"Abortion Doctor" Murdered

[Skeptic Ginger]

Honestly, I do not understand this. What is this need to blame an ENTIRE group of people for the actions of a few? One American man shot another American man. You're an American, therefore it's YOUR fault for not being loud enough. How American of you.

A human kills another human. You're a human, therefore YOU are responsible for not being loud enough. How human of you.

See how ridiculous? Or no?

Show me an example of actions any Christians have taken to examine their message, with the goal of addressing the problem of 'nutjobs' who misconstrue and act on Christian messages like this one, and I will reconsider my condemnation of the whole group.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Just to be clear, are you referring to Christianity as a whole or this Operation Rescue group as "those that encourage such murders?"

I'm referring to any believer of any religion who takes no action to prevent the 'nutjobs' or extremists from misconstruing the religious message. I'm referring to any believer who absolves themselves of guilt for the actions taken by any individual who misconstrues the religious tenets by simply saying, "I don't agree, therefore I am absolved".

 

[LostAngeles]

skeptigirl, you're painting a diverse group with a very large brush. Not every Christian is anti-abortion and there's a ridiculous number of sects. How can you blame such a large group for the actions of a few? By this logic, you're going to have to blame the doctor for his own death as he too was a Christian.

Do you blame all Christians for the actions of the IRA or all Muslims for the actions of al-Qaeda?

 

[JoeyDonuts]

I have the same concern about the Muslim community. Clearly there are many Christians and Muslims that don't agree with the actions of the extremists among them. But other than voicing disagreement, what are they actually doing to prevent the 'nutjobs' from acting on misconstrued religious messages?

What can they do other than report any suspicious or criminal activity when they become aware of it?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No, actually...I plainly called it domestic terrorism, because that is what it is. However, you seem to have a problem with people who identify themselves as Christians, which is strange considering you support a Christian politician (I guess it's his fault, too...he's guilty of murder by virtue of being a Christian).

This isn't a matter of "misinterpretation" and you're smart enough to know that, if you know anything about Christianity at all. Hello? The abortion doctor was in CHURCH, with CHRISTIANS, who obviously had no problem having fellowship with him. Are THEY guilty? In fact, is the DOCTOR guilty of suicide? Since HE was a Christian? I mean, come ON.

I'm asking for an example of Christians taking action to prevent their religious message from being misconstrued by the 'nutjobs'.

It is pretty easy to just say a Christian isn't responsible for people who misconstrue their religious message. But Christians should recognize they are responsible if they have done nothing to prevent such 'nutjobs' from acting other than to say, "not my problem, I don't agree. That's all I am responsible for, saying I don't agree."


Christians are indeed responsible for at least making an effort to stop the nutjobs from misinterpreting the religious tenets. I don't hold Christians responsible for succeeding, but I do hold them all responsible for more than just saying they don't agree. Sorry, but that is my view.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I still don't see the causal link between so-called 'innocent' Christians and the pulling of the trigger. If any group needs to be held accountable it's this Operation Rescue organization, but I'm not even sure how you'd go about doing that unless you could prove that taking violent action and using deadly force against abortion doctors are part of its credo.

Out of curiosity, are you looking for the Christian community to condemn and completely disassociate from any anti-abortion groups? I'm pretty sure that will never happen.

I am asking for any evidence whatsoever that any Christian groups whatsoever have made an attempt to do more about the 'nutjobs' than just verbalizing disagreement.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Um...I personally think you need to calm down, because while you may not realize this (and I understand this is an emotional issue), those kinds of attacks "egg on" the anti-abortion radicals, too. Screaming profanities and hurling insults only makes people hold tighter to positions. You won't change any minds that way.

In fact, things like that could probably encourage a nutjob to pick up a gun and do something stupid.

I don't expect to change the mind of someone like skepticalbeliever. I admit I am not calm. I expect my posts to end up in AAH. But I am really angry and just don't feel like calming down at this moment. Sorry.

 

[JoeyDonuts]

I am asking for any evidence whatsoever that any Christian groups whatsoever have made an attempt to do more about the 'nutjobs' than just verbalizing disagreement.

I don't think you're going to find much evidence there. Christianity is way too decentralized for any such action to have any real meaning. Most of your typical "Christians" don't really belong to a "Christian group," whatever that is. James Dobson, Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, and any other somewhat respected high-profile Christian personality could make a statement to that effect and it's highly likely that 80 percent of Christians in the U.S. wouldn't ever hear it, or care if they did.

You want to see more action on the part of Christians? Maybe they don't feel responsible since they didn't actually kill the doctor. The only thing they're guilty of is sharing the self-identity of "Christian." That means many different things to many different people.

And how exactly is any group supposed to take action to make sure that somebody doesn't misinterpret something? What do you think a pastor's sermon is? It's a lesson taken from his interpretation of scripture. Do you honestly expect him to make it absolutely clear to his parishoners that they are not to commit murder no matter what the justification may be? Having a correct moral compass is not the exclusive purview of any belief system, atheist or religious. It is the rule of law that dictates our moral compasses, and IMHO holding churches responsible to make sure their followers don't take anything out of context is ridiculous, unnecessary, and most likely illegal.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Reading the entire thread before responding...

I did edit my original reply to your post, even before I read the rest of the thread. I meant no offense at your correctly skeptical position. I did, however, feel the skeptical position was one of, this was an anti-abortion nut until proven otherwise, rather than the other way around.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

skeptigirl, you're painting a diverse group with a very large brush. Not every Christian is anti-abortion and there's a ridiculous number of sects. How can you blame such a large group for the actions of a few? By this logic, you're going to have to blame the doctor for his own death as he too was a Christian.

Do you blame all Christians for the actions of the IRA or all Muslims for the actions of al-Qaeda?

The IRA matter is not a Protestant/Catholic religious conflict. It is an ethnic conflict.

As for the Muslims and Christians, my gut reaction is yes, I blame them all for the extremists among them. The reason is not because I paint them all with the same brush. The reason is, just saying you don't agree is not enough, from my perspective, to absolve them all from responsibility for the extremists among them.

If I created a club, and that club had a particular philosophy, and a small number of people who joined the club misconstrued that philosophy and acted on their misconstrued beliefs about the club's philosophy, I could just say, "it's not my problem, I don't agree with how they misconstrued the club's philosophy."

If there was only a single 'nutjob' or even 2 or 3 'nutjobs' who misconstrued the club's philosophy, that would not be my problem. There are mentally ill people who incorporate all sorts of beliefs into their delusional systems. Christians and Muslims are not responsible for schizophrenics that incorporate gods themes into their delusions.

But, OTOH, if groups of people consistently misconstrued the club's philosophy and acted on those misconceptions, then I would have at least the responsibility to examine what role the club's philosophical beliefs was playing in the misconceptions that were recurring in some club members. I might or might not be able to impact those consistently reoccurring misconceptions, but I would be responsible to do more than simply say, it wasn't my problem.

It is the responsibility of both Christians and Muslims to address the extremists within their organizations. They owe the world more than simply saying, it's not their problem because they are not the extremists.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't think you're going to find much evidence there. Christianity is way too decentralized for any such action to have any real meaning. Most of your typical "Christians" don't really belong to a "Christian group," whatever that is. James Dobson, Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, and any other somewhat respected high-profile Christian personality could make a statement to that effect and it's highly likely that 80 percent of Christians in the U.S. wouldn't ever hear it, or care if they did.

You want to see more action on the part of Christians? Maybe they don't feel responsible since they didn't actually kill the doctor. The only thing they're guilty of is sharing the self-identity of "Christian." That means many different things to many different people.

And how exactly is any group supposed to take action to make sure that somebody doesn't misinterpret something? What do you think a pastor's sermon is? It's a lesson taken from his interpretation of scripture. Do you honestly expect him to make it absolutely clear to his parishoners that they are not to commit murder no matter what the justification may be? Having a correct moral compass is not the exclusive purview of any belief system, atheist or religious. It is the rule of law that dictates our moral compasses, and IMHO holding churches responsible to make sure their followers don't take anything out of context is ridiculous, unnecessary, and most likely illegal.

I'm not asking for all Christians to act. I ask again, can you show me any evidence that any Christians have taken any actions to examine and/or address the problem of people who act on misconstrued beliefs about what the Christian religion is telling the nutjobs or extremists to do?

 

[sugarb]

I'm asking for an example of Christians taking action to prevent their religious message from being misconstrued by the 'nutjobs'.

It is pretty easy to just say a Christian isn't responsible for people who misconstrue their religious message. But Christians should recognize they are responsible if they have done nothing to prevent such 'nutjobs' from acting other than to say, "not my problem, I don't agree. That's all I am responsible for, saying I don't agree."


Christians are indeed responsible for at least making an effort to stop the nutjobs from misinterpreting the religious tenets. I don't hold Christians responsible for succeeding, but I do hold them all responsible for more than just saying they don't agree. Sorry, but that is my view.

He was IN CHURCH. With OTHER CHRISTIANS. He himself was a Christian...and quite OBVIOUSLY made a more than heroic effort to not let Christian teachings be misrepresented. As did those who shared fellowship with him, knowing that he had been more than simply threatened.

MANY churches/denominations make huge efforts to embrace things that extremist nutjobs act stupid about. Check out the churches that perform gay marriage ceremonies even when the states won't recognize them. Check out churches that welcome divorced people. Check out churches that open their arms to anyone and everyone the extremists (like the shooter, and Fred Phelps, and televangelist millionaires too numerous to name) hate.

All Christians aren't weirdos. Some...many, in fact, are quite liberal minded. (Liberal in the classic sense of the word, not the current political sense). That kind of had to happen as people became more educated, and probably more directly as women gained more equality. You won't hear too many Christians anymore condemn women for working outside of the home, for example. In fact, truth be told, most churches pretty much only survive because of women, who are now generally more active than men.

Services have even changed, and involve more music than preaching in many denominations. I'm not a churchgoer, though when asked for special things, I will go to show support for youth music programs (churches offer more opportunity for youth music programs than schools now, and I personally feel that music is important--and youth perform *gasp* MODERN music). Really, everything has changed drastically since I stopped going years and years ago.

Locally, there was even concern when churches tried to get involved in politics. One church tried, desperately...it was over a GSA club in high school. I live in the Bible Belt. The church failed, miserably. BECAUSE other churches got actively involved to support ALL students, and to condemn hatred. So here, I've seen it. I've seen Christians stand up against Christians. Maybe you aren't looking in the right places.

 

[SezMe]

What can they do other than report any suspicious or criminal activity when they become aware of it?

While I think skeptigirl has gone way too far, there is a good point buried in the (fully justified, understandable) anger. There are things that could be done.

For example, let's take a page out of the opponents book (well, they're not "opponents" really but you know what I mean). Operation Rescue is very good at mounting protests and getting media coverage. Did you ever see the other side doing that? As well and as often?

Dobson and his group are masters at using the media - especially TV - to get their message out. But I've never seen, for example, the Missouri Synod getting on TV and expousing an opposing point of view. Or some Methodist umbrella group (there must be one). Don't the Episcopalians have a spokesperson? And so on...you get my point.

The far right Christian movement has also been very effective politically. From Bush on down they have, obviously, been major players in the abortion debate. Fix News is their 24/7 mouthpiece. But there is not a voice - an effective one anyway - countering their view. For example, there are few (none?) Senators who wear their liberal Christianity on their sleeves and condemn Planned Parenthood violence.

Overall, the point is that making the culture more toxic for the far religious right has not been done. If it had, this tragic event MIGHT have been avoided.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

....

All Christians aren't weirdos. Some...many, in fact, are quite liberal minded. ...Christians stand up against Christians. Maybe you aren't looking in the right places.

I've not said all Christians are weirdos or that all Christians agree with the extremists, in case that's what you thought I was saying.

But in regards to that second sentence, did you have an example of Christians taking any action whatsoever to stop the extremists among them, other than to say they disagree with murdering doctors? Just where is the right place to look?

 

[sugarb]

I've not said all Christians are weirdos or that all Christians agree with the extremists, in case that's what you thought I was saying.

But in regards to that second sentence, did you have an example of Christians taking any action whatsoever to stop the extremists among them, other than to say they disagree with murdering doctors? Just where is the right place to look?

Okay, one place to look would be to see if your state has a RCRC. (Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice). Kentucky does. There are many faith-based pro-choice groups. I know it sounds weird, lol. But there really are. A google search would probably work. Protestants, Catholics, Jews...all have pro-choice, faith based groups that are active politically in their regions, states, on a national level. Which may have at least something to do with any attempts to overturn the laws being miserable failures. These groups, generally, clearly explain how the coincide their views on abortion with their faith.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Okay, one place to look would be to see if your state has a RCRC. (Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice). Kentucky does. There are many faith-based pro-choice groups. I know it sounds weird, lol. But there really are. A google search would probably work. Protestants, Catholics, Jews...all have pro-choice, faith based groups that are active politically in their regions, states, on a national level. Which may have at least something to do with any attempts to overturn the laws being miserable failures. These groups, generally, clearly explain how the coincide their views on abortion with their faith.

You aren't getting the point I am making. I'm not saying anything about diversity of views among Christians. If anything Christians are as diverse as bacteria species. (FTR there are a gazillion or more bacteria species.)

What I am asking for is an example of Christians doing more to address the extremists among themselves other than to simply say they aren't extremists themselves.

 

[sugarb]

You aren't getting the point I am making. I'm not saying anything about diversity of views among Christians. If anything Christians are as diverse as bacteria species. (FTR there are a gazillion or more bacteria species.)

What I am asking for is an example of Christians doing more to address the extremists among themselves other than to simply say they aren't extremists themselves.

Okay, and I'm giving you at least two. The topic is a doctor who performed abortions being murdered by an anti-choice nutjob. I'm telling you that the best example of what you're asking is the people IN church, WITH the doctor. They obviously weren't teaching that kind of extremism in THAT church. Another example is the RCRC, which has many opportunities for people of faith to counter the "religious right" extremist element.

And I can think of another one quite easily off the top of my head, but it isn't necessarily about abortion. Many counter-protests have been organized and held across the country when Fred Phelps and/or his gang showed up. Counter protests by people of faith, church groups. One here locally, in fact, denouncing his kind of hate, and there have been many, many others.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Okay, and I'm giving you at least two. The topic is a doctor who performed abortions being murdered by an anti-choice nutjob. I'm telling you that the best example of what you're asking is the people IN church, WITH the doctor. They obviously weren't teaching that kind of extremism in THAT church. Another example is the RCRC, which has many opportunities for people of faith to counter the "religious right" extremist element.

And I can think of another one quite easily off the top of my head, but it isn't necessarily about abortion. Many counter-protests have been organized and held across the country when Fred Phelps and/or his gang showed up. Counter protests by people of faith, church groups. One here locally, in fact, denouncing his kind of hate, and there have been many, many others.

My complaint is not about, "not teaching extremism", my complaint is about god promoters not taking responsibility for the extremism that god promotion results in.

Phelps counter protests usually involve people supporting the military families Phelps is harassing or people supporting gays that Phelps targets. Do you have any examples of church groups specifically counter protesting Phelps?

 

[linusrichard]

You sincerely don't see how bizarre it is to say that anyone who really believes abortion is murder should murder doctors who perform abortions in order to prevent more murders?

Was it "bizarre" when those people tried to kill Hitler?

The amount of "murders" doesn't matter--so there are more abortions than executions, so what? There are probably more abortions than there would be people killed by that guy in the mall you talked about being allowed to shoot random people, too. The point isn't the numbers, the point is the belief that something LEGAL should be ILLEGAL, and what you say a person SHOULD be willing to do to prove they really think it's wrong.

Unless you're a hardline, no-exceptions pacifist, it's horrifying to me that, in the hypothetical I provided about the guy in the mall, you would rather just let him keep killing innocents than kill him yourself, just because what he's doing is "legal." I tried to paint a picture of an extreme situation in which any reasonable person would see the necessity of breaking the law or violating morality for a greater good. It strikes me as incredibly selfish not to do something. You satisfy your conscience and stay out of prison, and tomorrow more people die, and the next day, and the next...

 

[Oliver]

http://www.kwch.com/Global/story.asp?S=10451609

I guess only "life in the womb" is good.
I will never understand these ******** who do this. I wnat to see "Christians" condemn this ****, but I'm not holding my breath.

"Abortion-Jihad"