"Abortion Doctor" Murdered

True, I guess what I meant to say, I'm not sure what they're called but there are people out there who only eat stuff that has fallen off of trees and plants. They must be very skinny.

They are, and it's frightening to see.
 
Uh, I saw plenty of media coverage on this yesterday. In fact, it was front page news on a lot of MSM websites.

:confused:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/us/04recruit.html?ref=us

Is it this story of a recruiter getting shot in Arkansas? Or is dulab complaining about a different shooting that "isn't getting coverage"?

I've seen this story highlighted in my google news and yahoo news outlets.

However, I don't see any new stories about the abortion doctor shooting.
 
I agree with this, to be "pro life" seems impossible. Not only would you have to be vegan but you would never be able to ejaculate or bleed every month, think of all those living cells being killed off, my goodness :rolleyes:
.
I was bemused some years back when the leader of the Jain sect in India -flew- to the US for something.
He and they walk around with masks on their faces so they don't inhale insects.
I would have pointed out to him the condition of the nacelles of the engines on the 747 he was going to the US in, before the flight, and then, after the flight.
The millions of bugs smashed on the front of the nacelles and all the forward facing parts of the plane... how could he justify his trip when faced with that slaughter?
I bet he could!
 
Fiona, Cleon, thanks for your comments. Good points. I'm no longer sure where I even fall in the spectrum anymore to be honest.

I am morally against the idea of abortion. But I completely recognize that things would be insanely worse should it be illegal. I'm someone who doesn't like it, but wouldn't seek to change things. I would prefer to think that one day, there will come a time when abortions will be few and far between, by choice.

So I guess as much as I have been brought up pro-life, and consider myself pro-life, perhaps I am pro-choice after all. I wouldn't force anyone to carry a child to term. I just have a little niggle with the whole thing on a moral level. And only when it's a matter of convenience. Perhaps that is religious baggage from my upbringing.

ETA: I changed "force an abortion on anyone" to "force anyone to carry a child to term" while Cleon responded, but it was only because I was saying the wrong thing by mistake, my edit is what I meant to say.
.
I've participated in several abortions.
A friend who was in high school at the time "found out what that hole was for", and cheerfully invited many guys in.
She asked me to finance her first abortion (of two). I told her she had to work that out with her mother. And she did.
As she didn't like condoms, and wouldn't go on the pill,... the second abortion occurred.
Obviously not really someone that could be a parent, at that stage in her life.
Another friend, bi-polar, on meds, got pregnant. The prognosis was a seriously defective child, with a potential for serious post-partum problems for the mother. She already had 3 kids.
I helped her financially.
There MUST be a choice!
 
.
I've participated in several abortions.
A friend who was in high school at the time "found out what that hole was for", and cheerfully invited many guys in.
She asked me to finance her first abortion (of two). I told her she had to work that out with her mother. And she did.
As she didn't like condoms, and wouldn't go on the pill,... the second abortion occurred.
Obviously not really someone that could be a parent, at that stage in her life.
Another friend, bi-polar, on meds, got pregnant. The prognosis was a seriously defective child, with a potential for serious post-partum problems for the mother. She already had 3 kids.
I helped her financially.
There MUST be a choice!

Being an unfit parent is a good enough reason for me. In a lot of cases, including mine, not being able to provide for your child is unacceptable. I want happy, healthy, well fed, and educated children. Those are just my standards. It's all about quality of life.
 
You assume wrong. I believe that because the fetus is not a person, it's not murder. If you want more particulars, my approach is close to that of Alonzo Fyfe's desire utilitarianism. Since a fetus before a certain point lacks the neurological structures and functions that result in having desires that may be fulfilled or thwarted, it is not murder.


So are you suffering from the delusion that abortion IS murder according to the law?



Rubbish. I'm strongly criticizing people who go around saying "Abortion is murder" and you accuse me of seeing things as black and white?!!

I'm pro-choice. I don't want to take this moral choice away from women and doctors.

So after that certian point it is murder? That's what you are saying. From your link;

But some time before birth, probably between weeks 10 and 25, a pre-born human develops desires. At that point, we have to start considering their desires in our moral equations. I think it’s a fair bet that among the desires of a late-term fetus are very strong desires not to be poisoned, stabbed in the brain, or vacuumed into a tube.

Between 10 and 25 weeks??? That is a very big amount of time. 2.5 months to 6.25 months before birth. According to you, there is desire therefore there is life. By your definition, this Doctor was a murderer. You have contributed to what you abhor.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/us/04recruit.html?ref=us

Is it this story of a recruiter getting shot in Arkansas? Or is dulab complaining about a different shooting that "isn't getting coverage"?

I've seen this story highlighted in my google news and yahoo news outlets.

However, I don't see any new stories about the abortion doctor shooting.


Oh come off it.
On the News Networks, the Abortion doctor killings have been getting a LOT more coverage.
Nice attempt to evade reality.
 
There is no coherent, organized 20 year long political campaign of violence and intimidation against military recruiters, as there is against abortion providers. You're saying "the Left" has a double standard when in fact you're comparing apples to oranges.

There has been, as mentiones, a 25 year at least campaign against Americans in general by Islamic fantatic, climaxing the slaught of 3'000 AMericans on 9/11.
Look, both are evil. But I maintain that the Islamic fanatics are more dangerous then the Christian fanatics.
A lot of people have personal issues withe Christianity they do not have with Islam, and that combined with a tendacy by some..not all..on the left to view Moselms as being "oppressed" leads to them letting Islam off the hook.
 
Oh come off it.
On the News Networks, the Abortion doctor killings have been getting a LOT more coverage.
Nice attempt to evade reality.

You know, it's weird, but saying things like "come off it" and "nice attempt to evade reality" don't actually substantiate your point as much as you might think.

Right now, as I type, I'm looking at the front page to CNN.com. There is an article about Pvt. Long's killing, but there's nothing about Dr. Tiller's murder anywhere on the page.

Anecdotal? Pretty much. Representative of the media coverage in general? Probably not. Does it prove anything? Hell no.

But it's still a damn site better than "oh come off it."
 
Dudalb, you don't seem to realize that you are suffering from what is known as bias. Your observations are being skewed by that bias. The extremist muslim shooting is big news on the media in the last day or two.
 
No, I see more about the soldier who got shot, at least today.

The only mentions of the abortion doctor shooting are from right wingers being afraid of a backlash.

Of course they forget that the American public has a memory about 3 news cycles long.
 
Apparently Dud doesn't understand about news cycles and only sees the the "liberal media agenda."
 
And that is where the term "anti-abortion" becomes problematic--because it's perfectly possible to be against abortion, but still be pro-choice. There's nothing wrong with being against abortion "morally," and opting not to have one yourself. (Though I imagine this would be unlikely in your case, no matter what your morals may be.)

Because that's what the right to choose is about; the right to make the decision for yourself, whatever the decision happens to be.
Most people who are pro-choice are not in favor of promoting abortion. So the person you are describing is simply not in favor of attempting to use the law to force people to comply with their standards in this case. In how the term, pro-choice, is intended, you are describing someone who is pro-choice.

Most people who are anti-abortion as the term is typically used are also anti-choice.

But there is no question the terms are misused and in many cases, intended to make the other side sound bad and one's personal side not sound bad.
 
Last edited:
Oh come off it.
On the News Networks, the Abortion doctor killings have been getting a LOT more coverage.
Nice attempt to evade reality.
Are you out of things to say that actually matter in this debate? This is such an irrelevant discussion point in this thread. There have likely been a dozen murders since Dr Tiller's that got no news coverage at all, not even local mention. So what?

As for the murdered soldiers, not only has it gotten plenty of coverage, I've even heard a couple discussions about how the terrorist involved had come to the FBI's attention yet they failed to stop the man from acquiring an SKS semi-automatic rifle, a .22-caliber rifle and a pistol. Just as the murderer of Dr Tiller had been brought to the FBI's attention yet he wasn't stopped either.
 
The sick thing is the so-called "pro-life" murderers do not appear to want there to be NO abortions, because there have ALWAYS been abortions, they appear to want there to be no safe, legal abortions. This is because the life of the mother appears to means nothing whatsoever to them, and they actually appear happy that women get horribly maimed and killed in botched back-alley abortions because, well, those are the wages of sin for "loose" women.
There are a number of people of religious faith who believe providing sex education and birth control to unmarried persons is the equivalent of aiding and abetting sin. I've heard more than one person argue that STDs including HIV are what you get if you "sin" and that is fine with them.

The Catholics are officially against birth control and abortion. It is unrealistic to expect people to only have sex for procreation. This is bad enough if you want to impose such a belief on people of your own faith, but to then want to impose it on people not of your faith is the same concept as Sharia law. Perhaps the extremes are different, but the bottom line is these are religious beliefs and one needs to seriously consider which is which when claiming something is a"moral" law everyone is obligated to abide by. Randi had a Swift entry yesterday that reminded us prescribing birth control to unmarried adults was illegal until 1972! Birth control was illegal for everyone in the US until 1965!

The Swift entry has a link to the Pro Choice League which has the following information:
March 22 is the anniversary of Baird v. Eisenstadt, his 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that legalized birth control for all Americans (replacing the 1965 decision for married couples only). Baird v. Eisenstadt was a landmark case that became the bedrock of countless privacy cases such as Roe v. Wade and the gay rights victory Lawrence v. Texas (2003).
 
Last edited:
Try this one on for size;
Woman charged with murder for stillbirth
I also assume, that you assume an unborn child is not alive so it can't be murder. Your opinion is not law.
http://www.themonitor.com/articles/palmview-17831-degree-murder.html
http://cbs13.com/local/Stabbing.New.Year.2.474994.html
16 weeks. 7 to 8 weeks. Didn't this doctor preform late term abortions? Isn't that beyond these thresholds? By these laws, wouldn't that be murder? No, because the would be Mom said it's OK and yet they charge another "Mom" with murder for stillborn. Go figure.
It's nice that the issue is so black and white to you. Clearly it is not for the majority of people. How can anyone be charged with murder if it's not alive? In China female fetus are regularly aborted because they want sons. Is that OK? The issue goes much deeper than murder or not murder.
If a person dies on the operating table it is not considered murder or even manslaughter. Even if the death was due to malpractice one isn't charged with a crime. So there is not the conflict you are claiming here in calling the death of a fetus at the hands of some kind of violence, murder, while the same death under different circumstances is not murder. We actually can consider motive and circumstances in defining what is and what is not murder.

Murder, in this country, is defined by the law. The problem is the anti-abortion fanatics are unhappy with the law and wish to call something murder based on their personal judgment. That is not the way the law works in this country. And that is not how we define murder legally. murder
n.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
 
Last edited:
I've always been under the impression that there are already plenty of people trying to adopt children. I've heard stories of people waiting for as long as a year to adopt a child.

I googled a bit and found some forum discussions where people say times ranging from 6 to 18 months, and longer, but also depending on what parameters the adopting parents seek.

For example:

http://forums.adoption.com/christian-adoptive-parents/100576-how-long-wait-adopt-child.html

Some actual Christians discussing how long to wait for an adoption!

ETA: It wouldn't surprise me to find out that there are many unwanted babies though. I'm open to seeing any real data.
And yet there are many kids awaiting adoption that don't meet the criteria would be parents are looking for.
 
Or how about those that say "America had it comin'!" or even "America's pigeons have come home to roost". :D

Seems to me these things incite and even excuse violence against America (which includes American soldiers obviously).

People who are already inclined to do bad things to us can only be emboldend by hearing that some of our very own citizens think they have every good reason to hurt us.
Again with the apples and oranges analogies.

First, very few people actually have this attitude. You don't hear it nightly on any mainstream news programs like you hear people such as O'Reilly blaring the outrageous distortion that Dr Tiller would kill any baby for $5K.

And second, serious attempts to critically analyze the role the US has played in the rise of anti-American sentiments is more often than not, twisted by the right wing into the claim this is blaming America, yadda yadda. It's impossible to consider anything the country should examine and perhaps not repeat or even, heaven forbid, apologize for, if even the slightest criticism is turned into such nonsense.
 
George Tiller had buttons printed of his personal motto: "Trust women."

American Prospect: The Compassion of Dr. Tiller

Including the poor ones.
When you actually look at this man's life, you see him for the quiet hero he was. It's mind boggling to hear A-holes like Bill O'Reilly smear Dr Tiller. O'Reilly couldn't have bothered actually looking into the facts before he carried on his ignorant witch hunt.
 
It is getting a little coverage on in the papers, but ALmost none on the major news networks.
BOth Obama and the News Media seem to be underplaying this so as not to "offend" Moselm sensibilities.
Of course the ability of the Left to have "Selective Outrage" while accusing the right of the same thing is of long standing.
Everyone has selective outrage. Clearly we are not all a bunch of clones.

Your imagination anyone is considering Muslim sensibilities regarding the soldier murder is down right bizarre.
 

Back
Top Bottom