Posted on 09/04/2003 8:51:55 AM PDT by Polycarp
My anger over the pathological nature of "legal" baby killing and the individuals on these threads who see Hill's crime as somehow "worse" than that of the baby killers has led me to say things on these threads that I don't really believe, just to point out the rank hypocrisy and stupidity of certain posters on these threads.
I've made my points. I'll stop using bitter sarcasm and cynicism now and state clearly:
1)Hill murdered an abortionist, and deserved the punishment meeted out to him by the state. The state has the right, recognized in 2000 years of Christian moral theology, to impose capital punishment. But In all honesty, I have reservations about the death penalty.
2) Abortion may be "legal" but it is still a crime against humanity. Though it would be unjust to try them, by ex-post-facto prosecution once abortion is again made illegal, abortionists still must pay some measure of justice for their crimes. Revoking their licences and general social ostracizing would be minimum and insufficient justice.
3) Vigiliante "justice" and ex-post-facto law cannot be tolerated in a civil society. However, neither can judicial tyrrany and legislation by judicial fiat. Civil rebellion against judicial tyranny and legislation by judicial fiat is not now unwarranted. However, it may in the future be necessary. In the context of innevitable future civil rebellion against judicial tyranny and legislation by judicial fiat it is very likely that certain individuals might engage in vigilantism and ex-post-facto justice. Don't say I didn't tell you so.
4)In the current situation of pathological legalized violence in the form of "legal" baby murdering, everyone must understand that violence will always beget more violence, outside of the abortion clinics. Expect more cases like Hill. It is axiomatic that the violence of "legal" abortion will beget further violence, usually among the intellectually/emotionally/psychologically unstable.
5) Because it is axiomatic that violence, even the violence of "legal" abortion, will always beget further violence, it is evidence of gross ignorance of human nature and Natural Law that certain folks express surprise and dismay at the actions of someone like Hill.
6) Furthermore, to express more outrage at Hill's crime than the pathological violence ("legal" abortion) that precipitated Hill's crime is a symptom of a culture that has completely lost its moral compass and is on the straight and narrow path to self destruction.
In light of your histrionic hyperbole, and bullet-proof myopia, I'm surprised he was that restrained.
Sure you are.
No, I am not. Logic clearly is not your strong suit. Pointing out that violence WILL happen, that it is axiomatic that the pathological violence of "legal" abortion, is NOT the same as advocating violence. Unless you want to make the specious claim that Mother Teresa was advocating nuclear war when she simply pointed out the axiomatic fact that "The fruit of abortion is nuclear war."
I think you'll have a hard time convicting Mother Teresa of advocating violence. And since I'm simply repeating her warning, you will fail in convicting me of ADVOCATING violence.
Such undelicate language for one so close to God, wouldn't you say?
Righteous Anger does that to a guy.
Yes, clearly.
I wonder what's stopping them.
Maybe they have some healthy doubts about the "reward" that would await them. ;-)
Pretty scary, huh? Telling one to "screw" oneself, as Polycarp did to me, doesn't appear to be very Catholic or Family oriented.
Of course you're advocating violence. In fact, you'd probably have that same grin on your face the next time an abortion doc is shot that Hill had, out of joy.
Gosh, how DO you stand yourself, then?
And I'm sure, a lot of things take you aback. What's the point?
MY point was simply that some seem to see the evil of Paul Hill but don't correspondingly see the evil of the abortionists. And for some of us who see civil justice as an ordered extension of Divine Justice, Hill's eternal punishment is NOT "irrelevant."
Further, I think the condemnation of abortion in the context of this thread is totally appropriate and don't feel the need (thank you much!) to "start an abortion thread."
Then let me repeat what I said in my previous post:
Further, it is my sincere belief that Paul Hill was a murdering scumbag and that he is roasting in Hell as we speak.
According to your spittle-flecked attacks in Posts 1 and 2, I am one of those posters you referred to as being a "moral and mental midget" and having "rank hypocrisy and stupidity." Those are the words you used. All I'm asking you to do is to screw up your courage and call me those names to my face.
He didn't say it to me. He said it to someone else. Either way, it seems a little inappropriate for someone representing a Catholic organization.
And "histrionic hyperbole, and bullet-proof myopia" is apparently in the eye of the beholder.
Of course, you wish I had said this, because then you could disregard the cold hard facts I am telling you, but on the contrary, I have not.
There is a difference between predicting violence based on the axiom that violence begets violence, and advocating or condoning violence.
I condemn violence and have only said that Hill deserved his sentence.
However, I am warning you schmucks that though I condemn violence and civil rebellion that you must expect to see continued violence and civil rebellion because it is axiomatic that abortion violence begets further violence.
As long as legalized abortion is tolerated, there will be more violence.
Or perhaps the spinelessness of those that "oppose" abortion. Hard to garner support to force the right thing when half your own side is selling you out for some "safety."
And he sits there and posts that he is angry that people are so glad to see Hill executed. Of course he approves of it, otherwise, this would have never been brought up. This is the wrong time to get people angry over abortions. Using this execution as a platform associates one directly with people like Hill. Anyone who voluntarily associates themselves wit hthe likes of Hill is definitely a kook.
Fine. You can call him whatever you want. The disturbing fact that you seem to be advocating his murder is what I want to talk about.
If you think Hill was a hero - and you certainly seem to - what is stopping you from emulating him?
No you don't see.
The left likes to make facile analogies between Paul Hill and 9/11 which simply don't have any logical connection.
Paul Hill knew that he was breaking the law and Paul Hill accepted the consequences of his actions without making excuses for himself or lodging phony appeals. Paul Hill committed a crime and he paid for it with his life.
I don't believe either Polycarp or myself have argued that he should have "gotten off."
The fact is that his motivation was radically different from the motivation of a jihadist.
And shooting someone until they are out of their misery is merciful in comparison to "Dr." Britton's practice of leaving still-twitching, saline-scorched children in trash bags to die a painful death over a period of hours.
The fact is, your belief that the life of John Britton was intrinsically more precious than the lives of the thousands of children he murdered for cash on the barrel is erroneous and clouds your thinking.
Which explains the false inferences you drew from my post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.