Amazing << Hear this. Feel this, and tell me that this isn't music.
Oh, dear...
Posted on 06/01/2009 6:00:53 AM PDT by tcg
This shooting was an individual responding to the pressures being applied by the government to force us down the road to despotism.
Historically speaking, Lenin provoked violent reactions on the part of the Russian farmers as a means of drawing their weapons out. Lenin used the Red Army as the tool to eliminate all firearms in the Soviet Union. A farmer could shoot the local party official, but he couldn’t fight an army. I believe Obama is deliberately upping the ante in order to disarm the public. Read The Black Book of Communism.Ding ding ding.
But that would seem to make removing, abusing and arresting nonviolent protesters a waste of time, more symbolic than effective.
And if the state done it’s job and had stepped in to all sorts of situations people wouldn’t have felt motivated to do this or that horrible thing and then...... You can see where this is going.
The state did what it was supposed to do here - uphold court rulings, recognize the authority of duly elected representatives, convene grand juries, etc. If the state continues to do this AND the people of Kansas start electing different officials then there will be very different abortion laws in Kansas. Neither one of those situations create environments in which well-adjusted & reasonable people will kill. This man was, by all account so far, went cuckoo for cocoa puffs a number of years ago. Our government acts to accommodate reasonable men - not the loopy.
“I look at the situation and see that a governor could have been removed from office.” How? Do you really think legislators are going to remove someone from office for running interference for Tiller? If so, when does this get accomplished? And how many babies die horrifically in the mean time?
“New legislation could have been passed.” WHY? There is already legislation on the books that forbids what Tiller did. What kind of legislation, “If we pass a law, you really really really have to enforce it and we really mean it this time?” “Elections could have been won instead of lost.” Elections over what? Whether or not people have to obey the law? “These are all legal means - they have NOT been exhausted - and your response to that is that these are “extraordinary measures”.” Because they are.
“OK - let’s say that it’s extraordinary that a governor should have to be removed from office. So what. To my view that doesn’t make that removal less of a legal remedy. What does calling it an extraordinary measure change? What difference does it make?” It means that it isn’t LIKELY to happen and it shouldn’t HAVE to happen. We shouldn’t have to REMOVE a governor from office in order to prevent a man from killing viable babies when the law forbids him to do so! “Why bring it up at all if it isn’t meant to be something that changes the game?” The reason the governor was brought up in the first place was to dismiss the false notion by people that Tiller was legally justified in what he was doing. He wasn’t. A corrupt governor allowed him to disobey the law. “What are you attempting to argue and accomplish by suggesting that these are “extraordinary measures”.” I merely dispelling the myth that pro-lifers didn’t do what they needed to do, legally, to stop this man. They did. It is not in within their hands to for the governor to enforce the law and they shouldn’t have to.
“And BTW - I don’t think removing a governor is extraordinary. It’s very ordinary - literally. There is an order to it. It’s in state constitutions about how to do it. Common and ordinary are not the same.” You’re entitled to your opinion. In my opinion, it is an extraordinary measure.
*grin* I never said the government action was EFFECTIVE.
Joking aside - It’s not the option *I* would have selected. I merely said it was not unreasonable to believe that these steps might prevent violent action.
Most people derive at least part of their definitions of “normal and acceptable” from those they surround themselves with. It could be argued that the sorts of rallies that were being held encouraged the sorts of cranks likely to take violent action to congregate, socialize, and give each other bad ideas. If one argues that extremists left alone to congregate beget more extremists and that there wasn’t enough self-policing going on in these groups to temper the extremists..... you see how it goes.
This, of course, is something about which reasonable men might disagree.
” Do you really think legislators are going to remove someone from office for running interference for Tiller? If so, when does this get accomplished?”
Whether or not legislators will remove a governor is a part of the legal process in our republic. The fact is that they CAN. If they WON’T that doesn’t mean our republic has failed - it means that people need to apply more pressure on their reps.
Alternately - there is an election by which the governor could be removed. This hasn’t happened because conservatives haven’t earned enough votes to do so.
Which part of those two options are NOT legal remedies which could be carried out? I keep hearing you say that it would be hard, it would difficult, it would be unlikely, it tires our patience ..... so what? Does that suddenly make these not non-violent legal options?
” WHY? There is already legislation on the books that forbids what Tiller did. What kind of legislation,”
WHY? Because we are a nation of laws and our laws are not perfect but must, instead, be revised over time. The laws of Kansas could have been revised to close the loophole that led the grand jury to let him off the hook. And then he could be prosecuted again.
“Elections over what? Whether or not people have to obey the law?”
Elections for Governor and prosecutor. A Governor that wouldn’t shield Tiller and a prosecutor that would have been more vigorous. Apparently the people of Kansas didn’t want that though. They elected a prosecutor that said he would be less vigorous. The free citizens of a free state made a choice. The pro-life challenge is not to change their minds.
“I merely dispelling the myth that pro-lifers didn’t do what they needed to do, legally, to stop this man.”
Oh - I see. YOu mean they elected a pro-life Gov. a pro-life prosecutor, and a pr-life legislature that corrected the laws on the books and this man Tiller kept doing it anyway AND he was granted immunity from the law?
I don’t see imperfections in the law as extraordinary. They are quite ordinary. Common even. This is why we have procedure to remove corrupt governors. This is why we have elections. This is why we have representation. Whinging when it doesn’t work our way doesn’t make it extraordinary - it makes it one of the challenges of a republic.
I am not arguing the fact that the shooter is responsible, no matter what his metal state. I will argue that the state, Kansas in this case, did what it was supposed to do. At every turn, Tiller got cover from politicians, judges and the liberal left. Money and politics influenced decisions made on this issue, allowing him to continue.
You and I will not agree on this matter, as I am right and you are wrong :-P Like I said, at the very least Tiller now knows first hand if abortion is murder and what the consequences are.
I heartily approve of you using existing ideas and institutions to accommodate the new - that is the soul of conservatism going back to the Roman republic. =) I meant to encourage that.
It’s not inadequate at all - I just think you will flesh this out into something that stands on it’s own over time. I meant to encourage that also =)
You might read Peter Singer’s thoughts on war, abortion, etc. You will probably have very very very strong disagreements with him but his reasoning is robust and responding to him will sharpen your own thoughts.
I’ll just put on my asbestos undies now because I just suggested you read someone that many here regard as a tool of Satan.
Had he retired?
errrr... I should have said “the pro-life challenge is to change peoples’ minds.” not the opposite. which is what I said. *cough* *cough*
Wait until it turns out that Tiller was killed because he owed the guy some money or he had a drug deal go sour.
Then we won’t hear another word.
I am being a bit harsh in holding him in ABSOLUTE responsibility without paying any regard at all to the environment. I think I do see your point - But you’re probably right that we will not agree.
A tip of the hat to the turbo pig.
correction:
No doubt he had a full day of abortions to do (starting) on Monday morning.
Excellent article. But also learn from American history as well. Are we seeing an abortion version of “bloody Kanasa” like in the years just prior to the Civil War?
Correction, “bloody Kansas”.
Amazing << Hear this. Feel this, and tell me that this isn't music.
Oh, dear...
Pro-life rallies?
Really?
Maybe Rachel Maddow would argue something like that.
BTW, welcome to FR.
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.