Infamous Abortion Doctor Killed

[pbwalker]

Abortion, Murder, Death Penalty ...
Three distinctly different ways another person can be killed. While it is interesting and sometimes useful to compare our opinions on the validity of all three, we must keep in mind that each comes with clear and distinct differences.

• Abortion - obviously the dead in this case is given no choice - but there are, obviously, other considerations that we as a society have debated for quite some time. Wont' get into that in this forum. But just making the obvious point that the dead don't choose this fate.
• Murder - truly evil, the dead is given no choice whatsoever and the murderer takes life/death choice fully into his/her own hands
• Death Penalty - the dead in this case had a choice, and chose to commit a crime knowing (usually) that consequences of this crime could be punishment by death. This is why I don't agree that the Death Penalty can be compared equally to Abortion or Murder. It is too different, with a different set of "qualifying factors".

Well said...I don't understand how being pro-choice and pro-capital punishment is so unheard of. While I consider abortion to be despicable, it's not my say...nor the governments. But these topics rarely ever end up good...so this will be the last I post in this thread...

[nitrogen]

I don't believe that this was a "revenge" or "vigilante" killing, but rather an act of using deadly force to prevent what the assailant saw as the commission of a crime against an innocent third person. This doctor was killing babies (apparently late term babies at that) and wasn't stopping. Therefore his killer brought deadly force to prevent the continued commission of this crime.

We don't know what the killer was thinking, but that's my best guess. Texas has "defense to prosecution" laws in cases where deadly force was used to prevent the commission of crimes. If Kansas has such statutes, then if I was this guy's attorney, that's the angle I would be looking at.

I don't buy it for a second; it was a terrorist act.
But for the sake of argument, i'll give you the point and still disagree; it might be a defense to prosecution if he was about to perform one, but he was in CHURCH for crying out loud...

Also, thanks, terrorists: Now abortion clinics get special protection from the US Marshalls service!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ClarkLZeuss]

Good posts everyone. I hesitated mentioning this incident on the forum, because I know what a highly charged debate abortion is. I appreciate the insight and the respect, especially with a diversity of viewpoints. It truly shows what a "polite society" we're a part of.

I think a lot of common ground we can walk on here is:

- vigilante homicide is very different from capital punishment
- it's also different from self-defense, or defense of another (at the very least, because abortion is currently legal)
- two wrongs don't make a right & the ends don't justify the means
- the best way to change the law is through our democratic political process, not force, especially when you have strong beliefs
- actions like this can hardly be called part of a "string" unless there's an overarching organization or individual who's orchestrating them (and all the Pro-Life groups condemn violence)
- whatever we believe about abortion, this event won't help any of us

So what will happen next? Here are two articles that address this question, though I hope their predictions don't come true:
Demand: Root out pro-life 'terrorists'
The real danger of right-wing extremists

[ClarkLZeuss]

Also, thanks, terrorists: Now abortion clinics get special protection from the US Marshalls service!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This article is just what I expected. It cites a few anti-abortion activists who support violence, and tries to paint them as the majority. But a few dozen of those clowns is nothing compared to the hundreds of Pro-Life organizations who condemn violence, not to mention the millions of Pro-Life individuals who would never use or support violence. It's really frustrating to see the media completely distort this reality. But then, I'm not surprised...unfortunately.

[frazzled]

- vigilante homicide is very different from capital punishment
- it's also different from self-defense, or defense of another (at the very least, because abortion is currently legal)
- two wrongs don't make a right & the ends don't justify the means
- the best way to change the law is through our democratic political process, not force, especially when you have strong beliefs
- actions like this can hardly be called part of a "string" unless there's an overarching organization or individual who's orchestrating them (and all the Pro-Life groups condemn violence)
- whatever we believe about abortion, this event won't help any of us

Agreed. Also, for those sticking to the CHL context, that churches continue to be a location for shootings.

[iratollah]

There are too many 2A supporters who seem to trivialize the other parts of the BoR or other amendments. How can you support 2A but not 5A or 6A? (How many of you reading this hold 1A and 2A near and dear, yet now have to look up 5A and 6A?) What about 21st amendment to the constitution, if that goes against your personal beliefs or religion should we deny others?

Now to save you from looking it up:
Fifth Amendment: Due Process...nor shall any person...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...
Sixth Amendment: Speedy and Public Trial...In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial...

In this particular news story, the shooter is every bit the murderer that he believed his victim to be. Ironically, many who feel sympathy toward this murderer also have limited respect or understanding of our 1st amendment.

And regarding challenges to the 21st amendment, they can take my cold beer when they pry my still warm dead fingers off the bottle.

[omegaman]

74novaman wrote

"But ignoring the vigilantism and arrogance of being judge/jury/executioner, here in Texas we put people to death for killing others. Is it any less hypocritical because the law condones it?"

Do you really not understand the difference between murder and state sanctioned death penalty? We can all take a lesson from states (and countries) that have outlawed the death penalty (including right here in our own country). We can (and the Bible teaches that we should) forgive others who wrong us if you can find it in yourself to do so. But the State cannot afford to be soft on criminals and forgive lawless acts--especially violent crimes. The death penalty truly reduces violent crime, in my humble opinion. It is certainly not hypocritical to abhor violent crime and support the death penalty at the same time.

[ClarkLZeuss]

- vigilante homicide is very different from capital punishment
- it's also different from self-defense, or defense of another (at the very least, because abortion is currently legal)
- two wrongs don't make a right & the ends don't justify the means
- the best way to change the law is through our democratic political process, not force, especially when you have strong beliefs
- actions like this can hardly be called part of a "string" unless there's an overarching organization or individual who's orchestrating them (and all the Pro-Life groups condemn violence)
- whatever we believe about abortion, this event won't help any of us

Agreed. Also, for those sticking to the CHL context, that churches continue to be a location for shootings.

Next NYT Op-Ed: "Outlaw Guns and Churches"

[Plato]

The Jews were declared to not be "persons" in the legal sense during Nazi Germany, and the perpetrators of the holocaust claimed that what they did was legal. The courts eventually found them guilty, even though what they were doing was "legal" at the time...

Pretty much what I've been thinking as I read this thread...

The shooter in this case should take his own execution like a man and plead his case in the next life, just my .02

[74novaman]

Do you really not understand the difference between murder and state sanctioned death penalty? We can all take a lesson from states (and countries) that have outlawed the death penalty (including right here in our own country).

I understand quite well, I was just curious to see how others explained it. One of the most common thing I hear Liberals say with that arrogant tone is "How can you be 'pro life' when they're not born but so eager to kill them as adults?" (in regard to the death penalty). In no way did I state I did not support the death penalty, I just like to hear from the intelligent members of this board their arguments for supporting both pro life movements and the death penalty. I was sure they had a well spoken way of communicating why it is not a contradiction to support both, and I was right. If I was truly anti-death penalty because I believed live was sacred no matter what, I doubt very highly I'd carry a gun. But, that's not what I was saying.

At the same time, just because it is state sanctioned is no guarantee that it is right, so I would be careful automatically tying 'the law' with 'morally correct', or using the fact something is state sanctioned as evidence I was right. For example, the Chicago gun bans. It is law, and state sanctioned. Does that mean it is right to deprive their citizens of the ability to defend themselves? Absolutely not.

On a different note, I see my query sparked you to make your first post. Welcome to the forum, there's a lot of good people on here. Enjoy your stay.

[C-dub]

74novaman wrote

We can (and the Bible teaches that we should) forgive others who wrong us if you can find it in yourself to do so. But the State cannot afford to be soft on criminals and forgive lawless acts--especially violent crimes. The death penalty truly reduces violent crime, in my humble opinion. It is certainly not hypocritical to abhor violent crime and support the death penalty at the same time.

It's not just the state that the bible gives this ability to. If a family member of mine were murdered it also gives me the right to take the murderer's life. I just read it a few days ago and I've been looking all morning, but I can't find the reference. Can anyone help me out here?

[Keith B]

74novaman wrote

We can (and the Bible teaches that we should) forgive others who wrong us if you can find it in yourself to do so. But the State cannot afford to be soft on criminals and forgive lawless acts--especially violent crimes. The death penalty truly reduces violent crime, in my humble opinion. It is certainly not hypocritical to abhor violent crime and support the death penalty at the same time.

It's not just the state that the bible gives this ability to. If a family member of mine were murdered it also gives me the right to take the murderer's life. I just read it a few days ago and I've been looking all morning, but I can't find the reference. Can anyone help me out here?

I am not sure which verse you are referring to, but people need to be VERY careful in 'picking and choosing' bible verses for their meaning and personal interpretation. You need to understand the whole context of the book, and many other aspects of what was happening at the time, who the verse and quote was directed to and came from, etc. This is called Biblical Hermeneutics. Unless you totally understand all of the aspects of why the statement was made it is way to easy to take out of context and misinterpret the verse.

[Oldgringo]

As I pointed out earlier, there is at least one other person involved in the decision to have, and then go forward with, an abortion. Where's the wrath toward and condemnation of those other folk?

Although I've always voted for the Republican presidential candidate, I maintain my belief that legal abortion is a personal matter and not a matter of state.

[nitrogen]

You also have to realize that different faiths take abortion differently.
For instance, Judiasm views a embryo/fetus not as life, but "potential life"

http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_abor.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.jewfaq.org/sex.htm#Abortion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[C-dub]

KeithB,

I totally agree that context is very important. If I can find where It gives a family member this right I will certainly post it. I think it is Genesis 9:5-6 where the death penalty for murder is spelled out.


O.G. & Nitro,

Similarities aside, aren't most of or at least many of our laws based on the Bible, not the Koran or Torah.


Also, just to restate my position: I think that this person murdered this doctor and should pay his penalty. Where my difficulty lies is with feeling sorry for the doctor.