[LussaO]

Here’s a direct quote from editor-surveyor on another thread: “He should be lauded for his courage.”

Try as we might, me and some others just couldn’t convince this guy that selective outrage about 1st degree murder works against prolifers.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks; (courtesy ping to editor-surveyor); I did a search on e-s's perspective on the Roeder murder trial. I see that he posted quite a bit on necessity defense, jury nullification and closely related subjects, arguing that under Kansas law Roeder was entitled to present such defenses to the jury.

I myself am a supporter in principle of jury nullification, which has had an honorable place in our history since the pre-1776 John Peter Zenger case. However, I would disagree with editor-surveyor's position, as I understand it. The pre-meditated and intentional killing of a man is something that no one, on any account, can choose to do on his own: no one has this on his personal authority, either under Natural Law or God's law, as I understand it.

(Use of force to prevent an imminent slaying, which may unintentionally result in death, is a separate question.)

As far as I could see from a fairly quick scan, editor-surveyor is exceptional, if not solitary, in taking this stand in the Free Republic forum.