Posted on 06/08/2009 10:08:40 AM PDT by markomalley
I'm not "playing games". I'm done with the "pro-life" movement. Just a bunch of hypocrites who don't have the courage of their convictions.
Thank you once again for opening my eyes.
You most certainly are. “You've opened my eyes.” “The scales have dropped off my eyes.” Cynicism and game playing.
And what do you mean you're ‘done’ with the pro-life movement? How can you say that as a Christian? Pray tell? What about perseverance and long suffering and prayer and waiting on God - are you done with that too? Wow...
All this because you're willing to admit your hypocrisy and you think we're not? I'm a hypocrite sir, a sinner, and I'll be the first one to admit that. But I will not stand by while someone caricatures me. I will defend against that. And yes, imho, that is game playing.
In that we're in the Religion Forum, I'm not permitted to say what I realize about P-Marlowe, as it goes to inner thoughts and emotions, about which one is forbidden to comment herein.
So, I'm left with pointing out that the assertions posted are bereft of support from the real world. The assertions made are neither logically internally consistent, nor supported by any actual relationship to reality.
sitetest
Hence, it is clear that what Mr. Tiller was doing in his clinic was simply dispensing medicial care to needy women. Since the Sovereign Government has granted that medical procedure full constitutional status, there is simply no way, under the law, that anything that Mr. Tiller did could possibly under any circumstances be considered "Murder." As markomalley showed me in the Aquinas post, the sovereign determines what is murder in a society and if the sovereign sends a man to war and he kills another, there is no guilt. Likewise if Mr. Tiller performs a legal medical procedure, there is no guilt as he has the full approval of the United States and, unlike fetuses, he is protected by the Constitution of the United States.
I had previously made an argument that Roeder's actions could be justified under the "defense of others" defense, but as Aquinas and markomalley so aptly indicated, that defense would not apply because Tiller was legally justified in all his actions and therefore Roeder could not possibly be defending others since the ones he was attempting to defend are not considered human beings and are not afforded any constitutional rights.
So when it comes down to brass tacks, Mr. Tiller was an innocent victim of a vicious murderer.
Again my apologies to all who chose to argue with me on this thread.
You guys were right.
I was wrong.
Tiller's death was a horrid crime and Roeder deserves the death penalty (if they have it in Kansas).
Thank you all for your input.
Abortion is murder, so should we put on our Punisher shirts (or perhaps the Spanish Inquisition costume from Monty Python), arm up, and start hunting abortion doctors?
Should we all leave church, grab our pitch forks, and start killing those who oppose us? You say that if one views abortion as murder, than one needs to support what Roeder did, and probably should join in.
So again, Mr Marlowe. How many millions do you feel we need to kill in order to stop abortion? For if that is the only path open to us (either embracing the killing of babies or the killing of abortion doctors), then lay out your plan of attack.
Of course, you did leave unaddressed my point about Paul. See, if you want to see some REAL bad stuff, read about what Rome liked to do for fun. Read about how the first century Christians were killed. The Romans were nothing if not inventive.
And they loved abortion. Sewers in many Roman ruins (and in parts of Rome itself) were plugged up with the bodies of dead babies that the people would flush out with the rest of the ... well you know.
And those first century Christians, I guess using the reasoning you stated here, they must have grabbed the sword and started slitting every Roman throat they came across right? I mean the writings of the Early Church call all abortionists murder (including those caused by chemical birth control, and yes they had that). So if they truly thought it was murder, then they surly must have started killing those who did it right?
Or did they follow what Paul said in the Bible. Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. But then I guess they just didn't believe in what they said. After all, they were only tortured to death, exiled, imprisoned, raped, fed to the lions, and all of the other sick devices that age used. They didn't follow the truth of their convictions, discard what Jesus and Paul taught, and start killing their enemies. Then Paul was a fool for going to prison, and Jesus more of one for dieing on the cross. For they should have followed their convictions and just unleashed total war on those who sin.
Now, I know from some of your other posts that you DO NOT believe that. Tiller's murder was wrong, and it will delay the day when abortion is outlawed. All those who want to kill their later term babies will just hop up the highway to Omaha and get the procedure done there. And in the mean time, people now have a view of the pro life movement that we are dangerous terrorists.
I thought you had been reading my posts. We should not kill anyone to stop abortion because that would be murder. Abortion is NOT murder because it is legal and has been sanctioned by the government and the government has been instituted as the authority to which we must obey. As markomalley showed me with his references to Aquinas, it would be immoral to break a law instituted by the sovereign in order to effect moral change. Abortion is legal and therefore anyone who practices it is without guilt before the law (unless they do it without a medical license).
You say that if one views abortion as murder, than one needs to support what Roeder did, and probably should join in.
If in fact Abortion WAS murder, then there would be no need to do that because the Civil Authorities would be the ones which would extract justice. Again, thank you mark for showing me that passage from Aquinas. It really helped me to sort thing thing out in my mind. The fact of the matter is that the state has determined that Abortion is NOT murder, so that would preclude anyone from taking the law into their own hands to prevent it. Roeder's actions meet the definition of murder which is as follows:
The unlawful killing of a human being by another human being with malice aforethought.
The Government has determined that physicians are human beings and so is Roeder. He killed Tiller, so the only question would be whether or not it was "unlawful". Since he had not moral or legal authority to take Tiller's life, it was an unlawful act and since he hunted him down and shot him, we can infer malice aforethought. Roeder should be executed as soon as the law allows.
Now lets look at Roeder's innocent victim. George Tiller was a model citizen, a church going physician (those are rare these days) and apparently he was referred to as a generous individual. He had a clinic that performed legal medical procedures for the benefit of women who came from all over the United States to seek out his expertise. He did abortions, which are legal on fetuses which have never been granted the status of human being by the courts or the congress of this country. So Roeder is a murderer and Tiller is an innocent victim.
And in the mean time, people now have a view of the pro life movement that we are dangerous terrorists.
Obviously Roeder is not a part of that movement. The pro-life movement believes, like you and I, that Tiller was an innocent victim and Roeder was a cold blooded killer.
Are you having fun with this game yet?
So, what should we pro life (since you are no longer one) do?
And was Paul a fool for not preaching that it was the Christian duty to attack and kill Romans who where killing fellow Christians?
You guys showed me that killing an abortionist is legally murder and that killing fetuses is legal.
You've also showed me that the Sovereign determines whether or not a crime is murder, not the opinions of some members of some minority movement.
Abortion is not murder. Killing an abortionist is murder. I understand that now.
Thanks, you've taken a great burden off my shoulders.
Hey stop hounding me.
You were right. I was wrong.
Tiller was an innocent victim and Roeder is a cold blooded murderer.
I understand that now.
Thanks. You've been a great help.
DNFTT
What, did your words come back and bite you?
You know I'm right.
I see.
So both can not be wrong?
Both cannot be murder.
Why not?
If I take off tonight and go shoot a random gang banger who shot someone else in the past, is that murder?
Tiller never committed murder. Fetuses are not protected by the constitution. Gang bangers are.
I don't know why you addressed this to me:
“You guys were right.
“I was wrong.”
I know that abortion is murder, even if it isn't currently defined as murder under American law. For someone claiming the imprimatur of St. Thomas Aquinas on how one views the positive law of the state, you seem to have forgotten (or never learned) what St. Thomas had to say about unjust laws.
You seem to have abandoned the truth that abortion is murder.
I'll leave you to your new opinions.
sitetest
Seriously P-M?
“The pro-life movement believes”
You sound like one of those people railing against the Republicans, with blinders on...sarcasm, cynicism...too bad that.
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.