ABORTION-SLAY REV EXECUTED

New York Post ^ | 9/04/03 | GERSH KUNTZMAN

[kattracks]

September 4, 2003 -- As a violent thunderstorm flickered and dimmed the lights in Florida's execution chamber, a former minister was put to death last night for murdering an abortion doctor.

Paul Hill used his last breaths to call upon right-to-lifers to continue the fight - by any means necessary.

[Vaduz]

Make that two.

[Heartbreak of Psoriasis]

It is amazing how much of this discussion was going on 150 years ago.....about slavery and abolition. Remember that SCOTUS ruled that the 'negro' was not human. Remember the violence that abolitionists were responsible for.

I absolutely agree with that. The Dred Scott decision is eerily similar to Roe v. Wade. Both were exercises in raw judicial power that twisted the Constitution beyond recognition (although I have to say that of the two Roe was worse). Both decisions placed one class of human beings beyond the protection of the laws and handed them over to another class of human beings to exercise absolutely arbitrary power over them. The foregoing sentence is the very definition of slavery, and it follows that Abortion = Slavery.

Perhaps some day people will remember Hill with the sort of moral ambivalence with which most now view John Brown. Was John Brown a saint of a sinner? Was slavery such a moral abomination that it justified the spilling of blood to resist? If so, then how does the moral outrage of African slavery compare with the millions of abortions legally performed in America since 1973?

I would be most interested in your reply to those questions.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Whether you agree with him or not, it sure was nice to see someone with real convictions.

Do you feel that way about the 9/11 hijackers too?

[Dave S]

I think that Hill did a service to us all by putting the Pro-Life movement to the test. Are Por-Lifers serious about the unborn being human? If so, it follows that abortion is murder, abortionists are murderers, and lethal force is justified (indeed, morally compelled) to stop it.

You are one of the best examples yet of why the founding fathers didnt setup a theocratic form of government. People like you set the Pro-Life movement back a generation. If you think Paul Hill is so great why dont you go join him and his 72 virgins.

[Catspaw]

Of course, Paul Hill and his ilk did help get the FACE Act passed. For some reason, while the Army of God recruiters are extolling the virtures of Mr. Hill, they seem to forget that fact.

[Dave S]

If someone breaks in to your house an you kill him is it murder?

And the doctor killed was in Paul Hill's house? Fry the scumbag. Help him get his 72 virgin reward.

[Heartbreak of Psoriasis]

Even the Declaration was written from a Deist viewpoint and certainly cannot be twisted to interpret the viewpoint that "God's Laws" must be enforced even upon nonbelievers.

Certainly not all religious laws should be forced upon non-believers. Sunday church attendance and dietary laws come to mind.

But that's not what we're talking about here. Our Republc was founded upon the notion that there exists a Natural Law that is discernible by observation and reason, and to which all are subject just as they are subject to the laws of thermodynamics. For the Founders, the right to life and freedom and the corollary rights of self defense and revolution are not mere "constructs" that can be repealed by general agreement. The Declaration embodies this notion of the Natural Moral Law, and I think it clear that the acceptance of the principles of the Declaration is the sine qua non of Americanism.

Thus, I stand by my statement that nobody could deny that man is "endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights," including most relevantly here the "right to life" and claim ownership of the American tradition.

I respectfully reiterate my request that somebody here offer a rational argument as to why Hill's actions are unjustifiable given the reality of the humanity of the fetus, the natural right to the use of violence in the defense of self and others, and the supremacy of the Natural Law over all man made laws, including the diktats of SCOTUS.

Let's put aside the emotion for a minute, and apply cold hard logic to the situation.

I hope for your reasoned response.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Ah, so here is the intellectual heart and basisof Army of God recruitment. Seductive and sweet sounding, and hoping that people who tend to oppose abortion have heard the "abortion is murder" line so many times that it plucks the same emotional chord in the breasts of people. Ideally, you seek to turn ordinary and fervent Right to Lifers into snipers and clinic bombers.

The fact of the matter is that a very sizable percentage of the American public doesn't agree with the theological precept that a fetus is yet separate enough to enjoy separate protection at law, and of active Right to Life folks, most of them see a clear and cognizable difference between an abortion and wanton murder. It is a reasonable distinction to make.

[Heartbreak of Psoriasis]

Seductive and sweet sounding, and hoping that people who tend to oppose abortion have heard the "abortion is murder" line so many times that it plucks the same emotional chord in the breasts of people. Ideally, you seek to turn ordinary and fervent Right to Lifers into snipers and clinic bombers.

Actually, I want no such thing.

As I've said several times on this thread, I want somebody to give me a convincving argument why Hill was wrong, given the assumptions of human rights and the humanity of the fetus that form the rhetorical plinth of the Pro Life movement.

I've seen no such argument. Indeed, I've seen no response other than the very appeals to emotion that you would decry in me.

I say yet again: let's drop the emotions, take a step back and look at the thing with cold, hard logic. I want to be convinced that Hill was wrong. Believe me, I really do.

I hope to hear your reasoned response.

[Heartbreak of Psoriasis]

Of course, Paul Hill and his ilk did help get the FACE Act passed. For some reason, while the Army of God recruiters are extolling the virtures of Mr. Hill, they seem to forget that fact.

That's actually the only good argument I've every heard against anti-abortion violence. That is, one can and should refrain from taking an action that would likely exacerbate a bad situation. In other words, Hill's violence foreseeably lead to a public reaction that was bad for the pro-life cause as a whole, and thus was immoral as it forseeably did more harm than good. Given the political realities of our time, that's an argument with some merit, to be sure.

However, I personally don't find it convincing. Remember that we're dealing with abortionists - people who crush the skulls and suck out the brains of little babies for a buck. It seems to me that the moral outrage is so great that all other considerations rightly take a back seat.

Imagine a volunteer in the Underground Railraod who was forced to kill a bounty hunter in order to save the slaves he was helping to escape. Would his actions justified? I think so, and I'd like to hear what you think of that.

I would also be interested in hearing your take on John Brown and his violent campaign to end slavery. The same argument that applied then - that violence could only damage the abolitionist cause - applies by analogy to the abortion debate of our own day. I believe that history vindicated John Brown's quixotic campaign, however ill-contrived it may have been. What do you think?

[MEG33]

What you want you obviously have not been able to find here.Perhaps another forum might be able to address your needs with more intelligence,cold hard logic and lack of emotion.Somewhere out there surely you may find your answer.I hope you can find that special someone.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

If a person sees abortion as an only abhorrently immoral practice done in ignorance of a higher natural law, then Hill was wrong. This would reflect the view of most mainline Right to Life folks. A much smaller subset would think that it is deliberate defiance of that natural law - and those would be the folks that think Hill was right.

[Deepest South]

After Hill killed Britton the abortionist the abortion industry and willing media went into high gear in P'cola. The industry made sure the little town had PLENTY of willing "doc's" and the police department did a wonderful job of escorting them from the airport to the clinics under guard with the doc's wearing masks.

After the first killing here of David Gunn the year before, ( yes, we had two abortionists killed here)the town went from One, David Gunn doing abortions at two clinics one day a week to 3 abortionists, one of which was Britton and now we got 2nd trimesters abortions too. This point was made to Mr. Hill, on multiple occasions, the point being that killing these guys made things worse not better,

BTW, the owner of the clinic where Gunn( the first abortionist) was shot was actually owned by an abortionist named George Wayne Patterson, who lived in Mobile and stood in for Gunn prior to his own murder in Mobile, AL outside the back door of a porn movie theater. George Patterson's killer went to trial twice, was never convicted. No motive was established in the case. And no media or abortion industry leaders really ever said much about it. The inconsistencies that surrounded the murders in Pensacola make for interesting reading including information that placed someone else as the shooter in the Gunn murder. One more BTW, the woman shot was Mrs. Barrett, Colonels Barrett's wife, he carried a gun, said he would use it on pro-lifers ( quoted in GQ magazine article that discussed the Hill/ justifiable homicide concept before the murder) Barrett chased my wife and daughter while he and Britton were in Barrett's car and my wife was on foot. My wife had taken a photograph of Britton at the clinic and that set Barrett off.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

One more BTW, the woman shot was Mrs. Barrett, Colonels Barrett's wife, he carried a gun, said he would use it on pro-lifers ( quoted in GQ magazine article that discussed the Hill/ justifiable homicide concept before the murder) Barrett chased my wife and daughter while he and Britton were in Barrett's car and my wife was on foot. My wife had taken a photograph of Britton at the clinic and that set Barrett off.

Imagine that - Col. Barrett was concerned over the notion that the group of radicals in P-cola was apt to commit violence, and was prepared to act in self defense - unfortunately, Hill got to him first.

Why was your wife taking Britton's picture, and what purpose was that to serve?

You knew what Hill planned, and you knew something of his involvement in prior episodes, didn't you?

[CalvaryJohn]

Yeah, yeah. John Brown got what was coming to him, too. I admire his cause, but his methods were treasonous. Ditto for Hill. His cause was just. His actions were murder.

[Catspaw]

I think I'll quote Gov. Jeb Bush, who signed Paul Hill's death warrant:

''This gentleman created a premeditated act of murder in the defense of life, which makes no sense to me,'' Bush said. ``I find I have no sympathy for someone who would kill someone else and then say it's following the teachings of Jesus. . . . That's not my Jesus.''

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/state/6589447.htm

[Deepest South]

The purpose of the photo was to determine the identity of the abortionist of the week. Case in point Steven Brigham of New Jersey, who had lost his license to practice in 3 states for various activities and did not report that fact to Florida authorities as required by Florida law. He then lost his license in Florida too. And, NO, I did not know what Hill planned, and never suspected that he would commit such an act. Argued with him on several occasions NOT to promote his "justifiable homocide" theory since my concern was that some kook would do what he was promoting. Pro life does not include activities that promote murder of anyone abortionists included. Hill actually said he would never do such a thing as,

"the leaders never go to jail" This attitude was very disturbing too since it seemed he was seeking someone to manipulate to commit the crimes and then claim he was not involved. A lot like others that may manipulate others to racist crimes and then walk away. Perhaps Hill got tired of waiting on someone else to commit the crime and thought his actions might cause an anti-abortion war to start. Sort of Like Charles Manson and Helter Skelter. Manson did however convince others to do his bidding.

[tkathy]

The cause of abortion is not doctors or clinics (which are red herrings). The cause is teen age pregnancies.

[MEG33]

Not mine either and not acceptable in the laws of the state of Florida.

[John Doe]

You...smell a troll. Convenient vitrol to an articulate...thought provocing question? Tough to answer...is it?