Police say Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed while serving as an usher at his Wichita, Kansas, church Sunday morning. Tiller was one of the few doctors performing late-term abortions. The alleged shooter is in custody. Click here for the story.
Tiller survived a 1993 shooting outside his clinic. The shooting prompted Attorney General Eric Holder to direct federal marshals to "offer protection to other appropriate people and facilities around the nation.
I can just hear it now from the libs: "It’s the fault of all those right-wing conservative Christians."
A better perspective: Princeton University professor Robert P. George: "Whoever murdered George Tiller has done a gravely wicked thing. The evil of this action is in no way diminished by the blood George Tiller had on his own hands. No private individual had the right to execute judgment against him. We are a nation of laws. Lawless violence breeds only more lawless violence."
Libs don't have to say a word. The inflamatory rhetoric from Operation Rescue speaks plainly enough, and while OR may not be to blame for the murder I think most accept that their words greatly influenced the murderer to act.
In my humble opinion, there is a parallel to suicide bombers. They of course are to blame for murder but the mullahas who influence them to act and tell them they will become holy martyrs also have a bloody hand in the carnage.
I can't think of a single occidental major clergy (religion) that promises heavenly rewards for committing murder. Therefore the suicide bomber comparison turtles like my cream puffs invariably do. Though I understand what the blogger is trying to convey. But we have not only given up being civilized, we have lost concise thinking.
V.O....the invariable turtler.
Once a fair trial for Mr. Roeder begins, perhaps the courts will delay voir dire for 19 years. I wonder how long it would take 12 late term subjects of Tiller's appointment log for this trimester to deliberate and render a verdict in this case then.
And then there will be those who will imply in some ambiguous way that he had it coming.
I don't think murder of anyone by anyone can be segregated along partisan lines. It irritates me that the first thing out of anyones mouth is partisan. It is also interesting that the mudslinging seems to start on the right. TC isn't thinking and speaking for the left a little overboard?
Scott the scale you use needs some repair. Take the blindfold off and slide the fulcrum to center-beam, then get your chin out of the way.
You forget, I'm a convert from liberalism. I know how libs think - I was one for many years. I know how devious and unthinking libs are - been there, done that, repented of my sin!
I now understand how my idea may attenuate a process that you feel is already much longer than it should be.
Your apparent enthusiasm for pending matters of illegal conduct is matched only by your enthusiasm for thousands of perfectly legal ones.
The last time I checked, abortion was still legal in this country. If people oppose it so much, they should pass a law banning it. Oh, wait a minute, they keep trying to ban it, and they continue to fail. The doctor was an innocent victim of a deranged man. Groups such as Operation Rescue espouse propaganda, and then some people take things to the next level, murder.I'm sure that the murderer feels that he has saved innocent unborn babies from being murdered, but violence is not the answer to any conflict. In a free society, people have the right to disagree, but they do not have the right to murder those who hold a different view from their own. I believe that this man, the doctor's murderer, should spend the rest of his natural life in jail.
Renee
The terrible murder of a doctor who performed late term abortions must not go without retribution according to the laws of our land. Though I am ambivalent about capital punishment because man's inhumanity to man keeps me confused. But in my mind I believe that late term abortion is terrible. Science is taking us where we humans are not capable to follow because of moral conflict. It is a dilemma of our epoch.
Bart, your inapplicable rhetoric says nothing, my statement is still true.
Sounds like you weren't doing it right. You should have asked for guidance.
Isabell...what do you mean WE...kimosabee?
I haven't heard yet that he killed him because he was an abortion doctor. The deranged man may have had another reason at least in his mind. Since God has been banned from almost everything the world has lost all morality. While I am Pro life there could be some instances whetre a late term abortion could be necessary. The killer should pay and will pay. An eye for an eye.
He will most like plead insanity and get sent to a cushy institution or be incompetent to stand trial which could postpone it indefinately.
It's funny you should mention that Brian. I observed the same "we" when asking for moderator advise in a different topic. I believe she was complaining about someone misusing pronouns.
RE: "kimosabee" ??????? What do I mean "WE"?
"No man is an Iland, intire of it selfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine;....." [John Donne 1572-1631]
and he wrote; "...any mans death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee."
Those snide references, following nearly everything I post, do not impeach my veracity, authenticity and /or literacy. But they do reflect negatively upon the nitpicker. Bottomline: : Would it not be much simpler to ignore my posts which in two of the men seem to bring out such ill will responses for reasons that defy explanation?
Isabell...What do you mean we?This is what I mean...You want to lump everyone into your life experience and to idolize your beliefs as you do.You quote this and that and it shows me you have read and been told many things but it shows a lack of conviction that you have to affirm your beliefs with the words of others... just my thoughts in my own words...that and 2 bits used to buy you a paper.
I believe the usage was "we humans". This suggests Isabell proclaims herself to be human and suggests that moral conflict is an attribute of mankind. Now I suppose if you don't want to be lumped together with humans or mankind that is your right.
Or is your point that you are human but have no moral conflict with late term abortion and capital punishment? Using that logic Isabell mis-spoke indeed because not all humans have that conflict. However, she basically said we humans have created a quandry due to our moral beliefs. Don't we have a pro-life, pro-choice dichotomy in this world? I'm thinkin' thats a quandry.
My thoughts, in my own words? You have fun yanking her chain. You guys have called her arrogant and self promoting many times. I think she gets your opinion by now. Isabell and I have not gotten along for quite awhile now but I still see no need in picking on her every word. She wasn't using other people's words when she was telling you what she believes. It appears to me she used quotes to convey the meaning of her usage of the term "we". Seems to me ya'll are splitting hairs. If she bothers you, then ignore her.
Now cut it out. Don't make me get out the coat hanger!
What would the coat hanger be used for? To hang them? I think they make ropes for that. But the point is...they are not really yanking my chain. Intent does not equate success. With most bloggers I share debate and arguement, but a few, I look upon as I would at a bunch of idiot children. And that is not arrogance, that is being realistic.
"You quote this and that and it shows me you have read and been told many things but it shows a lack of conviction that you have to affirm your beliefs with the words of others." Brian Murray. What an unusual concept. And how does it tie in with my convictions and believes?
I am so fortunate to have had access to the great ideas and arts of those who came before me. It fills me with pride to be a Mensch (human). What I cannot understand is why my quoting some of histories great words so intensely offends Mr. Murray. He has given vent to that idiosyncrasy repeatedly. But it is his foible and he has every right to it. But why he is using it in the attempt to diminish me, that is the sixty-four dollar question. Kim Tanksly referred to it as ...pulling my chain. Why would anyone want to do that to a stranger? But if anyone has the psychological need to pull my chain....be my guest. But pulling the chain is not going to produce ding-dongs. Sorry!
You are indeed fortunate to have a blog ally who will momentarily set aside meaning to make such a trivial point at your expense.
Being a mensch, I would never allow anyone the liberty of assigning me a collar and chain in public to defend my honor. Hope you are comfortable with it.
Ha, Ha, Ha, such mean spirited words. Do you really think what you say has any impact on me whatsoever? Apparantly your self importance has reached dizzying heights. Your dislike of me is palpable and frankly comic. Keep it up I enjoy it.
What ally; what collar; what chain; and what about defending my honor? I consider my honor intact. Who is doing all those things to me or whom am I doing it to? I don't understand the post. And I am not a stupid person. Thank you.
"Being a mensch, I would never allow anyone the liberty of assigning me a collar and chain in public to defend my honor. Hope you are comfortable with it".
I posted a response earlier.
I am not comfortable that posting is so weird
Once while walking down the residential street on which I live, a car slowed down from about 50mph and came to a stop near me. Although the driver was initially complimentary about my pet dog (I call him Sam because that is his name,) the object of discussion quickly turned to why we weren't using the sidewalks. Instead of asking the driver why she drove like a maniac, I quietly reached into the chest pocket of my camo bibs and presented a few screws and nails that I had collected off of the street surface over the last few days. I was then explaining Foreign Object Debris (F.O.D.) when she just drove away uninterested. Denial will always repel aid.