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.

[E Rocc]

The self-appointed "commissars" on the right have done a lot to turn me off, and I have found myself becoming a mix of the Weekly Standard's foreign policy positions, and in very strong agreement with the "Leave Us Alone" coalition on the domestic issues.

I've been that way since the mid 1980s, indeed that was the Reagan approach. Defend the nation assertively, turn loose the power of American entrepreneurship....and oh by the way government is no more qualified to run people's personal lives that it is their economic lives.

It's noteworthy that Reagan was the most succesful Republican politician of the 20th century.

-Eric

[hchutch]

Agreed.

I mean, is it Michelle Malkin's business if I like to watch a Britney Spears video? Is it Brent Bozell's business if I like to listen to Howard Stern? Who really cares if I like listening to Ice-T or NWA?

They can change the channel. They can turn the TV or radio off and read a book or put in a CD. I really don't care what THEY do. I have to right to tell them who they can or cannot listen to. I EXPECT them to respect MY right to decide who and what *I* will listen to.

[Buckeye Bomber]

Man, I'd think you were smart, if it wasn't for your tagline about the DH in the national league. Worst idea ever!

For those of you with a sense of humor, here's some classic Onion satire:

http://www.theonion.com/onion3417/abortion_clinic_attack.html

[hchutch]

Hey, I followed the Brewers for 12 seasons in the AL (1986-1997). I got used to the DH. I miss the DH. How the heck are the Brewers supposed to put Richie Sexson, Brad Nelson, and Prince Fielder in the same lineup without the DH?

[Buckeye Bomber]

I don't know, but I know when the Reds had Griffey, Dunn, Kearns, and Guillen one of them could have been the DH. Even so, I like the pitching duels of the NL, but then again, I grew up on pitchers hitting.

[strela]

The pro-life movement was being portrayed as "a bunch of troglodyte gun kooks who are a bottle of Mad Dog 20-20 and a pack of Marlboros away from pulling another 9/11" long before anyone even knew who Paul Hill was.

Well, that is the inevitable result when a group of human beings presume to speak for God and attempt to coerce others into believing the same way they do. But, there's no sense in making liberal's jobs easier. By not immediately rising up with one voice and decrying and condemning murdering scumbags like Paul Hill, the pro-life movement just digs a deeper and deeper hole for themselves in public opinion.

[hchutch]

Precisely. It's ready-made PR for the pro-abortion crowd.

[E Rocc]

Agreed.

I mean, is it Michelle Malkin's business if I like to watch a Britney Spears video? Is it Brent Bozell's business if I like to listen to Howard Stern? Who really cares if I like listening to Ice-T or NWA?

They can change the channel. They can turn the TV or radio off and read a book or put in a CD. I really don't care what THEY do. I have to right to tell them who they can or cannot listen to. I EXPECT them to respect MY right to decide who and what *I* will listen to.

That was indeed the philosophy of the Reagan-era FCC. The one federal agency the moral majorettes would love to have controlled, and he turned it over to the libertarians who believed in the power of the marketplace. Howard Stern and MTV both owe their emergence to Ronald Reagan....and it's no coincidence that he got approximately 2/3 of the under-30 vote in 1984. The Democrats were giving birth to porcupines (breech presentation) over that statistic, especially when their biggest majority was among the 65 and over voters.

Bush the Elder's unwillingness to stand behind Reagan's social libertarianism blew that opportunity to render the Democratic Party irrelevant. The resulting pandering to the "cultural conservatives" (who are actually more like cultural collectivists) resulted in the loss of that younger vote.

-Eric

[strela]

It's ready-made PR for the pro-abortion crowd.

True. They say, "All our side wants to do is protect a woman's right to choose while the other side just wants to kill ya." And, in the case of Paul Hill, they'd be right.

[hchutch]

Yep. And Bush has followed the same path as Reagan in that regard. Putting the AFA and other groups into the usual tizzy.

Not my fault they forgot how to change the channel or put in a CD.

[E Rocc]

Man, I'd think you were smart, if it wasn't for your tagline about the DH in the national league. Worst idea ever!

Actually it's a tremendous idea. After all they don't force kickers to play other positions in football, or goalies to take a turn on the front line in soccer or hockey. Allowing a particularly good hitter to bat in place of a pitcher only adds to the excellence of the batting order.

Still....I've been wondering which tag-line was bound to stir more modell, mine or Hutch's. >:)

-Eric

[Alberta's Child]

Check out Post #204 in this thread -- I think it may offer some interesting insight into Paul Hill's thinking.

Well, that is the inevitable result when a group of human beings presume to speak for God and attempt to coerce others into believing the same way they do.

If Paul Hill killed these people with the intention of "rendering justice," then you'd be right. If he did it with the intention of protecting lives, then "presuming to speak for God" was not necessarily a relevant issue.

[strela]

Check out Post #204 in this thread -- I think it may offer some interesting insight into Paul Hill's thinking.

Not to be unkind, but I'm not particularly interested in the thought processes of a murderer. My only concern is that murderers assume room temperature as soon as humanly possible.

If Paul Hill killed these people with the intention of "rendering justice," then you'd be right. If he did it with the intention of protecting lives, then "presuming to speak for God" was not necessarily a relevant issue.

His motivations are immaterial - his actions are what should be judged. And judged they were.

[Buckeye Bomber]

When you were talking about judging actions, something else struck me. Not only are supposed "conservatives" advocating ending the rule of law around here, they are blaming the victim of a crime and society for the crime, rather than the individual. This must be some sort of bizarro conservative bulletin board.

[Alberta's Child]

His motivations are immaterial - his actions are what should be judged. And judged they were.

If his motivations were immaterial, then why are you concerned about the impact that his actions will have on the pro-life movement? He would be looked upon as no different than any other multiple-murderer, and would receive no more than passing mention here on FreeRepublic.

[daviddennis]

Amen, brother. I'm with you.

The increasing level of hostility here on all topics is a big worry of mine. I've pinged a friend to the party, Rabid Republican, who has made similar statements to me recently.

I'm starting to think we need a plan to "take back Free Republic" from those who believe in treating people who are one degree away from them ideologically as traitors.

Remember last year's election, when Peter Camejo and Bill Simon dealt with each other in a totally fair and civil way? I disagree with nearly everything Camejo stands for, but he at least has my respect.

The only problem is I have no idea how to make a campaign work. The other side has no interest in listening to us. I don't even know if they want to convert us; I feel more like they want us out or at least silent.

Thoughts?

D

[strela]

If his motivations were immaterial, then why are you concerned about the impact that his actions will have on the pro-life movement?

For the simple reason that I feel that the pro-life movement speaks for me in some ways, and I would hate to have that voice marginalized by the actions of a murderer.

[Buckeye Bomber]

They want silence and obedience. Just like any would-be totalitarians. I don't respect hatred and hostility. I respect logical reasoning and proven ideas. I stopped posting on Free Republic for a few months because of the mean-spiritedness of many of the debates, and the personal attacks I often endured for my disagreements. I come back for amusement (arguing is one of my favorite pastimes), and because I will be reassured that many Republicans aren't as bad as people try to portray them. So thanks for being the voices of reason I need to hear. And to those who are without reason, at least you're entertaining to debate.

[Alberta's Child]

For the simple reason that I feel that the pro-life movement speaks for me in some ways, and I would hate to have that voice marginalized by the actions of a murderer.

Then don't let the pro-life movement speak for you -- go out and speak for yourself, and don't ever feel a need to apologize for the actions of people who happen to have the same opinion as you on a particular subject.

I suspect Hill's case has evoked a lot of intense debate in the pro-life movement primarily because what has become known as the "mainstream" pro-life movement is having a difficult time facing the brutal reality of what it is trying to deal with.

[Rabid Dog]

I'm totally with you guys - what bothers me the most is that I see people whose opinions are thoughtful and respectful posting less and those whose opinions are redundant, childish and hateful posting more. And many of the obnoxious posters have been here a good while - perhaps not active - but here. And these posters are also quick to defend one another when chastised.