Althouse: "George Tiller, a Wichita doctor who was one of the few doctors in the nation to perform late-term abortions, was shot to death on Sunday..."

May 31, 2009

"George Tiller, a Wichita doctor who was one of the few doctors in the nation to perform late-term abortions, was shot to death on Sunday..."

"... as he attended church.... Wichita police said that the shots were fired from a handgun in the church lobby during the morning service."

274 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 274 of 274

Cedarford said...: In the end, Jefferson saw bloodshed as necessary when the cause was significant enough and the Will of the People was blocked by Tyranny. He mainly referred to despots...in his day the Courts were not nearly as powerful an arbitrar or coercive factor as they are today. (But in backing the French revolution, his comments about the Tree of Liberty being refreshed by the blood of tyrants clearly included in his posts the destruction of the Royalist and Catholic Ecclesiastical Courts and judges fleeing for their lives)

As a Revolutionary, Jefferson saw nothing wrong with killing for a means to a better society. He knew he had a good chance of being hanged if the Revolution had failed...BUT IT WAS WORTH KILLING AND RISKING HIS OWN LIFE TO TRY TO CHANGE THINGS...
Jefferson saw it as an ultimate decision, that could cost a man his life and even their good reputation and honor if they were wrong. But confer blessings on themselves and their children's posterity in great sum - if their decision to shed blood was the right one....

He certainly believed it was ridiculous to claim there was "never an excuse" to "violate the sacred Law 'Our Betters' rule us by " and "hurt someone". He'd say it loud and strong today, if he was here.

Remember, all courts are coercive in nature. Ultimately backed up not by people on their knees revering and kissing the hems of the black robe-begowned lawyers - but by violence. By the willingness of agents of the State to enforce the will of the courts against resistors, with guns and death if necessary.

Don't know where Jefferson would line up against Tiller if he had todays modern cultural standards. Back in the Revolutionary period we can be confident Tiller would have been hanged as a murderer. But Jefferson would certainly have never said: "There is never an excuse for violence against what Courts or Agents of the State attempt to compell The People to obedience.; 5/31/09, 7:36 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "Jefferson saw bloodshed as necessary "

Fuck you.; 5/31/09, 7:56 PM
jeff said...: "Scott Roeder is sentenced to sixteen months in state prison for parole violations following a 1996 conviction for having bomb components in his car trunk. Roeder, a sovereign citizen and tax protester, violated his parole by not filing tax returns or providing his social security number to his employer."

Sounds like one of those guys who thinks the IRS is illegal because Ohio wasn't a state at the right time, or the president at the time was born on a ship or something. So I guess both the pro-life and the Tea protesters are going to be blamed for this guy.; 5/31/09, 8:02 PM
jeff said...: "Don't know where Jefferson would line up against Tiller if he had todays modern cultural standards."

Pretty good idea though. He would be running for office, getting other like minded people to run for office, and legislate the issue. Now if we ever get to the point where the government is forcing pregnant women off of the streets into abortion clinics, then maybe we can talk about alternatives. But we are no where near that.; 5/31/09, 8:06 PM
KCFleming said...: somefeller said...
"It's funny, you usually talk about...how there probably will be violence coming from the left as a result."
I do?
I have?
You're just making stuff up, dude.
I have mentioned that the left is engaging in not violence, somefeller, but coercion. Force by the state.

"Yet, as we see today ...the political violence one sees these days is coming from the Right."
The violence one sees these days?
There's been more?
Where?; 5/31/09, 8:11 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 5/31/09, 8:11 PM
Fen said...: The health reasons for all of the late term abortions were mental health.

The following reasons are considered to fall under mental health:

1) doesn't want to change lifestyle to support child

2) doesn't want body changed by pregnancy, delivery, feeding etc.

3) doesn't feel ready to take on the responsibilities of motherhood.

4) doesn't want to interrupt college or career.

5) worries that presence of child will have negative impact on finding mate.; 5/31/09, 8:20 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 5/31/09, 8:24 PM
cubanbob said...: A certain irony that a abortionist who performed late term abortions was retroactively aborted.

Why the pity fest for a man who aborted babies that could have been delivered alive and survived?; 5/31/09, 8:24 PM
somefeller said...: Well, Pogo, here's one where you said the end result of Obama's actions will end in violence. And there's no shortage of paranoid comments from you about how fascism (a political tendency that always has violence at its core) is coming, if not already here, thanks to Obama and the Democratic Congress.

Plus, I already mentioned two examples of rightist political murders in the past year (Tiller, the Unitarian church shooting). Another example would be the recent shooting of policemen in Pennsylvania by an anti-Obama nut. And as they say in journalism, three examples can make a trend. But, hey, what are a few murders compared to a tax hike or bank bailout, right? I mean, that latter stuff is just scary political mayhem.; 5/31/09, 8:27 PM
reader_iam said...: Crap. Clearly out of practice commenting. Chose/had to delete it *again* because in reposting, I lost the italicization of that to which I was responding in the original (so instead it looked as if I was saying the quoted part myself).

One .. more .. time ... I'll try do this re-creation (and I'll add the attribution for the italicized portion up top, since I'm here) (also, I did change "by 8:11" to "my 8:11," LOL):
***
Deleted my 8:11 comment solely because I added a paragraph, and mistakenly between the two main instead of at the end, as intended: That's the sole change (except for adding a missing "." at the end of a sentence).

And here it is, so changed, only in that regard:

Somefeller: I don't consider abortion to be the equivalent, or even on the same continuum, as murder, so the very premise of your question is flawed.

I think that for a significant portion of people in the U.S., it's the *at some point* at which abortion *does* jump onto the same continuum which is the nub of the issue, most (though not only) specifically with the legality and public policy portion in a pluralistic, predominately secular, society in practice (even amongst the majority of people who designate themselves as being at least partially defined by religious belief). That's the nub of the struggle for the majority who are not on either extreme, or (a vanishingly few, it seems) who have come to terms with living a certain cognitive dissonance, adjustable by advances in science, both medical and otherwise.

On this basis, the very basis of your premise is flawed--and, particularly, in my opinion, both more broadly and profoundly flawed, not to mention more obstructive, to finding a way forward within a divided polity and society, and--a point I'd like you to pay especial attention to, Somefeller--with some reference to science, and how it sometimes moves goalposts forward, and sometimes back.

Somefeller, I'm tempted to say you've betrayed yourself, with that continuum concept. However, as always, I can be wrong.; 5/31/09, 8:34 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Hmmmm... Yet more domestic right wing violence. And we have people like Freeman Hunt attacking the victim. Not classy at all. Kinda sleazy, really.

MCG, I do not think we all agree that this was bad and wrong. Many, like Freeman, see it as an opportunity to make their point on other peoples' abortions.

Then there's anti-abortionist Randall Terry:
George Tiller was a mass-murderer. We grieve for him that he did not have time to properly prepare his soul to face God. .

No, I think this murder is welcome to news to many extremists.; 5/31/09, 8:39 PM
Cedarford said...: allenridge - "We are either a nation of laws or not.....".

We are not a nation of laws above everything else...

We are a nation of "We the People" - who establish and ordain law as a tool to serve the interests of the People. In this, the People must be sovereign. Not lawyers dressed in black robes who pull made-up law out of their butts (as in Roe v. Wade) and declare it sovereign over the People.

When democracy is usurped by bad rulings (Roe, Dredd Scott) those bad rulings are made even more dangerous because it is almost impossible to Amend the Constitution in the face of major organized minority vote opposition.

That leaves violence as the only path. Especially since the lobbyists for pro-choice got the Feds to hit abortion protestors with Federal RICO statutes for non-violent protest. Something they never dared try with non-violent protest actions of unions, civil rights groups, and recent anti-war demonstrators.

If it comes down to violence being the only way..well, that is sad. The Revolutionary War against the King's "Rule of Law!" was sad in a way. So was 660,000 Americans dead in large part because the Court tried social engineering and shutoff of all debate and vote by the People with the Dredd Scott decision.

Roe v. Wade has cost us an infintesimally small fraction of the lives the Supreme Court and "Rule of Law!" cost us with the Dredd Scott decision and the North knowing they could never pass an Amendment to end slavery against the opposition of 11 hard-core pro-slavery States.
Only 7 abortionists were killed, then 11 years of fruitless legal debate, then Tiller..no 660,000 dead, no major cities burned. But since 1973, some 24 million fetuses have been killed...

With the People never having had an opportunity to vote on it or vote to end certain horrific things "included in the package" like late-term killings of viable unborn infants that could be delivered healthy and alive.
Or The People of the United States not being allowed to mount effective protest, through pro-abortion activist groups with clout in DC and in courtrooms succeeding in slapping pro-life groups with RICO or Court consent orders..
==============
EnigmatiCore said...
"Jefferson saw bloodshed as necessary "

Fuck you.No, what you are really saying is "fuck you" to the Founder's philosophy on tyranny of rulers or the law the courts craft.

The colonials did not believe in just falling to their knees and sucking the cocks of the King's judges and redcoats trying to enforce "rule of law!!"

Nowadays, only the overly legalistic Jews and Sharia law -loving Muslims believe that law trumps the will of the People.; 5/31/09, 8:42 PM
jeff said...: "But, hey, what are a few murders compared to a tax hike or bank bailout, right? I mean, that latter stuff is just scary political mayhem."

So just to be clear, that's your standard? Find out if there is a common political viewpoint and then smear the entire movement? So Acorn steals a few votes, I can blame liberals for hating democracy? You sure that's the road you want to go down?; 5/31/09, 8:42 PM
somefeller said...: Reader, I'm not seeing what is betrayed in my continuum comment one way or another. When I wrote that comment, I was thinking of the issue primarily from a standpoint of criminal justice, namely that I don't see the act of abortion as being an act that lies on the homicide continuum with murder and thus should at some point require punishment for those involved in an abortion similar to that of another form of homicide, as one might expect for other forms of homicide, like voluntary manslaughter, killing someone in a DUI accident, etc. On the other hand, if your comment is an attempt to draw me into a discussion of where life begins, that wasn't what I was discussing then and it's not what I'm interested in discussing now.; 5/31/09, 8:43 PM
somefeller said...: "So just to be clear, that's your standard? Find out if there is a common political viewpoint and then smear the entire movement? So Acorn steals a few votes, I can blame liberals for hating democracy? You sure that's the road you want to go down?"

No, dumbass. I made that clear in my earlier comment, wherein I said: "Does that mean that pro-lifers support terrorism? Of course not. But let's not go into head-in-the-sand mode regarding this sort of thing, and these sorts of acts provide the context for laws like the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act and the need for high security at pro-choice political events. Like it or not, terrorism is a part of the pro-life movement in America today."; 5/31/09, 8:45 PM
reader_iam said...: AlphaLiberal: I find your analysis, judgment and view of Freeman's Hunt position to be rather lacking in--what's the word?--nuance.; 5/31/09, 8:46 PM
jeff said...: "Plus, I already mentioned two examples of rightist political murders in the past year (Tiller, the Unitarian church shooting). Another example would be the recent shooting of policemen in Pennsylvania by an anti-Obama nut. And as they say in journalism, three examples can make a trend. But, hey, what are a few murders compared to a tax hike or bank bailout, right? I mean, that latter stuff is just scary political mayhem."

Dumbass indeed.; 5/31/09, 8:46 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Alpha, did you just compare battered women to George Tiller?; 5/31/09, 8:46 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "No, what you are really saying is "fuck you" to the Founder's philosophy on tyranny of rulers or the law the courts craft."

No, what I am saying is fuck you.

I would like to think, and I think I might be accurate about this, that the founders would have applauded you dangling from a thread.; 5/31/09, 8:48 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Freeman, no, I didn't say a word about battered women.

You really come across as justifying Tiller's murder. Maybe that's your intent.; 5/31/09, 8:51 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Somefeller:

Pogo is no more paranoid than liberals like you who worried George Bush was interested in your tedious telephone conversations.

Pogo can read the tea leaves pretty damn well - that's being realistic not paranoid.; 5/31/09, 8:53 PM
somefeller said...: Here, Jeff, I'll type this slowly so you can understand. I cited recent specific acts of politically-motivated violence, all of which came from right-wing assailants. This was in support of my contention that there's been a wave of that sort of thing recently. See, where I come from, it helps to marshal actual evidence to support one's contentions, rather than just rattle off rhetoric.

Now, this does not say. and I do not say, that all, most or even a substantial amount of conservatives support this sort of thing outright, but it does tell you where the recent trendlines are going with regard to real politically-motivated violence, not just the stuff that goes on inside some paranoid people's heads. If the best counterexamples you can come up with are people breaking windows in Seattle during the WTO demonstrations a decade ago or some Hummers being vandalized by eco-nuts, that should tell you something.; 5/31/09, 8:53 PM
jeff said...: "No, I think this murder is welcome to news to many extremists."

That isn't the argument. Its over who you consider extremist. A handful of people believe that. The overwhelming majority do not.

"Yet more domestic right wing violence. "

Or more accurately, more violence. Not right or left wing. There is not a credible political movement that will applaud this.

"Many, like Freeman, see it as an opportunity to make their point on other peoples' abortions. "

Much like you use it to condemn right wing (or conservatives?); 5/31/09, 8:54 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: The *suspected* killer is a right winger and long-time anti-abortionist.

Roeder, a sovereign citizen and tax protester, violated his parole by not filing tax returns or providing his social security number to his employer. .

Also, he seems to have had a long involvement with Operation Rescue, Randall Terry's group, I believe.

More here:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/31/737357/--Suspect-Identified-in-Tiller-Assassination; 5/31/09, 8:58 PM
reader_iam said...: AlphaLiberal: With regard to Freeman Hunt, if you think she welcomes this murder on either retributive or in situational-ethics grounds, why not just ask her, rather than extrapolate from and assign to? Ask her if she welcomes it. Ask her if she agrees with it. Ask her if she condemns it. Or whatever.Ask her something*s* specific, to ascertain, in the spirit of discovery, and THEN challenge the positions and her.

So far, you're challenging Freeman Hunt as a symbol, but I don't think she's a particularly great one in terms of how she's being painted and then been challenged: lots of mark-missing, despite all the broad-brushing.; 5/31/09, 8:58 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: The suspect is a tax protestor (aka evader)??!!

I bet his plan was to hide out in Obama's Cabinet.; 5/31/09, 9:01 PM
jeff said...: "Here, Jeff, I'll type this slowly so you can understand."

How incredibly amusing and clever. All I have done is quote your own words. Perhaps you could let me know what other examples you disallow to save us all some time. I have also stayed away from personalizing this discussion. You apparently are unable to.

There in no evidence of any credible movement to use violence to achieve political change in this country. Random nutcases don't count.

"I cited recent specific acts of politically-motivated violence, all of which came from right-wing assailants."

"Now, this does not say. and I do not say, that all, most or even a substantial amount of conservatives support this sort of thing outright, but it does tell you where the recent trend lines are going with regard to real politically-motivated violence, not just the stuff that goes on inside some paranoid people's heads."

So your point is that there is a trend of right wing driven violence except that there isn't, but yet there is.

There has never been, in the history of the world, where someone, somewhere has both a political viewpoint and capacity of violence. We know this. But what is your point if not to blame conservatives or pro life or whoever else you disagree with?; 5/31/09, 9:03 PM
jeff said...: "If the best counterexamples you can come up with are people breaking windows in Seattle during the WTO demonstrations a decade ago or some Hummers being vandalized by eco-nuts, that should tell you something."

Sorry, I was referring to the protests in other countries fairly recently. And I am sure the people running the animal labs and who own the homes and cars that were destroyed might disagree with you on that.; 5/31/09, 9:04 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Jeff:

There is not a credible political movement that will applaud this. .

Well, let's see. You have Randall Terry just lamenting there wasn't more time for Tiller to repent before the assassination. He attacks the victim (a popular response).

Then you have the opportunists, such as Freeman Hunt, who use the murder to make the suspected murderer's case that abortion was wrong and Tiller was a bad person.

I never argued applause, actually. McG mentioned we're all appalled and think this is wrong. I don't think so, and some of the evidence is written here.

Much like you use it to condemn right wing (or conservatives?) .

So..... they can attack the victim and make the suspected murderer's case but I'm a bad person for pointing that out?

You're such a fair person.; 5/31/09, 9:05 PM
reader_iam said...: Somefeller: I'm going to respond to your 8:43 but give me a few minutes (bumping into evening schedule &, also, taking a phone call).; 5/31/09, 9:11 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: reader_iam:

With regard to Freeman Hunt, if you think she welcomes this murder on either retributive or in situational-ethics grounds, why not just ask her, rather than extrapolate from and assign to? .

She wrote a fair amount. I admit I don't know how she really feels about the murder. I allowed as much, with words such as "maybe."

She's welcome to clarify.

I was out visiting family and read the news and then came here and read this stuff. It's kind of jarring. Fucked up.

I'm genuinely concerned we will see more violence as the right wing flips it's lid over being powerless. We must discuss this.; 5/31/09, 9:12 PM
jeff said...: "Well, let's see. You have Randall Terry"

And you consider him credible? Well that makes you. And him. So the people happy about Reagan's death speak for the entire liberal movement? All I have to do is quote a fringe player and I can blame your side for what he says?

"So..... they can attack the victim and make the suspected murderer's case but I'm a bad person for pointing that out?

You're such a fair person."

What do you find unfair? There are millions of people who find abortion wrong. After reading Tiller's reports to the state of Kansas regarding his abortions I might also decide he was a bad man. And yet I still condemn his murder. Nuance. Are you guys not the kings of it?
Where do you see the unfairness? Do you see a movement here to raise the murder on our shoulders and shout his praise for this cowardly killing? Or are you all about the cheap shot?; 5/31/09, 9:12 PM
RLB_IV said...: Has any man in here paid to have his baby terminated? Were you so weak to not want your life changed by accepting the responsibly to support your child? Did you not have a choice? Did you have a daughter who got pregnant in high school and had her abort because you wanted her to get a college education? If you did, then the blood of a human is on your hands and a stain is on your daughter.

As for Tiller, no one knows why he was murdered. He may have been stuping someones wife. Happens in church more that you might know.; 5/31/09, 9:13 PM
jeff said...: "I'm genuinely concerned we will see more violence as the right wing flips it's lid over being powerless. We must discuss this."

And were you equally concerned about the left wing flipping its lid when the Republicans held the white house and both sides of congress? Perhaps we should also discuss that.; 5/31/09, 9:14 PM
KCFleming said...: Somefeller, you said I previousy blamed the left for violence, and gave a post of mine as evidence that says no such thing. The violence I predict will be from those reacting to an economy that has fallen into hyperinflation, as is being predicted.

What I was discussing was how the SCOTUS abortion decision, by rejecting the voters, set the stage for this sort of violence.

And by the left's longstanding desire to simlarly eliminate 2nd amendment rights, they will foment violence as a result there, too.

In a similar vein: Is England on the verge of revolution?; 5/31/09, 9:15 PM
reader_iam said...: (Also, I just want to type quickly, while on the phone, that while I've read some of this comments thread, I'm guilty of being not entirely up to speed, and this would be "my bad." So if I'm asking stuff already asked, alluding to or even making points already made, please--anyone and everyone--feel free to inform me of that as bluntly as you like, so I don't waste anyone's time.

I'd appreciate it, even.); 5/31/09, 9:16 PM
somefeller said...: "Sorry, I was referring to the protests in other countries fairly recently. And I am sure the people running the animal labs and who own the homes and cars that were destroyed might disagree with you on that."

Well, since I'm an American and we are talking about politics in the US, I was focused on local examples. Maybe next you can bring up examples of Maoist terror in Nepal to support your contentions about recent events in America. Also, I stated earlier that such acts are acts of terror, but they are much lower-level acts of terror, then, um, murder.

"So your point is that there is a trend of right wing driven violence except that there isn't, but yet there is."

Er, no, I was just pointing out that while mainstream conservatives don't support this sort of thing, the killers I mentioned all were right-wing in their politics and motives. Pogo asked for examples, and I provided them.

"There in no evidence of any credible movement to use violence to achieve political change in this country. Random nutcases don't count."

Every political terrorist is a nutjob of some sort. Sirhan Sirhan and Lee Harvey Oswald were hardly normal men. But they were politically-motivated, and it's always useful to see where the trendlines are at any given moment. Also, while there may not be a mainstream movement to use violence, there are plenty of non-mainstream ones. It'll be interesting to learn more about the assailant in the present case to see if he was tied in with anyone else, for example. Also, as far as the need for organization goes with regard to political violence, google the term "leaderless resistance" and learn a thing or two.; 5/31/09, 9:16 PM
somefeller said...: So, Pogo, violence by right-wingers (or to be precise, at least as of now a few right-wingers) is the fault of liberals, because liberals beat them in elections and in the courthouse? That doesn't say much good for your team. And regarding your "this will end in violence" line, it was at best vague with regard to where the violence was to come from, and you've made plenty of other comments about the terrible coercive oppression that's coming down from liberal fascists to make it clear where you think the force is coming from.

And per your UK link, the money quote is: "However, it certain to witness a major re-shuffle of political elite with a new prime minister, new government and a House of Commons where, for the first time since 1945, a majority of members will be newcomers. For staid England, that would be revolution enough."

Damn! A reshuffle of the UK political elite with lotsa new MPs? Whoa, that's some revolution they got going on there.; 5/31/09, 9:24 PM
jeff said...: "Well, since I'm an American and we are talking about politics in the US, I was focused on local examples. Maybe next you can bring up examples of Maoist terror in Nepal to support your contentions about recent events in America."

No Americans involved in that. Ok. You let me know when you get your goalposts firmly planted and I will re-engage.; 5/31/09, 9:29 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Anti-abortion leaders voiced concern Sunday that the Obama administration and other Democrats may try to capitalize on the murder of Dr. George Tiller to defuse the abortion issue in upcoming Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

Many anti-abortion groups condemned the killing of Tiller, a prominent abortion provider who was shot dead at his church in Wichita, Kan. But they expressed concern that abortion-rights activists would use the occasion to brand the entire anti-abortion movement as extremist.

They also worried that there would now be an effort to stifle anti-abortion viewpoints during questioning of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.; 5/31/09, 9:30 PM
KCFleming said...: Somefeller, you and I disagree about the future, to be sure. I hope the spending of $1B per hour magically turns our economy into a roaring engine. But I doubt it. And if hyperinflation sets in, the violence will be in the form of crime and abuse, as people set against each other. Political violence is a distinct possibility.

There's a reason there are ammo shortages across the US. What do you suppose that means, somefeller? Are people preparing for free doctors and cotton candy and horses that shit marshmallows in the Obama utopia?

Or maybe something else.
But what?
What could it be?; 5/31/09, 9:36 PM
somefeller said...: "No Americans involved in that. Ok. You let me know when you get your goalposts firmly planted and I will re-engage."

Hey Jeff, you are the one that said "I was referring to the protests in other countries fairly recently. And I am sure the people running the animal labs and who own the homes and cars that were destroyed might disagree with you on that."

I've kept the goalposts well planted here in the US of A with my examples and topic of commentary. You are the one who, by your own admission, brought up examples of eco-terror in other countries to support your arguments about what's going on here with regard to trends in political violence. But, if you want to claim the goalposts are being moved so you can try and save face, go right ahead.; 5/31/09, 9:37 PM
somefeller said...: "There's a reason there are ammo shortages across the US. What do you suppose that means, somefeller? Are people preparing for free doctors and cotton candy and horses that shit marshmallows in the Obama utopia?"

It means there are a lot of paranoid nuts who think that Obama is going to take away their guns (a fear that has no validity and is being fed by demagogues like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh) and/or there are a lot of losers out there who are really upset that an urbane, Ivy-League educated black man who is better than them in every way is now President and this is their way of compensating for that. (Envy, resentment and well-earned feelings of inferiority are big motivators for some people to make some purchases.) Some of these people may commit political violence, and in fact, some already have, as I've pointed out. But, their desire to stock up on weapons and possibly take up arms against their countrymen and legitimate government of this country says more about them than it does about the left and the Obama Administration in particular. And what it says is nothing good.; 5/31/09, 9:45 PM
somefeller said...: Anyway, I'm off to bed. I probably won't have a chance to post on this thread tomorrow, but Reader_iam, I'll look for the response you say you're going to write. If you take the time to write a thoughtful comment, I'm obliged to take the time to read it.; 5/31/09, 9:47 PM
bagoh20 said...: Killing innocent people is wrong. The questions are:
-
1) Who is innocent?
-
2) Who are people?
-
3) Who is a fanatic?
-
4) Who is a martyr?; 5/31/09, 9:53 PM
bagoh20 said...: The answer to question 2 changes all the rest.; 5/31/09, 9:56 PM
KCFleming said...: somefeller said "...legitimate government ..."

The legitimacy of the government is the thing coming into question. This was the point I was trying to get you to grasp, and was the object of the Taheri article.

The ammo shortages aren't because of 'paranoid nuts'; the numbers are simply too large. If that were all, you wouldn't have a thing to worry about. But you should in fact worry.; 5/31/09, 10:04 PM
Fen said...: allenridge; We are either a nation of laws or not

Laws that declared the negro private property to be disposed of as necessary.

Now the law declares the fetus private property to be disposed of as necessary.

And you appeal to the Law. I'm thinking you'll adjust nicely to Sharia.; 5/31/09, 10:11 PM
dcm said...: die, baby, die.; 5/31/09, 10:15 PM
dcm said...: die, baby, die.; 5/31/09, 10:16 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Dr. Tiller has been the public target of right wing /anti-abortion campaigns:

- U.S. Senate Republicans held up the Sebelius appointment in large part due to her ties to Dr Tiller.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21258.html

- Bill O'Reilly has featured Tiller at least 28 times on his show.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/05/31/tiller/

- The anti-abortion movement has made him a target for their coverage.
http://www.google.com/search?q=tiller+%2B+sebelius

Whether or not they're applauding, quietly smirking, or posing pained publicly, I will not try and say.; 5/31/09, 10:30 PM
reader_iam said...: I saw a bit ago that Somefeller's gone to bed. My bad, so tardy; so life, mine anyway. Here's a brief reply, anyway:
***
Somefeller, I'm going to briefly respond to your comment, and in order to do so briefly in this context, I'm going to separate your comment into parts and reply out of order. But, FIRST, I'll reproduce your whole, as written:

Reader, I'm not seeing what is betrayed in my continuum comment one way or another. When I wrote that comment, I was thinking of the issue primarily from a standpoint of criminal justice, namely that I don't see the act of abortion as being an act that lies on the homicide continuum with murder and thus should at some point require punishment for those involved in an abortion similar to that of another form of homicide, as one might expect for other forms of homicide, like voluntary manslaughter, killing someone in a DUI accident, etc. On the other hand, if your comment is an attempt to draw me into a discussion of where life begins, that wasn't what I was discussing then and it's not what I'm interested in discussing now.

***one of two***; 5/31/09, 10:33 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Fen:
And you appeal to the Law. I'm thinking you'll adjust nicely to Sharia. .

Actually, don't Christian and Muslim fundamentalists share opposition to abortions of any sort?

Heh. This may be the first terrorist attack on Obama's watch.; 5/31/09, 10:37 PM
Fen said...: Alpha: Whether or not they're applauding, quietly smirking, or posing pained publicly, I will not try and say.

Well, since you deliberately slipped in the word "target" to describe freedom of expression, its prob best you don't "try and say." We can get your propaganda from Olberman.; 5/31/09, 10:38 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Pogo preemptively rationalizes right wing political violence:

And by the left's longstanding desire to simlarly eliminate 2nd amendment rights, they will foment violence as a result there, too. .

Whatever happened to being responsible for your actions, Pogo? Now you say if you don't get your way on some issues, violence is excusable.

IOW, the people committing the violence are just poor victims. They can't help themselves.

The modern right-wing is a powder keg of paranoia, victimization, anger and ammo.; 5/31/09, 10:44 PM
hombre said...: Peter Hoh wrote: "elHombre, I have not said anything to suggest an opinion on abortion. Stop trying to read minds."

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....; 5/31/09, 10:45 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Fen:

Well, since you deliberately slipped in the word "target" to describe freedom of expression, .

Uh, Fen? Targeting is step one for a campaign. Follow the Google link. Tiller has been a target of the anti-abortion movement.

And now they're taking down all kinds of web pages.; 5/31/09, 10:46 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: You really come across as justifying Tiller's murder.

I suppose that's true if you can't read.

Here, I'll help you out and be crystal clear. (Again, I would note, as I've already written much the same earlier.)

People aren't to go around murdering each other. That goes for the man who killed Tiller, and it goes for Tiller himself.

Now if it's your position that because Tiller was gunned down, we should all take a day to forget that he also killed, well, you can have your day, but I won't be observing it myself. There's no use in pretending the man was a saint or that he stood for some noble thing. He was who he was. I've prayed for his soul for years, and now there are two killers and two souls to pray for. That's the whole of it.; 5/31/09, 10:59 PM
reader_iam said...: On the other hand, if your comment is an attempt to draw me into a discussion of where life begins, that wasn't what I was discussing then and it's not what I'm interested in discussing now.

My comment was not an attempt to do that. I did not have that in mind at all with regard to my original comment. In general, I no longer have much interest in that topic as it has been discussed for so very long--because, from my perspective, pretty much everything that could said about that from pretty much every perspective has been stated every which way, & discussed to death, in increasingly less good-faith, informed and productive ways.

To repeat: My comment was not an attempt to do that. And: I did not have that in mind at all with regard to my original comment.

That said, I'll just mention at this point that I will bring up something that's a twist on that concept, and related to this:

I'm not seeing what is betrayed in my continuum comment one way or another.

[Now that I'm doing this, I realize that this is not #2 of #2, which means that my 10:33 "#1 of #2" was wrong. I'm sorry.

Now that I am, I won't specify, a better choice.]; 5/31/09, 11:01 PM
hombre said...: somefeller wrote: "[T]here are a lot of losers out there who are really upset that an urbane, Ivy-League educated black man who is better than them in every way is now President and this is their way of compensating for that."

That's strange. Most of the complaints I hear are from well-educated people. They consider Obama to be just another corrupt political hack who bought the presidency and is now running roughshod over the Constitution and confiscating our children's legacy to solidify his power.; 5/31/09, 11:24 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Freeman, good to see you clarify you're officially against Tiller being murdered. With all your talk of scissors, his need to live only a second longer to repent, calling him a murderer, etc, it was a bit lost.

Obama did speak out on this violence:

"I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."; 5/31/09, 11:27 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: ThinkProgress highlighted this Kansas City Star post that is food for thought for Dr Tiller's haters:

They include every one who has ever called Tiller's late term abortion clinic a murder mill.

Who ever called Tiller "Tiller the Killer."

The groups who spent decades fomenting hate toward a man who simply believed that he was serving a purpose by being one of the few doctors in the country performing late-term abortions.

Hate. Not heated opposition. Not strong disagreement.

But blind hatred. A worthy read.

As Terry's statement makes clear, the same bullet that killed George Tiller also shattered the moral underpinnings of the movement that inspired its firing.; 5/31/09, 11:45 PM
Peter Hoh said...: I think the badgering aimed at Freeman is over the top. I don't think she came close to what she's been accused of -- i.e. justifying (or excusing) Tiller's murder.

It is possible to view both abortion and this murder as wrong, and to say both forcefully without even hinting that one is justifying the murder. Here's Robert George demonstrating how to do it.

Unfortunately, I don't think that the media will let someone like George be the face of the pro-life movement in the next few days. Randall Terry will attempt to seize some degree of relevance by saying outrageous things in an effort to ensure that his soundbites get airtime.; 5/31/09, 11:59 PM
Kensington said...: Jeremy said "Be sure to pass that onto the Tiller family, and any of the women who are still alive because of his surgery.".

You're quite a stupid person, aren't you?; 6/1/09, 12:01 AM
reader_iam said...: It appears I need to interrupt myself to state plainly (based on reading both a range and a continuum of comments), which clear necessity to state plainly disgusts me:

**OF COURSE,** George Tiller was **murdered** today.

Why would anyone think their arguments about whatever larger issues would be hobbled by stating what's as plain as the nose on anyone's face?

[Using "murder" the way your average person generally uses it in every-day language, as opposed to the legal, journalistic, & etc. limits & definitions, which which I'm well aware.]; 6/1/09, 12:15 AM
reader_iam said...: At the very least (and it is the least), people need to be able to state unequivocally that Tiller was murdered lest their mushy language and stance enables his martyrdom by virtue of their justifying a relativism which they supposedly decry.; 6/1/09, 12:38 AM
kimsch said...: Reader, You are absolutely right.

Murder is murder, period.

It doesn't matter how reprehensible his actions were, he didn't deserve to be murdered at all.

My prayers and condolences go out to his family. And, as Freeman, I have prayed for this man's soul in the past and will do so now as well.; 6/1/09, 1:09 AM
Synova said...: I don't approve of this murder, but there is no way at all that *because* this horrible person was murdered that I'm going to suddenly feel compelled not to say anything bad about him.

I'm not sure what certain commenters here want.

Murder is murder and it's wrong. It's also not at all *useful* politically. Stopping that particular man makes it harder to make progress. If I'm *sad* it's for that reason. I'm sad that this happened.

I can't be sad for Tiller. I can't pretend he was something other than a monster, just because he's dead.

AL wants us all to say what a nice fellow Tiller was and what a tragic loss it was that he is no longer in the world working to make it a better place?

Someone else figures that anyone not working full time to amend the Constitution should just shut up about abortion altogether.

And further... no one should *oppose* abortion, talk about how it is sinful and wrong, talk about how it *kills* unborn children, or what *exactly* happens in the late term abortions that Tiller performed because it might get someone upset.

So... we're supposed to say *nice* things about the dead man. We're supposed to NOT say anything bad about abortion itself or show pictures of babies or describe procedures.

And yet, while saying nice fluffy happy things about abortionists like Tiller and never saying the least bad thing about abortion itself and while avoiding all graphic images or descriptions... we're supposed to get the Constitution amended. Sure. Because nothing leads to making changes like being careful to say that nothing is wrong.; 6/1/09, 1:21 AM
d-day said...: Alpha:

The editorial you cite is bullshit. You know that most pro-lifers believe that a fetus is a PERSON. We can argue about the political process and laws and rights, but as a practical matter, what do you expect pro-lifers to DO? We can't HATE that? We can't TALK about hating that??

What would you do if 5 Supreme Court justices found that there was a right to child-veto -- you had up to 1 week to decide whether you wanted your newborn, and if you decided before that that you didn't, you just killed it.

So say that millions of American week-old babies were being killed based on "wantedness" by their families, and there was nothing in the political process you could do to change it. What would you do? How would you act? Would you say you "hated" the people who did the killing? How would you treat the doctor who made a nice living killing a few dozen babies a week? What language would you use to talk about the practice?

I'm not trying to convince you of anything here. I just want to know what you think would be the appropriate way to act in that scenario. Because there are lots of people who think that these are exactly the same thing. There's not any difference between a 30 week-old baby inside the womb versus a 30 week-old baby outside. But "wantedness" means it's legal to kill 30-weekers in utero? That doesn't make any sense at all. And lots of people are never going to see it any differently. So what are we supposed to do?

Not kill abortion doctors, I got that. But now you're telling us that intemperate language to save the lives of babies is somehow morally wrong as well? Based on one crazy guy?

That's a bunch of crap.; 6/1/09, 1:31 AM
reader_iam said...: I still owe Somefeller in terms of completing my response, and I will. This night just didn't quite work out as I planned, so it's a tomorrow task.

While I'm here to say that, I will also say: There's no true need I can see to feel, or other people to feel, **compelled** to say nice things about Tiller or his chosen career if they don't believe those things. Why on earth feel so compelled? I wouldn't. I don't.

And stating plain that he was murdered emphatically does NOT count as saying a nice thing, or stating something nicely.; 6/1/09, 2:21 AM
Eric said...: Look, it's not as if there are insurmountable obstacles to changing the constitution. Those opposed to abortion have never made a serious effort to do so.

Those in favor of a right to abortion never did so either. It was made up out of whole cloth by "progressive" judges. So, no, the obstacles aren't insurmountable at all. You just need to appoint the right judges.; 6/1/09, 3:28 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: Alpha,

So your response is that you really can't read and were just taking random parts of what I wrote completely out of context to try to feel out a gist? Interesting. Refreshing that you'd admit it.; 6/1/09, 8:16 AM
Kirk Parker said...: EnigmatiCore,

Your response to C4 seems fairly overwrought. While it's true that our resident anti-Semite gets it a bit wrong (the famous "watering the tree of liberty" quote was from a letter talking about Shay's Rebellion, not something written about the French Revolution), still the overall point regarding Jefferson is clear enough, or so it seems to me anyway.

Please, for the rest of us, can you explain what it is that you found so objectionable about the uncontroversial notion that Jefferson took place in an armed rebellion and later said somewhat favorable things about the concept?; 6/1/09, 9:52 AM