Posted on 11/22/2006 7:34:14 AM PST by presidio9
MINISTER PAUL HILL, who was executed for murdering two abortion providers in 1994, is lionized as a martyr on the Army of God Web site. On September 11, 2006, the fifth anniversary of the terror attacks that devastated our nation, a man crashed his car into a building in Davenport, Iowa, hoping to blow it up and kill himself in the fire. No national newspaper, magazine, or network newscast reported this attempted suicide bombing, though an AP wire story was available. Cable news (save for MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann) was silent about this latest act of terrorism in America.
Had the criminal, David McMenemy, been Arab or Muslim, this would have been headline news for weeks. But since his target was the Edgerton Women’s Health Center, rather than, say, a bank or a police station, media have not called this terrorism — even after three decades of extreme violence by anti-abortion fanatics, mostly fundamentalist Christians who believe they’re fighting a holy war.
Since 1977, casualties from this war include seven murders, 17 attempted murders, three kidnappings, 152 assaults, 305 completed or attempted bombings and arsons, 375 invasions, 482 stalking incidents, 380 death threats, 618 bomb threats, 100 acid attacks, and 1,254 acts of vandalism, according to the National Abortion Federation.
Abortion providers and activists received 77 letters threatening anthrax attacks before 9/11, yet the media never considered anthrax threats as terrorism until after 9/11, when such letters were delivered to journalists and members of Congress.
After 9/11, Planned Parenthood and other abortion-rights groups received 554 envelopes containing white powder and messages like: “You have been exposed to anthrax. . . . We are going to kill all of you.” They were signed by the Army of God, a group that hosts Scripture-filled Web pages for “Anti-Abortion Heroes of the Faith,” including
(Excerpt) Read more at thephoenix.com ...
So you ARE promoting and condining the killing of legal innocents in this country, aren't you?
Our founding fathers waged war in a revolution seeking freedom. They met the enemy face to face, and took prisoners when they were able to do so.
Oh please, they went to war over far less taxation than we tolerate now. They pulled Tories out of bed and tarred and feathered them for supporting the crown. Torie property was confiscated and given to patriots. Was this legal? No, but these were excesses which arose from not being able to make changes within the legal system. Anytime the deck is stacked a minority will drop out of the game.
You're evading. The truth is that the founders would not have shot women in the back or fired on unarmed civilians. Nothing you say is going to change that.
"It amazes me "
I just realized that this is the same argument that raged over John Brown and bleeding Kansas when the issue was slavery.
Something to think about...
You forgot about the other terrorist threat. All of those Timothy McVeighs out there. The thousands and thousands of them. You know the ones that out number islamic terrorists.
You're evading. The truth is that the founders would not have shot women in the back or fired on unarmed civilians. Nothing you say is going to change that.
Are you telling me that the founders wouldn't have hung all abortionists by the weeks end? Some one who kills dozens a day could hardly be considered unarmed. Helping to lure confused and sometimes coerced women in to kill their babies is not being an innocent telephone answerer.
I just realized that this is the same argument that raged over John Brown and bleeding Kansas when the issue was slavery.
You're right. Lincoln violated the Constitution and killed over half a million men.
I was referring specifically to John Brown's raids and killings of slave owners.
Just as a possibly interesting aside, the Battle Hymn of the Republic was originally a Southern song, and the opening words were, "John Brown's body lies a'moulderin' in the grave, John Brown's body lies a'moulderin' in the grave..."
Yep. I'm saying without question that the founders believed whole-heartedly in the doctrine of informed consent. Lest you confuse that with some abortion law or another the legal principle of informed consent is thus:
You have the right to know the legality of your actions and the possible penalties you may face. That is a basic, fundamental human right as the founders understood them. The state violates this basic human right when it retroactively punishes its citizens for actions that they committed while they were legal at the time.
Good call. John Brown enjoyed popular support amongst abolitionists, even though he was in fact a murderer by every definition. Brown took the law into his own hands much like it seems freedomfiter2 would do.
I was referring specifically to John Brown's raids and killings of slave owners
Oh right. Killing to end slavery isn't quite the same as killing to save lives, especially where one killing potentially saves hundreds. Interesting parallel.
You have the right to know the legality of your actions and the possible penalties you may face. That is a basic, fundamental human right as the founders understood them.
Obviously. The point I was ineptly trying to make is that they would never have allowed such a thing to be legalized in the first place and if some official tried he would have faced more than discontent at the ballot box.
And yet to seem to support the gunning down of a receptionist. That my friend is where we parted ways.
John Brown enjoyed popular support amongst abolitionists, even though he was in fact a murderer by every definition. Brown took the law into his own hands much like it seems freedomfiter2 would do.
If I remember correctly, John Brown was killed. It was right to execute him and it is right to execute anti- abortion killers as well. What is morally repugnant is to sit back and allow abortionists to kill with the blessing of the state.
And yet to seem to support the gunning down of a receptionist. That my friend is where we parted ways
I don't support killing the receptionist or even the abortionist. Anyone who who would do such a thing deserves the death penalty. However, when such a person does get killed, I feel the same as when I hear that some drug lord, mob boss or terrorist bomber gets killed. It makes the world and the human race a little better.
"Oh right. Killing to end slavery isn't quite the same as killing to save lives"
I am told that slavery caused huge numbers of deaths, not to mention an immense toll in misery and souls lost.
"caused huge numbers of deaths, not to mention an immense toll in misery and souls lost."
Wow, this sounds just like the women's lib movement. Ironically, American slavery and abortion are often compared. I'm not sure the US is Christian enough to see their error on abortion though.
"Wow, this sounds just like the women's lib movement."
There's really no need to be insulting. If you have some information that rebuts my statement, please present it.
"Ironically, American slavery and abortion are often compared."
There's nothing ironic about it. Both are grave moral wrongs, both were or are legal, both were or are justified by tendentious and blatantly invalid reasoning. I do hope no one will ever be able to say that both played a role in launching a civil war, but I'm not betting on it.
"I'm not sure the US is Christian enough to see their error on abortion though."
Which particular error would that be?
There are some differences between this violence and that commonly referred to as terrorism. Terrorism is usually the indiscriminate targeting of civilians. Persons with no connection to the issue may be victims.
The violence against abortion providers is not indiscriminate. It is very specifically targeted. Those not involved in the abortion business are not at risk for harm.
I don't mean to say it is not wrong. I believe it is. It is murder, but not terrorism.
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.