Kansas abortion doctor killed in church

[John]

Rach, the victim's occupation is inseparable from considerations of the crime. Now, nobody's saying that the killer was right. It's just that he wasn't wrong in [I]every[/I] way. Think vigilante justice is wrong? Alright, what would you do if there were a man in your area who made a legal living from killing, let's say, young children, and nobody else would do anything to stop him? Would it be "right" to let it go on, because acting otherwise would be vigilantism?

I know it's not exactly the same situation, but to a lot of people, such as our killer, it is the same ethically.

[Rachmaninoff]

I'm not saying they are inseparable, I'm saying legally, what he was doing, by law isn't considered murder. Ethically the man who shot him thinks so, but that's why we have laws in the first place, because of situations like this. Also, you already answered the question about the situation you presented. That sort of thing is illegal and I don't see it becoming legal anytime soon.

I'm not downplaying what this guy did for a living, after all, I don't agree with abortion at all. I just can't condone killing him over it. Even though by the religious standards I was raised in, it's unacceptable unless there is no choice.

I don't always agree with the decisions our government or local law makers make, but I still try to accept and live by them. And yes I do try to vote and change laws that I don't agree with.

Anyway, I'm kind of wondering what drove that person to resort to terrorism to put a stop to it. So many people don't agree with abortion, but they don't resort to such drastic measures either.

[Gavin]

[SIZE="1"]I do agree with you Rach, as I have said several times what Tiller's murderer did cannot be condoned in good conscience regardless of whether or not he felt what he was doing was ethically right. Yes, in principle killing someone who is just doing their job, or because you have a different view of ethics to them can't be excused. We live, as you said in a society governed by laws which must be upheld even if we don't agree with them sometimes.

However I simply don't agree however that we can confine this just a discussion based on principles alone when we're talking about something as socially divisive as late-term abortions. Perhaps its down to the fact I'm looking at this from a different perspective because abortion is still illegal in Ireland and if a doctor tried to perform them here he would be prosecuted by the state.

In the end, I just hope this doesn't spawn any further vigilantism.[/SIZE]

[Boo]

[quote name='Vicky'][size=1][...] It all boils down to a difference of opinion [...][/size][/QUOTE]
[quote name='Rachmaninoff'][...] All because they disagreed with that person's occupation? You can't just go, oh, well he considered the guy a murderer and shrug it off. [...][/QUOTE]
[quote name='Rachmaninoff'][...] People are letting their disgust for this man's chosen profession override their common sense. [...] [/QUOTE]
[size=1]??People?? are not doing anything. The general opinion so far in this thread was that the murderer did an act of major lame terrorism, which is not even the case. The man killed who was to him a murderer. He did not terrorise. They did not "just have clashing opinions." It's blatantly obvious that it was against the law (I don't know why anyone feels the need to repeat that fact), but if that law allows for what is to you allowing mass murder, how can you live by that law?

[quote name='John']Alright, what would you do if there were a man in your area who made a legal living from killing, let's say, young children, and nobody else would do anything to stop him? Would it be "right" to let it go on, because acting otherwise would be vigilantism?[/quote]
That is exactly the same situation. If you consider growing, but unborn children to be human enough to consider killing them murder, even though it's legalised.[/size]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff][...'] Where some of us are refusing to let it color our judgment in regards to a senseless crime.[/quote][size=1]Get off your high horse, cowboy. From the first moment you labelled the act as a senseless crime and have been judging the man's actions, doing it off as someone committing terrorism because he 'only' had a different opinion.

??People?? here are not justifying the assassin's actions nor letting their judgement get clouded, but they are speaking up because the other side of the ??people?? are so quick with their replies and their judgement.

By the way, my personal opinion about abortion never even came up [i]or[/i] had any effect on my opinions in this thread.[/size]

[Kenso]

[COLOR=SeaGreen][SIZE=1][FONT=Comic Sans MS]Boo, the reasons you just gave for it not being an act of terrorism would clear an awful lot of 'terrorists'. One's beliefs do not change the type of crime. To people who are fighting religious wars, their kills are right and justified. That doesn't mean they are not terrorists. They may not necessarily consider whoever they are killing murderers, but by some way of looking at their religions, the people who died deserved to die.

Just because the killer may think the doctor was a murderer does not change the fact that it becomes a blatant attack against a specific group of people (namely, doctors who perform such procedures), and by every way we tend to use the word terrorism, that makes it an act of such.

I do not support abortion in anything but absolute necessities (that's what adoption is for), but I cannot call this anything but an act of terrorism.
[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Raiha]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]While late term abortions are still legal [why] in Kansas, just remember that this man would be a criminal if he'd been in any of the other 30 or so states that have in fact banned this procedure. So in other words this guy jumped the gun when he shot the 'poor brave little abortionist' because sooner or later Kansas was going to pass a partial birth abortion ban too.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[SIZE="1"]Just something I've been mulling over about this, can someone please explain to me exactly what makes this guy a "terrorist" as opposed to a garden-variety murderer ? Yes his reason for killing Tiller was most likely ideologically-based but does that necessarily make him one, I'd thought unless he's part of some larger pro-life movement that's pushing their agenda through violence he was just a murderer. [/SIZE]

[Rachmaninoff]

[QUOTE=Boo][size=1]Get off your high horse, cowboy. From the first moment you labelled the act as a senseless crime and have been judging the man's actions, doing it off as someone committing terrorism because he 'only' had a different opinion.

??People?? here are not justifying the assassin's actions nor letting their judgement get clouded, but they are speaking up because the other side of the ??people?? are so quick with their replies and their judgement.[/size][/QUOTE]That's what terrorism is Boo:

ter·ror·ism (těr'ə-rĭz'əm)
n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

His ideology if you will, was that the man was a murderer. If you read the article, the clinic where this guy had been working had been bombed and he himself shot in the past. I said terrorism since the place was consistently threatened instead of some one time attack.

On the other point, I'll clarify the clouding judgment bit. I've been discussing this with some of the narrow minded people around here ([SIZE="1"]and by here I mean where I live not on OB[/SIZE]) so that was intended more towards those people than anyone in the thread. So my apologies for that since it's not really intended for anyone here.

[SunfallE]

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"][QUOTE=Allamorph][FONT=Arial]Guess what, guys? We've got ourselves some Pro-Life terrorists here in the States. Ain't that swell?

Makes me sick.[/FONT][/QUOTE]I know the feeling. And hearing some of the people I know who are very anti abortion say he got what he deserved, just makes me want to smack them.

Anyway, I would welcome a ban on abortions done that late, but I can't and won't welcome using those kind of methods to stop it. I feel sorry for his surviving family. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[James]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I know others have said this, but for me the blatant hypocrisy of killing someone in the name of being pro-life is utterly astounding.

It kind of reminds me of a phrase in Animal Farm: "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."

Extreme pro-life groups often seem to be saying "terminating a life is always inexcuseable, regardless of circumstances - oh, unless those circumstances involve our agenda."

And unfortunately this is the problem with any extreme group really - they have a set of rules that everyone except themselves must live by.[/font]

[Rachmaninoff]

[QUOTE=James][font=franklin gothic medium]Extreme pro-life groups often seem to be saying "terminating a life is always inexcuseable, regardless of circumstances - oh, unless those circumstances involve our agenda."

And unfortunately this is the problem with any extreme group really - they have a set of rules that everyone except themselves must live by.[/font][/QUOTE]Stuff like that, always makes me want to bang my head on my desk. It's just so hypocritical like you said.

Also: [URL="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31154101/"][U]Suspect in doctor's death warns of violence[/U][/URL] Hopefully the claims that he's a lunatic, are correct. We don't need more people like him out there.

[John]

I think most people would kill one to save a thousand, and I think that's what this killer's rationale was. I have little doubt his actions were also fueled by hate (whether he'd admit it to himself or not), but that doesn't mean he was hypocritical in his stance on killing.

[James]

[quote name='John']I think most people would kill one to save a thousand, and I think that's what this killer's rationale was. I have little doubt his actions were also fueled by hate (whether he'd admit it to himself or not), but that doesn't mean he was hypocritical in his stance on killing.[/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Yeah, true. But this still illustrates my point - people on the extreme end of the argument tend to say that killing isn't right under any circumstances (i.e. in reference to whatever the mother may have experienced).

Yet it's perfectly okay for them to have exceptions to the rule - if you "kill one to save a thousand", it's considered reasonable.

It reminds me of extreme green groups who consider themselves pacifists, yet are often willing to commit acts of terrorism to further their agenda. Because they might be able to "save thousands" by committing acts of violence or sabotage or whatever, they feel that their actions are justified.

In the pursuit of their end goal, they lose sight of their own "ideals". In doing so, they become worse than their perceived enemy, I think.[/font]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='John'] I have little doubt his actions were also fueled by hate (whether he'd admit it to himself or not), but that doesn't mean he was hypocritical in his stance on killing.[/quote]I think his actions are what's hypocritical, not his actual stance against abortion.

James already covered the other so I'll not bother to do the same.