"Abortion Doctor" Murdered

Whiplash said:
I can't help but feel that saying "Abortion is Murder" is not a means to incite violence. I always felt it was meant to make people realize it was wrong on some emotional level. To get them to see what they feel is "the truth" about abortion.

Having come from a Christian family, as I've said before, I remember many discussions about the morality of abortion. And the consensus opinion at the time was the people accepted abortion because they didn't realize how horrid it was, and things like "abortion is murder" and commercials with fetus' and so forth were meant to shock people. To get them to see the fetus as a person. To reach them emotionally.

Not to incite violence.
Click to expand...

Intentions and effects can be quite different. And having NOW seen what this does, any moral person will abandon that rhetoric, or so it seems to me.
 
Last edited:
Whiplash said:
I can't help but feel that saying "Abortion is Murder" is not a means to incite violence.
Click to expand...

Well it's obviously causing violence. Maybe people should start thinking about the consequences of calling women and doctors murderers for going through an abortion :mad:
 
Last edited:
Ben makes a good point. It seems the "pro-life" movement is reeling from Tiller's murder - this is the worst kind of press for them, the absolute worst. Let's hope this causes them to reflect a bit more on their tactics, rhetoric, and insane zealots like Randall Terry.

At the same time, let's hope this sad event galvanizes the medical community into standing up more against this lunacy.
 
Whiplash said:
I can't help but feel that saying "Abortion is Murder" is not a means to incite violence. I always felt it was meant to make people realize it was wrong on some emotional level. To get them to see what they feel is "the truth" about abortion.

Having come from a Christian family, as I've said before, I remember many discussions about the morality of abortion. And the consensus opinion at the time was the people accepted abortion because they didn't realize how horrid it was, and things like "abortion is murder" and commercials with fetus' and so forth were meant to shock people. To get them to see the fetus as a person. To reach them emotionally.

Not to incite violence.
Click to expand...

I am sure you are right that this is what many who make such statements are thinking and trying to achieve, Whiplash. But is it not curious to note what follows?

A foetus is not a person: so you cannot get folk to see this, because it is not true. I put it to you that such people have put forward all their arguments and they have lost the debates they have had with many: though of course not all.

They have no reason to suppose that other folk don't have the same information and insight they have themselves: information about abortions is not exactly hard to find and I am sure if it matters to them they have given persuasion their best shot. It seems, at best, smug to suppose that the only reason someone might disagree with you is because they do not have the facts; especially after you have presented those facts. I am trying to imagine a conversation like that, and I fail when I get to the the bit that goes " hmmm: if so many people accept abortion, even after we have given them the information about it, perhaps it is us who do not have all the facts?" How does it go after that bit? Do they consider they might be wrong? At least wrong enough to make forcing their views on others a dodgy proposition? I imagine some do.

Obviously some do not. Instead they abandon reason and try emotional blackmail. You are not supposed to tell lies to persuade people to your point of view. And you are not supposed to fall back on emotive blackmail when your reasoned argument fails: if you do then you did not engage in the debate honestly in the first place: because you will have your own way and the argument was only one means to an end you will pursue by any means you can stomach.

It is at least a waste of time pretending to engage in honest discussion of the issues, if that is where you are coming from. We all do this and sometimes at the start we don't even know we are doing it: we think our arguments are sound and it is only when they are shown to have flaws that we face the dilemma: we can only do 4 things at that point: we can change our minds;we can reserve our position and learn more and better arguments; we can recognise that this is a core issue and that we are not amenable to argument about it; or we can continue to believe we are right and abandon reason altogether on that issue

The first option is the ideal: but we can only do that some of the time
The second and third are very human and the right response in both cases is to hold to our own view but acknowledge it is irrational: and in consequence give up the idea we can impose it on others
The fourth is the problem: because now the only limit on our action is what we can face in the mirror: and some folk can face an awful lot if they can find a form of words which justifies it. And we all know that.

So, while any given individual who has taken this option might not themselves be willing to murder, they do have to accept responsibility for predictable consequences of their actions. Their actions include speech. A justification of the sort we are discussing leads logically to murder for at least some people: if you honestly believe that abortion is murder then some folk will come to believe that it is heroic to take direct action of the sort we are discussing. There is no excuse because it has happened before and so you cannot claim you never could have thought this might follow.

Hate speech has consequences: wearily predictable consequences. It is hard to see how you can take the view that hate speech designed to shock people into radically rethinking their view is only supposed to work in one direction. I find this disingenuous, frankly
 
Last edited:
Thank you for taking the time to write that Fiona. But I want to make myself clear here. I was stating what I believe that these people think, and how they rationalize to themselves. I may not have been clear about that, the only opinion I meant to be stating for myself personally in that was that I felt that "abortion is murder" never struck me as deliberately hateful. But I can see where you guys are coming from, completely. I certainly always thought it was a tad extreme or shocking. Just not deliberately meant to incite violence.

I agree it'll be good if this sad event causes them to rethink their approach. And Fiona, I am in no way pretending to have an honest discussion. I thought I made my opinion clear on abortion earlier in this thread, and said I realize my position is really one of pro-choice. I'm with you guys on this for the most part. I just have some moral niggles about abortion that I can't explain other than "it feels wrong", and that I admit may be some kind of religious baggage from my youth. And this is also probably what causes me to somewhat knee jerkishly defend them at times.
 
Last edited:
I agree 100% with that. Realizing that, long ago, was what first made me start to come away from strict pro-life belief.
 
skeptigirl said:
Geese, right in the middle of responding the post changed before my very eyes. I actually had a reply. Perhaps I can word it as a general question instead.

Is every death at the hands of another murder or not?
Click to expand...

Better ask
Edited by prewitt81: 
Content in violation of Rule 12 removed
, I sorry I mean Tricky, He seems to be the megalomaniac around here.


But I would say no.

Attack the argument, not the arguer.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: prewitt81
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thaiboxerken said:
I'm so glad I won't live in Wichita anymore. If abortion is murder, is scrambling an egg killing a chicken?
Click to expand...

picture.php
 
The Painter said:
....
But I would say no....
Click to expand...
So if every death at the hands of another is not murder, then your logic fails. If one can define the death of a fetus at the hands of another murder, it does not necessarily follow that ALL fetal deaths at the hands of another are murder.
 
MattusMaximus said:
Ben makes a good point. It seems the "pro-life" movement is reeling from Tiller's murder - this is the worst kind of press for them, the absolute worst. Let's hope this causes them to reflect a bit more on their tactics, rhetoric, and insane zealots like Randall Terry.
Click to expand...

I hope that happens, but I don't see anything that would make me think this incident will have any greater effect than all the others.
 
Well, it seems as if the other shoe is starting to drop. I had long feared that this was the work of more than just one unhinged nut...

Suspect in abortion doctor death warns of violence
The man charged with murdering a high-profile abortion doctor claimed from his jail cell Sunday that similar violence was planned around the nation for as long as the procedure remained legal, a threat that comes days after a federal investigation launched into his possible accomplices.

A Justice Department spokesman said the threat was being taken seriously and additional protection had been ordered for abortion clinics last week. But a leader of the anti-abortion movement derided the accused shooter as "a fruit and a lunatic."

Scott Roeder called The Associated Press from the Sedgwick County jail, where he's being held on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller one week ago.

"I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal," Roeder said. He would not elaborate. ...
Click to expand...

I'm now pretty much convinced that we could be seeing a resurgence of the kind of ultra-fundamentalist domestic terrorism that we saw in the 90s regarding abortion clinics & doctors. This seems to confirm my suspicions.

Btw, I started a new thread on this particular point.
 
BenBurch said:
Well, MattusMaximus, if that is actually true, then we need to use the anti-terrorism laws and shut down Operation Rescue.
Click to expand...
While this should have been done a long time ago, I think anything that idiot murderer claims is on par with Tim McVeigh and Manson both thinking they were starting 'the revolution' with their idiot actions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom