the image of God. It is precious and sacred.
Thus taking a life is an offense that so violates that image that it brings with it the strictest of penalties.
Report comment to moderator
#142
Good way of putting it Donna. I appreciate it. I had never (for some strange reason) connected my feeling that the death penalty “should be carried out only with the strongest” of testimony to the Bible’s two witness requirement.
I think that is absolutely the way I see it too, and I’m pleased to see the Biblical connection now and to be able to articulate how I feel about it better. Thank you.
My kids and I had just been reading through the story of Noah, and we had just read about God’s decree on humans or animals who shed blood. So, this will help me articulate better to them what the Bible says.
Report comment to moderator
“The only thing worthy of a human life is another human life. That is why Tiller’s murderer, when convicted, should forfeit his life to make up for the life he took.”
Wow, I didn’t know that we could “make up” for Tiller’s death by killing this other guy. What happens when the death is “made up for”? Does Tiller get to come back? Go to Heaven? Does some monumentally good think happen for his family that makes them forget they ever had a husband/father/grandfather?
Not to be overly blunt when I am just beginning to get a rep for being a reasonable liberal, but the argument that “I care more about Tiller’s death because I want to see his murder fry” is incredibly stupid. And stupid is a good word for this particular idea, because it not only lacks an intelligent basis, it’s also extremely awful.
Report comment to moderator
Re: #129
CherylD, let me spell it out more slowly.
a b o r t i o n
i s
n o t
m u r d e r.
Your continued attempts to justify Dr. Tiller’s murder is a morally bankrupt position.
Report comment to moderator
Look who’s calling who morally bankrupt…
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, I have never attempted to justify Mr. Tiller’s murder. Never. Quit slandering me.
Report comment to moderator
Considering that you’ve repeatedly slandered a man who was murdered, that’s “rich” CherylD!
Report comment to moderator
Cheryl,
Anlir is beyond unreasonable. He has been “out to lunch” for awhile now, and the rest of us know it. So, don’t worry over much about what he thinks. I know it is hard, because we want to be friendly with everyone, but he doesn’t want to be friendly to us. He likes to slander, and he honestly believes he reads minds.
BTW, Anlir,
A B O R T I O N
I S
M U R D E R.
Report comment to moderator
No it’s not.
Report comment to moderator
Kyle A: Here’s an interesting test. How many of the political liberals and the non-Christians here support the death penalty for Tiller’s murderer, if he is convicted? I’m sure that most, if not all, of the conservative Christians do. Tiller’s life was worth that much, despite what he did for a living.
I’m not sure what it’s a test of, but I do not. His killer — whether the suspect now in custody or not — should spend the rest of his life in a lonely prison cell.
Report comment to moderator
Psst Cheryl … It’s Dr. Tiller, not Mr. I’m sure that was just an oversight.
Report comment to moderator
TRS:
A B O R T I O N
I S
N O T
M U R D E R
“Murder” has a definition under the law, and abortion does not fit it.
Report comment to moderator
Abortion is murder – because it’s legal doesn’t change the fact.
Report comment to moderator
#153
Anlir,
It was legal to kill Jews under Hitler’s Germany. Wasn’t it still murder?
It was legal to kill dissidents in Stalin’s Russia. Wasn’t it still murder?
It was legal to kill heretics under the Inquisition. Wasn’t it still murder?
I’m not after the U.S. (present) legal definition, which has changed over time and (hopefully) will change again. I’m after the moral definition, that will not change and has not changed over time.
Abortion is murder.
Report comment to moderator
I’m particularly interested in how those who are “pro-choice” defend the abortion of a viable baby.
I mean seriously. You are going to call someone “human” or not based on a few inches of vagina or a covering of skin and womb that I could cut through with a pocket knife?
Tiller was murdering children who, if they were taken right then, would have lived.
How does someone condone this type of horrendous violence — both physical to the child and to the English language and to logic???
Report comment to moderator
What is the difference between a 9-month old “fetus” and a just born baby?
N-O-T-H-I-N-G but some sort of mind game that the “pro-choice” crowd wants to play.
Report comment to moderator
Francis Schaeffer has been mentioned on this and several other threads. Below is a short quote from the address Schaeffer gave at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church.
Report comment to moderator
TRS: Whatever newspaper that was quoted from has NO legitimacy, because it still refers to “pro-life” people as “anti-abortion.”
How is that inaccurate? In terms of precision, it’s actually more accurate, for people who oppose abortion but support the taking of life in other circumstances (capital punishment, war.)
If you oppose abortion and capital punishment and approve of war only as a last resort, then “pro-life” fits. Otherwise, I think it’s arguable.
Report comment to moderator
SteveG,
There is a fundamental difference between capital punishment and abortion:
Capital punishment is only to be exercised after a person has been tried and found guilty of certain offenses by the civil magistrate.
In abortion, the unborn child has been tried and found guilty of nothing more than being an inconvenience to one of the parents (usually, the mother).
The difference, Steve, is due process of law. I’m amazed that you don’t discern the distinction.
Incidentally, you will note that God’s Word requires the execution of certain criminals — most notably, murderers. OTOH, there is no place in God’s Word that even allows parents to kill their children.
(As for “approving of war”: A nation has the same right to use violence to defend itself against violence as does an individual. Sadly, the US has long since abandoned any pretense of legitimacy — i.e.,self-defense — in most of our wars of the last 150 years. I hope you’ll realize that opposing unjustified military intervention overseas is not the sole interest of political liberals. But just because most conservatives have a penchant for using American military might for all manner of unjust reasons, it does not automatically follow that they are wrong for a) opposing abortion, or b) supporting capital punishment.)
Report comment to moderator
Scroop Moth (140) – by the way, curious about your name…
Thanks for the explanation. I suspect the reason we are hearing such things is because advocating vigilantism would discredit the pro-life movement, not because Mohler and friends have backed off on their abortion is murder position. Kinda like winning a battle that would jeopardize the war.
I have met people who have asked the question of when we should take up arms to defend the unborn, and who applaud the bombing of clinics. If you regard unborn children as living people, you can understand the sentiment.
I hope someday we regard abortion lke we have learned to regard slavery: an abomination. I hope we get there peacefully.
Report comment to moderator
Re 159-
Steve and I are pro-life. You guys are just anti-abortion.
Report comment to moderator
RPN: I appreciate the sentiment and what you’re trying to say. But Christians need to wrestle with the Scriptures on these issues. Many of us (I’m one) don’t particularly like the idea of the death penalty. But I believe (if reluctantly) that Scripture prescribes it in the most extreme case when someone takes another life. (And again, following a legal trial, due process, and with credible eye witnesses — not based only on circumstantial evidence, no matter how strong.)
Report comment to moderator
Civil magistrates also are given the authority to dispense mercy in cases where they believe the person has genuinely repented, and I have no qualms with exercising that when warranted. In that case the person is imprisoned for life. I think the death penalty should be rare, based on the high standard Scripture gives for proof. (Interesting question, though: Is DNA equal to an eye witness?)
Report comment to moderator
Frank: There is a fundamental difference between capital punishment and abortion:
Of course there is. I never said there isn’t.
What is not different about them, however, is that they are both the deliberate ending of a human life.
But just because most conservatives have a penchant for using American military might for all manner of unjust reasons, it does not automatically follow that they are wrong for a) opposing abortion, or b) supporting capital punishment.)
Of course it doesn’t. I never said it did.
However, it does make “anti-abortion” a much more accurate label than “pro-life” for those who take that combination of positions.
Report comment to moderator
No, people are against abortion b/c they are pro-life – they are not pro-life b/c they are anti-abortion. Pro-life is the most accurate description of the all-encompassing Christian worldview.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!