Posted on 06/01/2009 6:00:53 AM PDT by tcg
All who know the objective truth about the dignity and value of every human life, from conception to natural death and at every moment in between, should decry this horrible act of violence. It must be unqualifiedly rejected and condemned within the Pro-Life community because of our unwavering conviction that every life, at every age and stage, has dignity and must be respected, protected and honored. This bedrock conviction should inform a “whole life/pro-life” ethic in those who gather under the banner of being Pro-Life.
A moral analysis tells us that the killing of a defenseless George Tiller is similar to the killing of every defenseless child in the womb who dies due to procured abortion. Both acts of killing are evil. Both must be completely rejected. Both should be decried by every person who is Pro-life.
We reject intentional abortion because every procured abortion is the killing of a member of our human family. The dignity of that little human person in the first home of the whole human race cries out for changing the unjust approach to giving protected status to intentional abortion in America. However, this dignity is present in all human persons, even those with whom we disagree and those whose actions we decry.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
If you are either a Christian or a Jew, you must know all of the various theological versions of this basic thought “Those who do not work do not eat”.
What do you do when someone takes what you need to survive? Do you let the thief take that essential, and thus kill you? Or do you recognize that the thief signed his own death warrant when he decided to be a criminal?
Are you aware you have bought into a thought originated by socialists, who wanted to de-emphasize property?
Thanks for the welcome. More of a return actually. I used to comment a few years ago but then I started a small business and all of my free time disappeared for a while. Had my swan song and left. However, I just graduated to “I can afford an assistant now!” and only work 6 days a week now. Woohoo!
And about the rallies - they are a different breed now than they were 20-25 years ago. You were talking about the mid-late 80’s incidents weren’t you?
Pro-Life orgs do a LOT better at self-policing now than they did 25-30 years ago. In fact, I’m kinda surprised that this new guy was active with Operation Rescue. I would have guessed they would have weeded him out for something fishy a while back.
This isn’t something that only affects pro-life groups BTW. Any new reform or protest organization is fueled by true believers and is eager for other to join. They tend to overlook serious warning signs until a little bit of cynicism sets in. USUALLY it just means they have their bank accounts emptied to pay for somebody’s drug/gambling/ex-wife problems. Sometimes the little signs they overlook are warning signs of violence though. People learn the hard way about overlooking what seem like “minor” character flaws in the new guy with the shifty eyes.
Agreed.
Agreed. Tiller's murderer is gonna get a nasty suprise when he gets to heaven. His stay won't be long.
Hitler was also acting within the law....to state that laws must be changed is fine except that there is no one to change the law...politicians, courts, lawyers.....you cannot get rid of all of them so that you can change the law...What should one do to change the law, and how many babies will be murdered in the mean time? Tillers death was no more note worthy than any of the others that have been killed in the last week...but his death makes the earth a little better since he is no longer walking on it.. Geez, all you hand wringers in the prolife movement should get a grip..I am against abortion in 99.9999% of the time, but I really don't care what those who are pro-death say about me...Let's run with your analogy. How did Hitler get all of his extra-judicial powers? After all the beer hall putsch was a failure right? He needed the reichstag fire(or the killing of an abortionist) to seize extra-judicial power.
See where I'm going with this?
Your going to have to be clearer in your response to me....I don’t follow your argument....
Your going to have to be clearer in your response to me....I don’t follow your argument....Think of it this way. Right now, American law still functions. People wanting to subvert it still have to look for loopholes and ways around it. Abortionists like Tiller still have to look for ways to cheat.
Hitler came to power by manufacturing crisis that gave him the ability to dictate the law as he saw fit. He didn't *need* to cheat anymore. What he said went.
If conservatives keep giving the Ayers' of this world Reichstag fires(killing abortionists like Tiller, no matter how despicable) they *will* take advantage.
Thank you for your clarification, I just disagree...
I don’t know, they probably would have been his followers.
. . . I believe to have interfered as I have done, . . . in behalf of His despised poor, was not wrong, but right. Now, if it be deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children, and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I submit: so let it be done.”
Although initially shocked by Brown’s exploits, many Northerners began to speak favorably of the militant abolitionist. “He did not recognize unjust human laws, but resisted them as he was bid. . . .,” said Henry David Thoreau in an address to the citizens of Concord, Massachusetts. “No man in America has ever stood up so persistently and effectively for the dignity of human nature. . . .”
John Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859.
Sometimes your concience just demands that you act.
Everybody knows that you don’t kill innocent people. There’s no need for people who support the Cause of Life to genuflect before anybody in the media or government.
Hogwash. There is a difference between respecting individual property rights and putting them on the same level with human life. And get real. Nobody in America in 2009 is going to die if he is robbed........unless, of course, you’re stranded in Arizona desert and someone is trying to steal your last canteen of water. If you want to shoot someone over that, go for it. But don’t pretend that shooting robbers in the back because they were stealing a TV from the neighbor’s house was done to save a life.
Again, we’re going around in circles. You keep talking about the legislature’s job to “correct” the laws that are on the books...to close “loopholes” etc. You keep discussing this as if there were some short-coming in the law, stating “laws aren’t perfect” as if what Tiller was doing was technically legal. How many times do we have to explain to you, that wasn’t the problem? The pro-life legislators did their job properly. The problem is in the refusal of the AG to ENFORCE the law for political reasons. You seem to be conflating Tiller getting off on minor charges about a doctor’s second opinion — which had NOTHING to do with his major crime and wouldn’t have stopped him at all even if he had been convicted — and the REFUSAL of the AG to bring charges for the main crime. Whether or not the AG follows the law is not in the hands of the pro-lifers. And,yes, you can say Tiller’s killer should have tried to have the AG impeached. I don’t presume to know what was in the killer’s mind, but I’m guessing he concluded the pro-lifers did everything by the book and babies were still being murdered and decided not to allow more babies to be murdered while this was being drawn out.
“How many times do we have to explain to you, that wasn’t the problem?”
Who is the we? To date, you’re the only person I’ve had this discussion with on here. Pardon my confusion.
“You seem to be conflating Tiller getting off on minor charges about a doctor’s second opinion....”
I am, in fact, attempting to keep those issues separate while still addressing both. Perhaps this is part of the confusion? I will try to separate them more clearly in the future.
You are correct - The secondary issue you mention would be addressed by closing a legal loophole - the primary issue would not.
I believe, however, that in BOTH cases the BEST legal remedies are elections. Send those people down to a HARD defeat. Not only will you get rid of the offenders but you will change the sorts of candidates that run for many years to come...
Believe it or not I’m agreeing with almost everything you are saying. The only contention I’ve had with anything you’ve said is:
1) You seem to suggest that ALL legal remedies have been EXHAUSTED when I believe they clearly have not &
2) This thing about “extraordinary measures”
The first one is clearly resolved. I can point to elections which can be held. I can point to possible impeachments. I can point to constitutional amendments which could be passed. All of these are legal remedies which haven’t reached their limit. Clearly legal means have not been exhausted and the rule of law can continue to address these matters.
The second issue is “extraordinary measures”. I understand you feel that taking some of these steps are extraordinary but you’ve never made clear what difference that makes. So it’s extraordinary! Does that change the legal options in any way?
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.