No, no, and no.
Very little is known of him — he's being kept under very tight wraps. Yet from what little is known, one surmises that Roeder is a very private man who ended up doing a very public thing. One senses he was acting out of conscience, imagining that he alone would pay the inevitable price. And for whatever reason, he was willing to bear that price. Whatever it is to be.
This strikes me as being something very like what the Framers had in mind when they pledged "their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor" to the cause of Liberty. Only Roeder evidently has staked his ground on Life.
When they pledged "their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor" they were dead serious. All was forfeit for the greater cause.
“One senses he was acting out of conscience, imagining that he alone would pay the inevitable price...
This strikes me as being something very like what the Framers had in mind when they pledged “their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor” to the cause of Liberty. Only Roeder evidently has staked his ground on Life.”
++++++++++++++++
Roeder acted basically alone, or perhaps with the support of a small handful. The Patriots of 1775 acted with a huge swath of support within the populace. The comparison breaks down, which is why I consider what Roeder did vigilantism, although perhaps admirable from a very limited, isolated point of view - meaning he paid an ultimate price to defend babies - but in the process damaging the entire movement strategically, and indeed morally. We need to win this battle by standing on the truth. When we get to the point where we need to pick up arms and risk fortunes like our forebears - we’re going to know it.
Do you think we’re at a point where we need to do that Betty? Are we at a point where we need to pick up arms against a despotic government?