"Abortion Doctor" Murdered

MattusMaximus said:
...
ETA: I think this could very well be classified as domestic terrorism, especially if it is revealed this guy was plugged into a network. It happened back in the 90s, folks. I wouldn't be surprised if it is happening again.
Click to expand...
I do hope they charge this guy with terrorism. We should be writing our federal representatives to bring the issue up with federal prosecutors.
 
BPSCG said:
Well, that's just the trouble, isn't it? Do you have some evidence that Christian ministers preach murder from the pulpit?
Click to expand...
You are joking, right?

PROLIFE: Sanctity of Life: Sermon
Abortion is a modern equivalent of child sacrifice. The births of both Moses and Jesus were accompanied by a massive slaughter of the innocent. Both the Old and New Testaments record widespread infanticide being unleashed in attempts to eradicate the people of God.

Just as God’s people opposed Pharaoh’s decree to murder new-born boys in Egypt (Exodus 1:15-22), so we need to protect pre-born babies from abortion today. Just as King Herod sought to kill the babies in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:16), so abortionists are attempting to butcher babies today.

The most dangerous place in the world is not Bosnia, Somalia, Sudan or the Congo. The most dangerous place in the world is the womb. Pre-born babies are being killed in their mothers’ wombs at a greater rate than any other section of society. The mortality rate for pre-born babies varies from one in four to one in three.

A growing number of Christians worldwide are coming to recognise the abortion holocaust as the greatest crime being committed in the world today. It is an urgent priority for the Church to expose, oppose and end this war against children made in the image of God.
Click to expand...

To argue this kind of language doesn't encourage murder of doctors who perform abortion, is just arguing semantics.
 
skeptigirl said:
I would like to see Christians first and foremost recognize the contribution the religion itself plays in the development of religious extremism.

Lots of things have inherent danger associated with them. Gun makers, for example, don't do enough to address the dangers of their products either. The gun manufacturer absolves themselves of guilt by blaming the user. Some people agree. Some of us feel the product maker is responsible for more than just saying they don't condone misuse of their product. A drug manufacturer, OTOH, is likely to be considered responsible to act to lessen the hazard their products pose along with the benefit.

Religion is another matter in that there are no clear cut 'manufacturers'. So I don't expect all Christians to act to lessen the inherent hazard their religion poses. But I expect at least some of them to recognize their religion poses a hazard to users prone to extremism. If you are involved in a religion such as the Christian and Muslim religions currently, and you are aware there are people who are damaged by those religious messages and beliefs (in this case the damage is to people who are prone to extremism related to those religions), then at least some of those believers should recognize and act to prevent the religious message from resulting in extremist interpretations.

The believers value extremism. They may not value all forms of extremism. But they value the extremist who gives their life to God, yadda yadda. This creates an inherent risk that valued extremism will be negative. If you preach extremism (give your life to the Lord) as many Christians do, you should be taking some action to prevent bad extremism, not simply saying, "gee, not my fault that guy misused my religion."
Click to expand...


OK, so the only way for Christians to show they are sincere about opposing actions like the Murder of the Doctor is to give up religious beliefs and stop being Christians. Got it.
Like people have never been driven to extreme actions by political motivations.
 
skeptigirl said:
I do hope they charge this guy with terrorism. We should be writing our federal representatives to bring the issue up with federal prosecutors.
Click to expand...

It seems the call is going out for just that! I've seen a lot of headlines and editorial/opinion pieces today about it.
 
skeptigirl said:
I do hope they charge this guy with terrorism. We should be writing our federal representatives to bring the issue up with federal prosecutors.
Click to expand...

I think we're going to find out that the guy had all sorts of mental problems as his brother indicated.

But if he turns out to be sane then I would probably support the idea of terrorism charges. Violence to achieve political ends you cannot achieve at the ballot box or through the courts sounds pretty much like terrorism to me.
 
Last edited:
sugarb said:
It seems the call is going out for just that! I've seen a lot of headlines and editorial/opinion pieces today about it.
Click to expand...


Part of me wants to say that's going too far. But I'm also feeling some recognition that it's my own lifelong biases. I have to admit, this is terrorism. To kill an abortion doctor, for being an abortion doctor, can only be construed as a threat to other abortion doctors by means of terror.

If they do charge him with terrorism, I'm pretty sure many on the right will have a fit. And that will sadden me, and make me a bit sick. I hope I'm wrong.
 
skeptigirl said:
You are joking, right?

PROLIFE: Sanctity of Life: Sermon

To argue this kind of language doesn't encourage murder of doctors who perform abortion, is just arguing semantics.
Click to expand...
Um, skeptigirl, maybe you should read to the end of your link. If you had, you would have seen what the author of your link tells people they should do.
What Should You Do?

​
Be Informed
“My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge.” Hosea 4:6

Obtain and read: “Fight for Life - a pro-life handbook for Southern Africa” and “Making a Difference a Christian Action Handbook for Southern Africa.” Write to Africa Christian Action and request free copies of “Scripture and the Sanctity of Life”; “It’s My Body” and “Abortion - The Facts”. You can also request a Resource List of available pro-life videos and books.

Be Interceding
“If My people who are called by My Name, will humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” 2 Chronicles 7:14
Abortion is a tragic national disgrace and we should pray for God to have mercy upon us and to revive His Church to oppose this evil. Pray for the mothers in crisis pregnancies, pray for the counsellors at crisis pregnancy centres, pray for the medical personnel who are faced with life and death choices, pray for those who make the laws, pray for the voters and for the judges. Pray that God’s will may be done, and that lives will be saved.

Be Involved
“Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of Mine, you did it for Me.”
Matthew 25:40
Our first priority is to see that our congregation is informed, interceding and involved. Each of us must be involved in prayer and persuasion to save lives. Pray for mothers going through crisis pregnancies, for pre-born babies who are in danger of abortion and for pro-life ministries.

Try to organise for a pro-life speaker to address your school or work place and for pro-life videos such as “Eclipse of Reason”, “The Hard Truth” and “City of Refuge” to be shown to your youth group, women’s group or home fellowship. Join ACA and order a copy of the Christian Action Starter Pack. Then encourage some other concerned friends to join with you in starting a Christian Action Group or Pro-life ministry in your home, workplace or church. Distribute pro-life literature.

Volunteers to help at a Crisis pregnancy centre are always needed. Go through your cupboards and see if there are baby clothes and accessories, in good condition, that you no longer need and can donate to a crisis pregnancy centre.Consider adopting a child.

Start now to educate and enlist others in the campaign to end abortion. Mark your calendar and encourage others to plan now to take part in the next Life Chain, 1st Sunday in October (and if possible join ACA outside Parliament on the closest Sunday to 1st February (the anniversary of the legislation of abortion in South Africa) – for a prayer vigil and placard protest. We can all do something. We must all do something positive – to love our neighbours and to save lives.

Children are a gift from God for blessing the family, the church and the world. Life is precious. We are called to love our neighbours and this includes our unseen pre-born neighbours.

“Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter.” Proverbs 24:11
Click to expand...
Get informed, pray, educate, organize, volunteer, donate, even adopt a child.

If there's anything in there that even suggests anyone should kill anyone, could you point it out to me? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with charging people like this with terrorism. It simply raises their profile, provides some degree of legitimacy (amongst the true believers) for their actions, and makes them a matyr to their cause, rather than what they are - murdering scum.

Charge them with murder, try them for murder and punish them for murder.

Drive the fact home to them and their ilk that what they are is common criminals, nothing more.
 
skepticalbeliever said:
If you want to see "Christians" condemn this, go to Operationrescue.org. When it returns, you will see that even the most conservative Christians abhor the abomination of shooting a person in church. You can see the same thing on the nrlc.org. Go to lifenews.com and see that all pro life groups condemn this murder.

I have posted about George Tiller extensively on this board. I saw this news go across the ticker on fox news and was stunned. That is the only word I can use to describe my reaction.

What happened in Ks. today was a tragedy. We live in a world where people don't respect life, we see late term abortionists abort viable babies, and we see hypocritical vigilantes kill in the name of protecting life. This shows that we need to build a culture that respects life in order to prevent this from happening in the future.
Click to expand...

Nah, we just need fewer people, all around.

http://www.vhemt.org/
 
Cleon said:
....
Here's the reality:

Few Christians are murderous anti-abortion nutjobs.
Few Muslims are terrorists.
Few Jews are Kahanist zealots.

If you feel the need to attribute blame of an individual's actions to the (much) larger group as a whole, IMO you have left the realm of critical thinking.
Click to expand...
The other side of the coin: Even fewer of the particular 'extremists' you are referring to are atheists. Many things influence extremism from nationalism and bigotry to god beliefs, but there is almost always a religious component tied into the extremism.

I understand why people in this thread are reluctant to blame those that merely promote religion from having any responsibility for the side effect of inadvertently promoting extremism. Like I said, a lot of people don't think gun manufacturers are responsible when their product is misused.

Maybe the drug side effect was not the best example since it was an example of a hazard that did not involve misuse. Tamper resistant caps, OTOH, is an effort to address the hazard of misuse of a product. In the medical field we at least try to attenuate misuse in other ways. There are people working, for example, on needles that cannot be reused. The purpose is to prevent the reuse of disposable needles in third world countries. Just labeling something, "Do not reuse" is not enough.


Upon reconsideration, I agree to let all the apathetic church goers and other believers who don't do much else about their god beliefs off the hook here. I should be more specific and only apply my comments to those people who actively promote their god beliefs. As my thoughts gain clarity by explaining them to others, I find it is the promoters of Christian beliefs that I think should consider the unintended consequences of promoting their religion. It's not enough to just say they are not responsible for misuse of the thing they are taking part in creating.
 
sugarb said:
Presumably the same thing you're doing here...discussing the murder of a doctor that was apparently an act of what should be called domestic terrorism. Then the discussion turned into blaming all Christians everywhere for the acts of a few, which you seem to be agreeing with. If that's your position--that this was a simple murder by Christians as a whole, then I'm disagreeing with you, it would appear.
Click to expand...
Again I ask, show us some examples of Christian religion promoters taking some responsibility for the misuse of the religion they promote. (I'm not done looking into the nuns against Phelps incident.)
 
sugarb said:
And you want to ignore the faith groups that have worked for decades to keep abortion safe and legal. You want to ignore the faith groups that have counter-protested the extremists calling for violence.
Click to expand...
An example of countering Phelps was mentioned. Clearly Phelps' group is easy to despise. How many Christians have protested outside of churches preaching abortion is murder? Which Christian groups are protesting the use of such inflammatory rhetoric as not appropriate because it is dangerous?

sugarb said:
...The congregation that witnessed his murder was...and I seriously DOUBT they stood up and applauded. Would you tell THEM it was their fault?
Click to expand...
I would tell them they need to take a serious look at what the role of promoting their religion plays in creating this kind of murderer. I would tell them to look further than simply saying they don't agree therefore they are not responsible for the misuse of the religion they promote. That they don't promote misuse doesn't mean what they do promote does not contribute.
 
Whiplash said:
Interesting, but not surprising that this little gem has gone unnoticed or unreplied to. It's a valid point. Nothing infuriated me more in the last 8 years than constant claims of Bush being a murder, and "Bush lied, people died!". It was all rhetoric, and they knew it, and they knew damn well what they were trying to do by saying it. Stir up discontent against the administration (at the very least).

Neither side, nor any relgion, has a monopoly on polarizing, angry rhetoric designed to make people take action.
Click to expand...
I have Brainster on ignore, so I didn't see it.

I agree to some extent and was especially concerned when the right wing started to use language that electing Obama was dangerous. I think the McCain camp recognized that hazard when it occurred and made an effort to back off on the rhetoric.

Both in the case of Dr Tiller and in the case of the Obama rhetoric, the language was, kill this person who poses a continuing or future threat. If calling Bush a murderer was going to incite an extremist, it would have been more of a revenge killing. Not that either is OK. I think we need to be careful in either case. But it is much more dangerous to incite someone into believing killing a person eliminates a future threat.
 
JoeyDonuts said:
....
The kinds of preachers spewing that firebrand rhetoric represent an infantesimal minority of Christians in the U.S. ....
Click to expand...
I think you would be surprised to find out just how common this was in the very large and still growing Evangelical movement.
 
skeptigirl said:
Again I ask, show us some examples of Christian religion promoters taking some responsibility for the misuse of the religion they promote. (I'm not done looking into the nuns against Phelps incident.)
Click to expand...

The problem you're not seeing, Skeptigirl, is that you cannot define Christianity as a product like a gun. You don't get a receipt when you buy it, you don't have to buy a license or ammunition, there aren't any tests you have to take or certifications you have to acquire. Anyone can claim to be a Christian, and there's nothing to be done about it. Anyone can claim to be a licensed driver...but the state can check the validity of that claim. You can't put a safety on faith like you can on a firearm.

It isn't a product. It's a belief system. So who promotes what? On the OTHER hand, organized groups pro or anti something or other, are different: and today, I have seen many pro life faith groups denounce murder. Yes, I've also seen a few nutjobs cheer...but what's new? We saw a few nutjobs cheer when the towers fell, too...but certainly not everyone with whom you could form an association with those jumping for joy.

I don't know what you want. I gave you a MAJOR national faith group that directly opposes the "religious rights" extremism, and you said it wasn't good enough. This isn't about everyone who has faith, it is about groups that advocate or protest social policies and laws BASED ON faith--it is THOSE groups that promote the kind of extremism we're talking about here, not people who just happen to have faith in God and live their own personal lives according to that. We're talking about specific people who attempt to influence social policy/law. Otherwise, I wouldn't call the murder of an abortion doctor terrorism, I'd just call it murder.
 
skeptigirl said:
An example of countering Phelps was mentioned. Clearly Phelps' group is easy to despise. How many Christians have protested outside of churches preaching abortion is murder? Which Christian groups are protesting the use of such inflammatory rhetoric as not appropriate because it is dangerous?

I would tell them they need to take a serious look at what the role of promoting their religion plays in creating this kind of murderer. I would tell them to look further than simply saying they don't agree therefore they are not responsible for the misuse of the religion they promote. That they don't promote misuse doesn't mean what they do promote does not contribute.
Click to expand...

Again, the fact that they attend church does NOT make them promoters of their faith, it just means they are practicing their faith. Everyone who owns a firearm isn't a member of the NRA, just as everyone who attends church isn't a member of a group that demonstrates to change public policy.
 
sugarb said:
Well, it's really quite simple when we're discussing Christianity. The teachings of Christ don't include murder or violence. Anyone who claims to believe in Jesus as "Lord and Savior" must, by default, believe what Scriptures say Jesus taught, right? Wouldn't that be fairly logical? Jesus didn't say murder or hurl insults at and act like idiots toward our enemies...just the opposite, actually, which was a pretty radical concept at the time. ...
Click to expand...
I suggest you spend a little more time reading the New Testament and reading what Jesus supposedly said.

You can start here with the Skeptic's Annotated Bible's page (King James version, feel free to search other Bible versions on the site) on Cruelty and Violence in the New Testament.
For example:
Matthew (5:17) "Think not that I am come to destroy the law."
Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
 
BTMO said:
I disagree with charging people like this with terrorism. It simply raises their profile, provides some degree of legitimacy (amongst the true believers) for their actions, and makes them a matyr to their cause, rather than what they are - murdering scum.

Charge them with murder, try them for murder and punish them for murder.

Drive the fact home to them and their ilk that what they are is common criminals, nothing more.
Click to expand...
If (IF) he is charged with terrorism:

1) It won't be the only charge. He'll also get a murder rap plus many others
2) The terrorism charge won't be primarily directed at him. It will be a legal means to see if others can be implicated and charged in the crime.

IOW, your focus is on the individual. A terrorism charge would be focused beyond the perp himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom