Posted on 09/04/2003 12:33:34 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:16:24 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Oh, and by the way, when you quote the Declaration of Independance, you might try remembering that, whilst indeed one of our Founding Documents, it is the Constitution, and not it, which carries the force of law.
I believe that you misunderstand the question, which is whether there is a Law higher than the Constitution. The Declaration answers that question with a resounding "yes." The Natural Law - the laws of Nature and of Nature's God - stand above all man made laws and is the standard by which they are judged.
If it were otherwise, then the Founders would have had no natural right to revolution, which they claimed. If they had no such right, the the Constitution that followed from that claim is illegitimate.
We see then that the entire American tradition is founded upon the notion that the Natural Law allows for violence under certain circumstances.
I thus reiterate that nobody who genuinely believes in the American Revolution could posit that no law of man - even the Constitution itself - is subject to unquestioned obedience under all circumstances.
The answer to that question is simple.
If, abortions were shown on television, the very next day, there would be no abortionist or abortion supporters. It is that horrific.
Sorry, but I'm not inclined to respond to people who resort to accusations like this with reasoned argument. You clearly wish none, and it would be wasted upon you.
Got this e-mail from a friend who knwe Rev. Hill for 9 years.
Just a few minutes ago, my friend Paul Hill was strapped to a table, and injected with a lethal combination of poisons that ended his life on earth. It was a deliberate killing on the part of the State of Florida.
Paul Hill was a gentle man with a kind face. Not the kind of guy you actually expected to see on the sidewalk in front of the abortion clinic every day they killed babies, calling out to the women and offering help, and calling out to the abortionists to repent from their wickedness and turn to Christ for salvation.
I didn't know him very long. We met in Chicago in April of 1994. It was a big meeting of pro-life leaders that was gathered precisely to address how we would deal with the first killing of an abortionist by Michael Griffin; the killing of David Gunn in Pensacola, Paul Hill's home town.
...
Less than four months after that meeting, Paul took a loaded 12 gauge shotgun, and killed the baby-killer John Britton, and his armed bodyguard, as they got out of his truck to walk the few steps to the building, to go in and butcher 32 unborn children. Those children did not die. John Britton did. He never killed another baby. Over 25 abortionists quit the grisly trade as a direct result of Paul's actions as well.
I've laid out above logical arguments that request a reasoned response. Ad hominem attacks are no argument, and prove only the intellectual poverty of those who resort to them.
I don't think with my emotions, I think only with my intellect, and I expect others to do the same.
I therefore gently reiterate my friendly challenge to you and others on this thread to address the arguments made above using reason alone.
I await your reasoned response.
Thanks, Hyacinth.
I'll be back tomorrow.
You'll stop using them, then? After all, questioning a man's patriotism, while he is wearing his country's uniform in time of war, would certainly fall in this category.
Which was grinning from ear to ear as he relished his fame, and his actions.
"Paul took a loaded 12 gauge shotgun, and killed the baby-killer John Britton, and his armed bodyguard..."
You forgot to mention that the bodyguard was an honorable veteran of the armed forces, that Hill also shot Dr. Britton's wife, and that he was fully prepared to kill police officers as well. Must be an oversight...
"Those children did not die..."
Not that day, but their mothers could easily seek their procedures elsewhere. No child was defended from ANYTHING.
"Over 25 abortionists quit the grisly trade as a direct result of Paul's actions as well..."
Yep, I'm sure they never did another one again, or even moved to another city to do them, or hired guards of their own...keep dreaming.
My purpose was not to do that, but rather to point up the logical inconsistency of your purported position and the founding principles of our Republic.
I intended that only, and in no way meant to call into question your honor and patriotism.
Now that we've cleared that unfortunate misunderstanding, please address the substance of my arguments.
I look forward to your reasoned response.
Some liberals have real convictions but they are clearly wrong. Being sure you are right doesnt make you right. Paul Hill deserved what he got. He's not God, he shouldnt assume that role.
"No American could hold that view."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.I'm sorry, but I can't defend my citizenship OR patriotism more directly with you...I'm overseas right now defending YOURS.
Your statement was, however, arrogant, insulting, and offensive, not to mention destructive of any cedibility you may have possesed.
Oh, and by the way, when you quote the Declaration of Independance, you might try remembering that, whilst indeed one of our Founding Documents, it is the Constitution, and not it, which carries the force of law.
To claim that no American could believe this is so outlandish as to be ridiculous. If anything, the opposite is true. Even as a non Christian I found the gurney/cross comment to be one of the most offensive things I've ever read. The italicized above may top it. Views like this lead to Roy Moore at best, "Nehemiah Scudder" at worst.
I tended to agree with MEG at first, but I suspect we have not a liberal having fun, but a Rushdoony "Reconstructionist". Even without these comments, this is probably the most disturbing thread I've ever read. It graphically illustrates something I've caught heat for saying around here, that the use of religious fanaticism as a justification of evil is by no means a monopoly of Islam.
-Eric
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.