I don’t have anything to add, really. I wish the same thing I wished after the Knoxville shooting–that these media personalities would stop to consider that, while they’re using their culture war rhetoric to drive up ratings, there are people who listen to them and take them seriously. If you’re going to accuse someone of being a baby-killer, you don’t get to act shocked or surprised when the folks you tell and who believe in you take you seriously.
The idea that folks are coming into churches to shoot people…
I don’t know. I keep seeing all these people talking about how this is not what the pro-life movement is about and I just want to ask them what rock they’ve been living under. This is exactly what the pro-life movement boils down to. That’s why so many anti-abortion folks AREN’T involved with the pro-life movement, because it’s always been a bunch of religious extremists who egg each other on to more stupid and evil ends.
I don’t know. That’s what I think, anyway.
Sorry, I just can’t get my head around the idea that we’re being gunned down in our churches now.
Sara Robinson points out that this is the anniversary of Eric Rudolph’s capture.
Southern Beale urges people to stop acting like assholes.
I’m going to bed.
Tiny Cat Pants 
I just can’t get my head around the idea that we’re being gunned down in our churches now.
No sanctuary, no mercy, etc.
I just saw a youtube vid of Randall Terry espousing the belief that Tiller had not the time to get right with his maker. Incredibly obtuse* of him, considering the belligerence that it took for the alleged Christian supremacist to enter Tiller’s house of worship to commit this deed. My guess is that this chickenshit (alleged to be Scott Roeder) knew that he couldn’t get past perimeter security at Tiller’s clinic.
And it is no small coincidence that Roeder allegedly had Operation Rescue’s number on a sticky note inside his car. As this is an early detail, it may not be accurate – but given that OR is already trying to flush their Tiller cyberstalking operation down the memory hole…….
Just gets a little tiresome feeling like you’re walking down the street with a target on your back just for being a ‘lib’rul.’ I realize there are First Amendment issues involved, but we really need to do something about the domestic terrorism that’s going on vis a vis this and a few other things. Pretty chilling when you’ve got gun activists looking for names and home addresses of the law enforcement officers who attended Bredesen’s gun bill veto. (And it’s the same tactic the likes of Operation Rescue has used against abortion doctors for years…posting their names and photos on websites, etc.)
And yet the right-wingers who seem to consistently pull stunts like this want the public to give them ever-greater access to firearms.
At least it’s looking like Obama’s got the FBI on high dudgeon and is overturning every cobblestone trying to run down who-all was connected to this.
“Sara Robinson points out that this is the anniversary of Eric Rudolph’s capture.”
Ah. I didn’t remember that. I suppose the day was “chosen” then.
As I recall, Eric Rudolph evaded capture for a very long time because he had support from a number of people. I don’t know how many people gave him aid and comfort; I don’t know how many people made a conscious choice– out of sympathy, not fear– to not turn him in; but he had help. Rudolph obviously didn’t give any of them up at his trial, but it’s ridiculous to suggest that he was completely on his own hiding from the Feds (even the Bush Feds) for five years.
There are a lot of folks in this country who agree with the anti-choice terrorists, just like there are a lot of folks who agree with all the other right-wing terrorists. You have mainstream commentators with nationwide megaphones egging these folks on, and you have huge, well-funded organizations backing them up. Since I’m on a few of these terrorists’ target lists (with my black, left-wing, urban, pro-choice, miscegenating self), I’d like to see my government be a bit more aggressive in going after these assholes. I’d also like to see the mushy middle of professed Christianity be a bit more muscular about disowning them.
Pingback: Kansas Abortion Doc Assassinated: Tennessee Reacts : Post Politics: Political News and Views in Tennessee
Of course it’s also a tad disengenious when “mainstream” anti-choicers say that these people don’t represent them — if they think abortion is murder, and most of these same people believe in the death penalty for murder, what other outcome do they pretend to seek? The only difference between them and a lunatic like this is the latter’s willingness to take the law into his own hands — a relatively trivial difference if you ask me.
I’d also like to see the mushy middle of professed Christianity be a bit more muscular about disowning them.
Amen. These folks are committing execrable acts in their names.
Except likely many religious leaders – the real kind, not these Philistines we keep reading about – are afraid of them too. Nothing like an armed kook who’s willing to shoot up your congregation to make you keep your mouth shut.
Pingback: View From the Cumberlands » Blog Archive » Say what?
The thing is, ya know, that if all the non-crazies denounced these folks, none of them would particularly be a target. I mean, no more than they already are for the nuts.
I’m another who wishes that they’d get on these domestic terrorists as heavily as they’re (trying?) to go after out of country terrorists.
I see no difference in this. Roeder would have used an IED if a gun didn’t work.
“Pro-Life” my fat @$$. I hate that name, because it hasn’t meant what it should mean for a long long time.
And from the pulpit! Stand up and say that murdering doctors is wrong wrong wrong!
Of course it’s also a tad disengenious when “mainstream” anti-choicers say that these people don’t represent them — if they think abortion is murder, and most of these same people believe in the death penalty for murder, what other outcome do they pretend to seek? The only difference between them and a lunatic like this is the latter’s willingness to take the law into his own hands — a relatively trivial difference if you ask me.
Since you’re talking about me–not directly but by inclusion of characteristics–I’ll presume to answer.
First off, I don’t believe abortion is murder. (Hold your shocked gasp for a minute.) I do believe that it is the ending of a life, but I think for something to be murder there has to be mens rea–a mental state of wanting to kill out of malice. So while I personally believe that life begins at conception and that abortion is the ending of life in its early stages, I don’t believe abortion is murder any more than I believe that the death penalty is murder.
And since I also believe the principle found in Judaic law that the saving of a life is paramount, I have come to the place where I view some abortion* as the killing of one life to save another and therefore halachacally permissable. I’m sure nm, Goldni or others can correct me on the finer points of Jewish law where I remain ignorant.
I have reasoned the situation thusly. Killing without mens rea is not murder. Most abortion performed by an abortion doctor is not murder.* Executions performed by the state are not murder. Killing anyone out of anger, a desire to cause pain or exact vengeance is clearly murder. That’s why I believe shooting abortion doctors is murder and why I’m very very very against the death penalty when people say “I don’t believe in the death penalty but I’m for it for this bastard who eats children’s hands off and then strangles them.”
The reason why is because when you say “I’m against the death penalty BUT…” you are turning the death penalty from a form of earned punishment into a tool for vengeance. You are no longer acting judiciously but have in your own mind committed the mens rea necessary for murder. I think that’s why a lot of anti-death penalty folks don’t understand how anyone can be for the death penalty. Because every anti-death penalty person whose blog I’ve read for any length of time has uttered that type of statement at least once, to the best of my recollection.
It’s because anti-death penalty people only see the death penalty as an act of vengeance. Which it isn’t–when performed according to the parameters of the state. So they assume if they can excuse DP as an act of vengeance in their own mind that it then is the same in the mind of everyone who supports the DP.
I understand that those of you on the left feel vulnerable, betrayed and angry. Perhaps even fearful. I understand how that can lead you to say hurtful things about your fellow human beings. I hope that in the stillness you eventually do realise that all of us are struggling to make it to the finish line in our own way and that it is never a bad thing to extend kindness, civility and mercy. Even to someone who is your vileist enemy.
*The reason I add qualifiers to the word abortion is because I believe strongly in judging things on a case by case basis. And while I can’t presume to know the mind of anyone getting an abortion I can only assume based on statistics that there are at least a few–even if it is a very small number–of people who seek to get (or give) an abortion out of mens rea–a guilty mind. That remains between those people and the universe, which has a way of righting wrongs whether it be through the judicial system or the wheel of luck.
The short answer on thehalacha of abortion is that the type of abortion Dr. Tiller performed — late-term abortions in cases of danger to a woman’s life or ability to bear children in the future, or in cases of lethal defects — is precisely the type of abortion about which there is the least ambiguity. In cases of danger to a woman’s health, Jewish law demands abortion; in cases of lethal defects, it permits it. There’s a lot more disagreement among authorities about earlier abortions, or about where the threshold should be for accepting abortions to prevent mental/emotional harm to a woman. Halacha suggests that abortion is always a problem, but is permissible in many cases; since most Jews believe that a fetus is ensouled only about halfway through pregnancy the issues are different than for those Christians who believe that a zygote is ensouled from the moment of conception. In any event, both approval and condemnation are seen as depending on the specifics of any case.
The vitriol aimed at Tiller’s operation was disinformation, ne plus ultra.
We’re not talking about elective abortion procedures here. We are talking about horrific genetic defects in many cases (I’ve read about cases of conjoined deformities, of calcified brains, of babies without skull bones, severe spina bifida, of grotesque developmental abnormalities which have no names). We are talking about women who needed to have advanced pregnancies terminated in order to qualify for chemotherapy. We’re talking about fetuses riddled with malignancies. One instance I read about was one in which the baby was going to be born without a face – no nose, no mouth.
But overall we’re talking about women who wanted to carry their pregnancies to term but couldn’t.
And to dovetail this into the nearly non-existent public debate over SJR127 here lately – these are the sorts of circumstances under which our legislature has just said, “You shall bring that child to term in this state.” Even if it kills the mother, even if the child is condemned to a nasty, short life riddled with constant and painful medical interventions – “nothing … secures or protects [your] right to abortion.”
So if you’ve already had two children and are expecting a third, but suddenly develop pre-eclampsia in your 21st week, it is the position of the legislature that you’re up to nothing but mischief and should be forced to go through with the delivery – even if that means that your two healthy children will grow up without their mother.
And Dr. Tiller provided families in the most dire circumstances with options. Some fanatic “sovereign” with an agenda and a firearm just dealt a traumatic blow to people suffering in unimaginable circumstances. I wonder how many cases just turned absolutely hopeless because of this.
This is abhorrent on so many levels.
So if you’ve already had two children and are expecting a third, but suddenly develop pre-eclampsia in your 21st week, it is the position of the legislature that you’re up to nothing but mischief and should be forced to go through with the delivery – even if that means that your two healthy children will grow up without their mother.
Exactly. What you described here is the scenario a close friend of mine faced – albeit her situation involved the high blood pressure drama that could have ended her life and the child’s. However, she was allowed to go thru with the abortion due to the legality of the procedure and all’s well that ends well.
I should also mention that in her case, her husband is a doctor, a specialist actually. She is a nurse. So, in this case, you had two medical professionals making the difficult decision to take charge of their own medical well-being.
She and I talked about this at length after she had a run in with a very conservative Oklahoma guy (that we both know) who liked to shoot his mouth off about how abortion was evil and people that have them are going to hell. She shut him down telling him the case in which she had an abortion and that once he was in possession of having a womb, they’d talk more at length about the topic.
Oh, this was the same Oklahoma guy that came knocking at my door sniffing around trying to cheat on his wife with me (I had no part of that!) I told my friend about that nonsense and added “I bet he becomes a staunch believer in abortion once he gets some girl, other than his wife, pregnant.”
you are turning the death penalty from a form of earned punishment into a tool for vengeance
I get the impression that it’s more about finding out that there are things vile enough to earn the death sentence. Not so much vengeance.
What one person considers “vile” might not raise another’s eyebrow. I’m trying to recall a case of a ‘pro-lifer’ trying to kill Bush, Clinton, Bush the Elder, or Reagan for the heinous act of ordering the deaths of innocent children (keeping in mind that Clinton ordered the deaths of white babies, too). While I don’t doubt that there are some people who show up to protest both abortions and wars, I’m guessing the overlap is pretty minimal.
Yeah, halacha is pretty clear on what Tiller was doing.
Man. This happened a few blocks from my childhood house. It’s horrifying and stomach-turning and…shocking but not entirely surprising. It’s so much part of the texture of my growing up in Wichita (not that most of these people are from there, they just came there and it’s become this locus of reproductive freedom assault).
I just…I don’t know. This one has knocked me for a loop and I’m still processing.
Seems like everyone is making this more complicated than it needs to be.
Killing is wrong. Killing a grown man/doctor is wrong. And killing via abortion is wrong. Both are lives. Both have heart beats. Both can feel. Both have the right to live without another taking that right away. It’s all ashame that the world has come to this. Both are wrong. Both should not happen.
A heart that is beating is alive….i saw my baby’s heart beating at 4 weeks after conception. It’s called LIFE people. Whether you’re still growing in the womb or done growing as an adult, your heart still beats. Being inside the womb should be the safest place to be in the world….but it’s not. Being in your church should be the safest place to be in the ‘outside’ world…but it’s not. It’s ashame that both of these cases are not how it should be.
Think about it. It’s not complicated. Respect life. ALL life. A life without a voice and a life with a voice. The heart beats….and all hearts that beat once should beat until their natural time. Not to be determined by a doctor or a crazy guy with a gun. And the beat goes on…..or so it should.
Amber:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anencephaly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalocele
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold-Chiari_malformation (Type III or IV)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dandy-Walker_malformation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holoprosencephaly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potter%27s_syndrome
Tell me that these should be brought into the world, visited upon infants, only to suffer and die. I cannot be convinced that that this is “right” and “moral.”
It’s not as simple as you’d like to make it.
it really is simple.
the end of a life is not to be taken by another human being. It was wrong for that doctor to have been killed by another in his safe church. And it is wrong that a baby can be killed by another in his safe womb.
The “what about this… fill in the blank with medical issue” scenario is a typical response that many understand and know about. Yes, there are atypical medical emergency decsions that arise. That goes without saying.
So, yes, it really is that simple.
My original point: Being inside the womb should be the safest place to be in the world….but it’s not. Being in your church should be the safest place to be in the ‘outside’ world…but it’s not. It’s ashame that both of these cases are not how it should be.
The “what about this… fill in the blank with medical issue” scenario is a typical response that many understand and know about. Yes, there are atypical medical emergency decsions that arise. That goes without saying.
You’re going to have to explain why this isn’t a contradiction, then. ‘Cuz I don’t get it.
Amber, do women have beating hearts? Because, if they do, there are times when only one beating heart can be saved; there are times when not stopping one heart from beating will result in stopping two heart from beating. Your world-view works only if you don’t allow women the same sanctity and safety you want fetuses to have.
You all do realize <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/01/arkansas.recruiter.shooting/"there was another case of someone killed due to domestic politics on Sunday?
I don’t think there will be as much hang wringing or blanket condemnations in this comment section over that one though.
Military officials initially believed the shooting was a random act, but Thomas said police believe the shooter acted alone “with the specific purpose of targeting military personnel.”
The shooter’s name: Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad
Yup, I’m sure there will be plenty of people here happy to explain why there’s a bit more nuance in this situation compared to the abortionist murder.
Link.
Shorter Lee: HEY LOOK OVER THERE MUSLIM MUSLIM MUSLIM!
(You do realize that there was a 20+ year stalking campaign against Tiller, right?)
Oooh, why aren’t you talking about what Lee wants you to talk about instead of what you want to talk about?
Because this isn’t the first time that a winger has flapped a strawman in my face. He can go flog it elsewhere.
Andy, a strawman is a false over-simplified argument created so it can then be easily knocked down.
What I linked to was a news report concerning a shooting that occured on the same day at the abortionist shooting. It is therefore just as topical and newsworthy as the original topic of this post. I do not dare to criticize Missus B on what she does or does not post on, but I was suggesting that the folks making blanket generalizations about pro-lifers because of one murderous nut may want to realize that similar charges can be made about groups whom they are more sympathetic towards.
*****
And ironically, Andy’s comment “Shorter Lee: HEY LOOK OVER THERE MUSLIM MUSLIM MUSLIM!” is in fact a textbook definition of… wait for it…. a strawman argument.
That’s kinda funny.
Sorry, I meant red herring.
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue.
My bad.
It’s also a straw man, in the sense that it’s attributing a reaction to “people here” that is based on Lee’s fantasy rather than fact. But what I mostly object to is the attempted derailment thing, and the belief that he gets to choose B’s topics for her. For someone who hangs out here so much, Lee sure engages in a lot of trollish behavior.
To get back to the subject at hand, is there the least bit of a chance that folks who are more like Kat, who would try to lower the number of abortions by, you know, making the circumstances that lead to abortions less daunting, can use whatever shock there is at this murder to get more control over their movement?
I don’t really think Andy’s comment was a strawman. He was pointing out that you were attempting to divert attention away from the topic of discussion. How is that creating a related but easily defeatable argument in order to tear it down? It’s not. He was simply observing what you were doing. His use of snark doesn’t make it a strawman in the slightest.
The reality is that this post is entitled “Dr. Tiller,” so i should not be difficult for one to ascertain it’s subject. I fail to see what your citation of a separate terrorist attack has to do with the Tiller incident except to note that there have been multiple terrorist attacks in the world. There are hundreds of thousands of terrorist attacks. We all know that, but this post happens to be about one specific terrorist attack.
I was drawing parallels.
Two people killed, one on Sunday, one the very next day, by politically motivated assasins, one an anti-abortion extremist, the other an extremist Muslim convert. And I was trying to point out that the broad paint brushing going on in the comment section could be turned around in ways you might want to consider.
For example: Eleanor’s comment: I realize there are First Amendment issues involved, but we really need to do something about the
domesticMuslim terrorism that’s going on vis a vis this and a few other things.Sam’s first comment: I’d like to see my government be a bit more aggressive in going after these assholes. I’d also like to see the mushy middle of professed
ChristianityIslam be a bit more muscular about disowning them.From B’s original post: I keep seeing all these people talking about how this is not what
the pro-life movementIslam is about and I just want to ask them what rock they’ve been living under. This is exactly whatthe pro-life movementIslam boils down to.That is what i was pointing out, the similarity of what you all were saying with similar speech that you would normally abhor.
Lee, I think you may have a valid point in your last post about the use of inflammatory language and dismissive and/or hyperbolic statements which grossly oversimplify a complicated emotional situation.
But I think it would actually work better if you made the point on your own blog and linked here.
I’m not saying that to say “go away”–it’s quite obviously not my blog and not in my power. I’m saying that because when you try to make your point here it looks as if you are trying to make your point INSTEAD OF joining the existing conversation. If you made the point in a linked blog entry it would look like you were trying to make that point IN ADDITION TO.
I’d be happy to discuss both issues. I think there’s a relevance. I also think there’s a relavent third topic which might be up at my blog thursday if I still have writer’s block on my work stuff.
I just think this is the place where people want to talk about Dr. Tiller, the vagaries of late-term abortion and the response from pro-life groups to what seems an incongruous abberation to their (our?) philosophy.
—–
*I say “our” because while I consider myself to be pro-life I think that I have a different approach from what much of the mainstream Pro Life Movement is about. A different approach and a different philosophy in the main.
Nope, that’s a parallel only if most Muslims have been complaining for the past few decades about military recruitment, military activity, or whatever. You know, picketing recruiting offices, putting up signs about the evils of soldierism, writing letters to the editor about how recruiters are evil, trying to pass legislation outlawing the military, stuff like that. They haven’t. Give it up, Lee, you’re just being a troll today.
But I think it would actually work better if you made the point on your own blog and linked here.
You may have a point, Kat. This is my last comment.
Nope, that’s a parallel only….”
NM, you keep telling yourself that.
You may have a point, Kat. This is my last comment.
Promises, promises.
Here’s one thing that makes it less parallel. The pro-life movement is, ya know, ‘pro-life’. Whereas several branches of Muslim are okay with killing infidels.
But the early conversation was about domestic terrorism. Isn’t that what happened in both cases? The guy may have had a Muslim sounding name, but he was an American killing another American over a political issue therefore…… domestic terrorism.
No, I think the conversation started as a discussion of the influence talking heads have over whacked-out individuals.
The pro-life movement is, ya know, ‘pro-life’. Whereas several branches of Muslim are okay with killing infidels.
Tell that to George Tiller, Barnett Slepian, David Gunn, John Britton, James and June Barrett, Shannon Lowney, Lee Ann Nichols, Robert Sanderson, Calvin Jackson, David Gandell, Emily Lyons, Garson Romalis, Hugh Short, Jack Fainman… people shot, bombed, and murdered by people describing themselves as “pro-life.”
Shelley Shannon certainly cast herself that way. As did Eric Rudolph. And John Salvi. And James Kopp. And Michael Griffin.
According to the NAF, since 1977, there have been 7 murders, 17 attempted murders, 41 bombings, 642 bomb threats, 175 arsons, 96 attempted arsons, 390 invasions, 659 anthrax threats, 179 assault & battery incidents, 406 death threats, 525 stalkings, and 4 kidnappings.
No, the pro-life movement is not. It is universally pro-forced-childbirth, however.
That’s the point I was trying to make Andy. The hypocrisy is why I don’t feel like this situation is especially similar to the one Lee was trying to bring up.
Amber has obviously never had to make end-of-life decisions on behalf of someone else, because her vanilla “ending a life is always wrong” position just doesn’t cut it in the ICU.