Doctor Murderer Scott Roeder Gets 50 Years...

[Skeptic Ginger]

Whenever someone tells me they think abortion is murder I have a really hard time not saying "Really, you sure don't act like it."

If I thought there were locations in my city where children were being murdered every single day I would not be protesting with signs.

Should we alert the authorities to this post because you are describing yourself, or are you a pro-choice person egging on a civil war?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'm listening to him prattle on during his sentencing hearing on In Session ontruTV. He's using the opportunity to voice his rant against abortion.

Oooh.... he's getting a smackdown from the judge. Shame real smacking isn't involved.

I wish the news media, including Rachel Maddow this time, would have shown clips of the judge's comments rather than showing the comments of the idiots who testified as character witnesses about this creep.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I have become very skeptical when it comes to "minimum" sentences. A lot of Parole boards find ways to get around them.

It is going to take a judge or governor to do something before 50 years, the parole boards will not get a chance to do anything until then.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Should we alert the authorities to this post because you are describing yourself, or are you a pro-choice person egging on a civil war?

I was merely pointing out the huge disconnect between the rhetoric and the actions of the people on one side of the debate.

It is my experience that actions are more indicative of a person's true feelings, whatever their rhetoric may be. Therefore, it seems unnecessarily divisive for the anti-abortion advocates to use terms like "murderer" and "baby killer" when their actions show that they do not believe those words to be true.

Is that the sort of thinking that will egg on a civil war?

 

[Dr. Keith]

I wish the news media, including Rachel Maddow this time, would have shown clips of the judge's comments rather than showing the comments of the idiots who testified as character witnesses about this creep.

If we are going to have a divided media, it would be nice if the left side was far better at this sort of thing. I don't have any hope for the other side.

 

[Augustine]

I was merely pointing out the huge disconnect between the rhetoric and the actions of the people on one side of the debate.

It is my experience that actions are more indicative of a person's true feelings, whatever their rhetoric may be. Therefore, it seems unnecessarily divisive for the anti-abortion advocates to use terms like "murderer" and "baby killer" when their actions show that they do not believe those words to be true.

Is that the sort of thinking that will egg on a civil war?

I am sure many people thought (and still think) that O.J. Simpson was/is a "murderer". However, I am not aware of any instances of anyone trying to administer vigilante justice outside of the legal system wrt OJ. Are you arguing that anyone who called O.J. Simpson a "murderer" should have been willing to take some kind of "action" beyond what the criminal justice system found? Or that their referenced belief that Simpson was a "murderer" was mere rhetoric?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

While the Catholic Church has taught abortion is murder since 1869 (and it has been a sin nearly since the start of the Church), the fact remains that abortion is legal, and (AFAIK) almost always done at the request of, and with the consent of, the mother. While violence may be justified to protect one's life or the life of another, the use of violence in the case where an act is legally sanctioned by the legitimate public authority is not justified, nor is it sanctioned by the Church.

A similar case may be made for euthanasia, assisted suicide, or capital punishment. While an obligation exists to preserve the dignity of life, that obligation does not get fulfilled through violence. In the case where the government has deemed acts contrary to the dignity of life legal, the obligation must be fulfilled through conversation, discussion, and changing the minds of others.

I was debating that very point wrt to this murder and some others.

People were trying to use St. Augustine's (ahem--"your") just war theory to say this can be seen as the first shot of a just war. I pointed out that it fails for several reasons (it's certainly not an obviously winnable war) including the point that the decision has to be made by the legitimate authority (government or something similar) and is not left to an individual like Roeder.

And don't even get me started on those who go around saying "abortion is murder". . . .

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I was merely pointing out the huge disconnect between the rhetoric and the actions of the people on one side of the debate.

And I wouldn't so much stress their "actions" as simply the inconsistencies in their position. They say abortion is murder because a zygote onward is a human. Yet many of them make exceptions in cases of rape, incest, or if the mother's life is a risk. If the zygote is a human, then those exceptions make no sense. Almost none of them are in favor of prosecuting the mother for murder. (If a woman hired a contractor to kill her 5 year old child and the child was killed, she would and should be convicted for murder.)

I agree that pointing out these inconsistencies is important. When they say, "Abortion is murder" meaning, I assume, that "Abortion should be considered murder" (since it's not murder in most cases), I don't think they even believe that themselves.

Yet it doesn't mean I'm saying they should act on their statement and start a war to abolish abortion.

ETA: On a bit of a tangent: I think American Catholics have the perfect training for making statements that they don't really believe in. If you question most of them carefully, you'll find that few actually believe in transubstantiation, resurrection of the body, the teaching authority of the pope and so on--all things a practicing Catholic professes to believe.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I was merely pointing out the huge disconnect between the rhetoric and the actions of the people on one side of the debate.

It is my experience that actions are more indicative of a person's true feelings, whatever their rhetoric may be. Therefore, it seems unnecessarily divisive for the anti-abortion advocates to use terms like "murderer" and "baby killer" when their actions show that they do not believe those words to be true.

Is that the sort of thinking that will egg on a civil war?

What Augustine said.

I was going to say that I believed GWBush was dangerous for our country. That doesn't mean I had to devote my life to his demise because of that belief.

You can believe abortion is murder without believing it is up to you to act on that belief. I think your premise is faulty.