Posted on 05/31/2009 10:08:54 AM PDT by upchuck
WICHITA, Kan. -- Dr. George Tiller, a Kansas man who became one of the most famous figures in the national debate over abortion, was shot and killed at his church Sunday morning, KAKE-TV reported.
Tiller was walking into Reformation Lutheran Church at 10:03 a.m., when he was shot.
Tiller was pronounced dead when emergency crews arrived, the station reported.
Police were looking for a blue Ford Taurus with a K-State vanity plate, license number 225 BAB. Police described him as a white male in his 50's or 60's, 6'1," 220 lbs, wearing a white shirt and dark pants.
And some rogue hall monitor couldn't abide that kind of tardiness.
Let me be clear about this... I am not against killing, I’m just against the killing of the innocent.
1. Regarding the Czechs — the Government surrendered — the people never did. And the Geneva Convention only applies when it works to our enemies advantage...
2. The difference between the Founders and Brown was that the Founders acted based on shared principles, after ore than a decade of appeals for redress, and they did so as representatives of their respective States. John Brown was a coward and vigilante who acted unilaterally and illegally.
3. That justice and legality are not synonymous is a principle we agree on. That the murder of an unborn child is the same as the murder of a 2 yr old child I generally agree on (there may be a caveat or 2, but generally agreed). But where we draw the line may be different. That Tiller is dead is not something I will weep over. But the question is, what is the net effect of that “justice” the killer doled out? I’ll tell you, the murder of MORE unborn babies, under the protection of Federal law enforcement, AND the persecution of those who would work to see abortions end! It was both illegal AND unjust to murder Tiller, if for no other reason than because the net effect will be that more babies die, and more liberties are lost — and civil conflict inevitably comes closer.
4. The Left never has to pay a price because they have no morals, and make no pretense to having morals (unless they see political benefit in it). There is therefore no criteria by which they are held accountable. The Press won’t hold them accountable, their comrades in the Washington political elite (Dem or Repub) won’t hold them accountable, their friends in the courts won’t hold them accountable. ONLY the people at election time MAY hold them accountable — and lately, that’s not been true. Furthermore, by the time the census is thru, ACORN is fully funded and in place, and the gerrymandering of new congressional districts in finished, not even a MAJORITY of the voters will be able to beat the deck they’ve stacked.
I think you are paranoid and way too willing to submit to leftist thoughtcrime blame for a crime someone else committed. Please, keep me out of your guilt trip.
4. The Left never has to pay a price because they have no morals, and make no pretense to having morals (unless they see political benefit in it). There is therefore no criteria by which they are held accountable. The Press won’t hold them accountable, their comrades in the Washington political elite (Dem or Repub) won’t hold them accountable, their friends in the courts won’t hold them accountable. ONLY the people at election time MAY hold them accountable — and lately, that’s not been true. Furthermore, by the time the census is thru, ACORN is fully funded and in place, and the gerrymandering of new congressional districts in finished, not even a MAJORITY of the voters will be able to beat the deck they’ve stacked.
* * * *
good work, though I disagree with your number 3, in that Tiller got his just desserts.
Sara — please explain..? I think you misunderstood what I said.
I did NOT say I believed all pro-lifers bore guilt regarding Tillers murder. I said we would all be blamed for it. Big difference.
And I didn’t put you into my [alledged] paranoid, delusional “guilt trip.” First, because I’m not feeling guilty for anything, and second, because I haven’t the first clue WHO you even are.
On the same token, if you believe the murder of Tiller was justified, then the “Pro-life” movement is in far more trouble than I thought.
good work, though I disagree with your number 3, in that Tiller got his just desserts.
__________________________
Tiller has been inviting martyrdom for his “cause” for a long time. But to give him that status (regardless of whther or not he “deserved” what he got, will actually end up strengthening the baby killers we want so badly to stop! And now, they will be empowered to curtail our liberties, perhaps even bust down our doors, looking for “terrorist literature,” or weapons, or whatever they can to try and pin something on us.
This, in the current state of our nation, has placed a huge weapon in the hands of our enemies, and there is no reason to believe they won’t use it. Those who are spoiling for a fight on “our side” don’t know what they are asking for. Even if we were to ultimately “prevail,” what would THAT mean? What would be left?
I have no doubt that fight would have eventually come. Now, it will come sooner rather than later, and we are not ready. I would have preferred that THEY (government, Statists, Liberofascists) had been the ones to initiate the battle. But now, the perception (whether accurate or not) will be that “armed, fanatical pro-life Christian Conservatives” started this.
THis could easily spin out of control, and now, we will be the ones on our heels. And those who simply say “he got what he deserved” will be throwing gasoline on the fire with which they will be burned.
I am sorry to misunderstand you. Please forgive me.
I do not think Tiller should have been murdered but I am not sad he is dead - at all.
Stop making excuses. i wouldnt feel too badly if some of the communists in our govt met a similar fate. That doesnt mean i am about to go around killing anyone, but if someone else does the deed, i wont be crying over the tainted blood of treasonous actors and infanticiders.
We are speaking about matters of legality. The government surrendering makes the killing of Heidrich murder. But your point that the people ultimately must obey their own sense of justice apart from the government is precisely my point.
2. The difference between the Founders and Brown was that the Founders acted based on shared principles, after ore than a decade of appeals for redress, and they did so as representatives of their respective States. John Brown was a coward and vigilante who acted unilaterally and illegally.
Which is an excellent point. The Founders felt bound to present the Declaration of Independence before George III, and the Czechs established a government in exile. That said, the Founders excused a great deal of violence against the British, which occurred prior to the Declaration based on the premise that the people were acting out on issues of natural rights. The abolitionists had a long history and certainly represented a lot of people. What was John Brown's goal at Harper's Ferry? To arm a slave revolt. I doubt that the slaves working the fields of the South condemned his actions as too fanatical. And I doubt that any of us that had families ripped from us and our persons placed under another's total control would consider those actions too fanatical. So its really a matter of perspective.
But where we draw the line may be different. That Tiller is dead is not something I will weep over. But the question is, what is the net effect of that “justice” the killer doled out? I’ll tell you, the murder of MORE unborn babies, under the protection of Federal law enforcement, AND the persecution of those who would work to see abortions end! It was both illegal AND unjust to murder Tiller, if for no other reason than because the net effect will be that more babies die, and more liberties are lost — and civil conflict inevitably comes closer.
Actually, we are not in disagreement on that, except that I would caveat that it is possible for an action to be both just in the micro and counterproductive in the macro. That is actually the crux of my point. Interestingly it is thousands of Czechs were slaughtered in retaliation for the death of Heidrich, so the same question could be asked concerning that.
More proof that abortion is a religious sacrament, not a medical procedure.
Should that be "Yes we must obey our laws, until we can no longer live with the result of [] obeying them"? Methinks that's what you meant.
40,000,000 no longer live with the result of obeying them.
When the laws stop protecting innocents, innocents must be protected by other means.
Yes, you caught my bad grammar.
As a matter of principle, the administration of justice is properly the matter of the civil authorities (see Romans 13). Even if the government is in the hands of wicked people, the subjects of that government should not usurp its power. In I Samuel 24, we note that David did not kill King Saul when he had the opportunity to do so. The powers of government are rightly restricted, and when its commands are in conflict with God's Word, we are justified to disobey immoral orders of the government. However, this does not extend to a person unlawfully doing what the government should do.
Or like the killing of the German Ambassador in Paris, was used as the pretext for Kristallnacht.
I define murder as the wrongful taking of an innocent life. If you agree with my definition, please explain how the execution of this doctor was a murder.
If you could stop the murder of thousands and you did not, isn't your inaction immoral? Why would you not be culpable in some way?
I believe many of us here consider abortion to be murder, but we don't have the courage to act upon that belief.
We must also understand that vengeance and administration of justice are not the roles of private individuals. "Vengeance is Mine, and retribution, In due time their foot will slip; For the day of their calamity is near, And the impending things are hastening upon them." (Deuteronomy 32: 35, NASB). This point is also repeated in Romans 12 and Hebrews 10 in the New Testament. Civil government is authorized in certain instances to administer justice, as Romans 13 indicates. Jesus Christ Himself stated that there is a role for government in society, "render unto Caesar" in Matthew 22:21 and Mark 12:17.
Why do you call the killing of this murderer a murder. I gave you my definition earlier and asked you to explain why this was a murder.
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.