A secular nation is not a moral vacuum (Erin)

Sadly, Tiller's assailant is not one of a kind, but neither is he typical of the antiabortion movement. Prominent pro-life organizations long have condemned violence against abortion providers while working to restrict the late-term abortions for which Tiller was known . . . Despite these statements, some pro-choice activists are suggesting, overtly or subtly, that the responsibility for Tiller's death is shared by the broader pro-life movement.

The militancy of some pro-life groups constitutes an alarming assault on a constitutionally protected right, but the answer is not to limit expression. It's unfair to ask antiabortion activists to muffle their message because it might inspire an unbalanced individual to commit an atrocity.

I completely agree. But I wonder, do you see the hypocrisy?

I can't read minds, but it seems clear to me that the anger of many gay-marriage supporters is such that they feel justified in exposing people who gave money to the Prop 8 campaign like this, and letting the chips fall where they may. I can't prove it, but I believe they'd be pleased if these people were attacked in some way, or had their property vandalized, just to "show them."

These people are so caught up in their own drama that they cannot imagine how this technique can be used to hurt gays . . . There are many more people who may never consider brutalizing that man or vandalizing his property, but who wouldn't much mind if somebody did, because after all, he has it coming (they think). All they know is contempt, and they're so righteous in their hatred that they would be ripping apart the customs and conventions that make it possible for us all to live together in a civil democracy. This is exactly what I believe the Eightmaps people and their supporters are doing. And having opened up this Pandora's Box, they will have no grounds to stand on when it is used against them.

-- Rod Dreher, "Eightmaps and the strange knock at your door," January 15, 2009

Throughout history, there have been political movements, faith movements, and cultural movements with "great conviction". Most have moved forward with the use of violence. A very few have at least tried to avoid using it.

There's no great mystery to how these things work. Leaders use inflammatory rhetoric, and followers -- perhaps just a few -- come through with "action". The techniques are demonization, dehumanization, appeals to "morality", etc., etc. It's been done over and over.

A "morally blind" group is one which refuses to see the consequences of its actions.

Thanks, Gus.

Ol' Franky Jr. never misses a chance to stab his dead daddy in the back, does he?

Lots of Lieutenant Keefers on this pro-life cruise, I see.

Yes, R Hampton, I do see the hypocrisy -- the hypocrisy of those on the left who, while insisting that Dr. Miller's murder be laid at the feet of vocal abortion opponents, fail to see that gay rights activists have employed exactly the same rhetorical tacticsw against their opponents as Dr. Tiller's opponents did against him.

By all means, show us the dead Christian activists.

That's annoying. The tag didn't close.

I see Eightmaps as the equivalent to the pro-life movement's tactic of semi-permanent encampment of clinics. What is the purpose? To identify who might be getting an abortion so that you can try to persuade them not to. Both methods are perfectly legal, morally justified, and - by themselves - do not instigate violence.

2. Decide if you will protest by yourself or with others. It's best to be part of an organized group that is targeting the clinic on a regular basis and offers "shifts" to ensure greater coverage.

7. Train to become a sidewalk counselor who talks to those entering or leaving the abortion clinic. Do not attempt sidewalk counseling if you have not received training from a pro-life organization.

-- "How to Protest Legally at an Abortion Clinic"
http://www.ehow.com/how_2154658_protest-legally-abortion-clinic.html

Erin, here's what it says on the eightmaps site:

A mash-up of Google Maps and Prop 8 Donors.

Proposition 8 changed the California state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. These are the people who donated in order to pass it.

Where is the inflammatory language? Where is the "Wanted" verbiage? Where is the equivalent of "babykillers!"? Where is the equivalent of fake blood?

Search the site. Then search the news. Where is the person listed on that site who's been threatened? Where is the person on that site who's been attacked? Where is the person on that site who has been shot and killed? Even by "fringe" leftists?

The fact of the matter is that since the end of the Vietnam War, no-one in the US has been killed by anyone on the left (I include fringe environmental groups in this category since their crimes have been exclusively directed at property, not individuals). The fact of the matter is that liberals in this country are far more "pro-life" in a general sense than conservatives, at least in their current incarnation.

And that includes those on opposite sides of the various debates on homosexuality. While FBI data (blog article, has a bias, but well cited with government statistics, links to FBI data provided) shows attacks on homosexuals is the third most common form of bias crime (and note that (1) there aren't a lot of us, (2) reporting on crimes based on orientation is incomplete and (3) bias related crimes based on religion overwhelming target Jews). But what do you have to show for all of the anger over Prop. 8? People demonstrating against religious invaders in the Castro and a handful of instances of vandalism. You see more crime in your typical middle school.

Face it: there's one side in the debate that's violent and it ain't ours. As Dan Savage says, it's a bit much for you and Rod and your ilk to complain that "The People I'm Persecuting Are So MEAN!" (Warning: mild naughty language, ads for businesses like tattoo parlors, bars and the like, not for the easily shocked and offended)

Your side, in addition to being violent, is the master of the double standard.

The fact of the matter is that since the end of the Vietnam War, no-one in the US has been killed by anyone on the left

Wrong, just off the top of my head, the Unabomber killed three people.

Try all the women who have been killed because they have refused to get an abortion. Pretty sure those men are on the left.

I don't think pro-lifers saying that pro-choicers are "evil" or "disgusting" or "morally abhorent" or "Santanic" or "unprincipled" or "a fake Christian" helps things. (And, yes, I've been called all of that and more on conservative blogs). It's not just the abortonists being called names. It's everyone that disagrees with a fairly absolute pro-life position.

And that sort of rhetoric will, I'm willing to bet, lead some unbalanced pro-lifer to kill a pro-choicer (but non-abortionist) at some point.

Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

Left and right are such arbitrary labels (even for sane people) but it seems a little unfair to label a man who said the above a lefty.

I really am astounded that so many people are happy to claim that if you find another's actions abhorrent in the extreme, violence is the next logical step. You see it, both left and right. Quite frankly, I think it is a major symptom of a horribly malignant development in Western Civilisation.

Repeat after me, no matter how wicked your neighbor is, its never justified to do violence to him for his wickedness. Period, full-stop. And pretty much every critic of the pro-life movement in the wake of Tiller's horrific assassination, , as well as every anti-abortionist (as opposed to pro-life) who has justified or cheered it, have taken this position. You all ought to be ashamed of the twisted way you view the world.

"has no problem using phrases like Republican hate-machine"

Schaeffer has the right to use that phrase, considering he used to be a part of it. He oughta know.

"With that in mind, is it morally wrong to suspect that a good portion of the pro-life movement is finding pleasure in the murder of Dr. Tiller?"

Suspect it? No. Conclude it? Perhaps.

Max, WTF are you talking about?
Tree spiking deaths?!?!
DC snipers are lefties!?!?
Who IN THE US (as was in the original quote) was killed by Pol Pot or Castro?

"Castro? Pol Pot? Jim Jones? Soviet Premiers? American fellow travellers flakking for them?"

I believe you missed Stalin, Genghis Khan, Idi Amin, Saddam, Charles Manson and Ted Bundy on that list.

Steve

What you are showing here is lone right-wing nutcase versus left-wing politician who gets power and commences mass murder. Not your best argument, give it up and take a short sanity break.

This is all part of the smoke and mirrors of the abortion wars. In fact some 20 to 25 percent take the extreme version on each side (no abortion, no exceptions or abortions anytime up to the moment of birth.) Most people think there should be some sort of restrictions, but reasonable people having reasonable discussions does not win ratings, sell books and newspapers, or keep the "party loyalists" loyal.

Actually, re-reading my comments, I could see that some might interpret them to mean any person in the world who has harmed an American either on our own or foreign soil. So technically, we could say that Saddam was a leftist (sort of, in the sense the the Ba'ath party was initially a pan-Arab socialist party) who killed Americans (fighting in the Gulf War and the War in Iraq).

So let me amend my comments to restrict it to American liberals and leftists adopting domestic violence in order to achieve political ends, they way that the Weathermen did during the Vietnam War and the way McVeigh, Rudolph and now Roeder have in more recent years.

Hopefully that's more precise (and we can leave Genghis Khan out of the discussion). Sorry for any ambiguity.

"So let me amend my comments to restrict it to American liberals and leftists adopting domestic violence in order to achieve political ends, they way that the Weathermen did during the Vietnam War and the way McVeigh, Rudolph and now Roeder have in more recent years."

The Unibomber's Manifesto is very leftie.

I am genuinely in search of information here (and for that reason, I suspect no one will answer me--snark off.) My questions: first of all, has any part of the pro-life movement, particularly Catholic organizations, repudiated any other part of it in print or in any official public statement? Did anyone, in an official capacity, actually repudiate the Nuremberg Files or Randall Terry, for instance?

Second, what is the nature of this training for "sidewalk counseling" of which you speak? The "counseling" that I've seen on the rare occasions that I've seen it, has consisted of people screaming things like "don't kill your baby!" or "Mommy, don't kill me!" at women. Or of people reading condemnatory Bible passages in a loud voice to no one in particular. Being screamed at doesn't count as "counselling" in any other context. Is there something else that people do on the sidewalk that I'm not familiar with? And what do they teach you when they train you about how to do it?

All I can say about this is that if I were a pro-choice leader I would be quietly encouraging people to donate as much money to Randall Terry as they can because he is the most effective pro-choice advocate in the country.

Well, Max...I guess we had best go easy on the right wing terrorists. After all, they have a lot of catching up to do, don't they?

RJohnson
June 2, 2009 7:43 PM
Well, Max...I guess we had best go easy on the right wing terrorists. After all, they have a lot of catching up to do, don't they?

****

Er, ah, no.

Context RJ, context. Scroll up if you must.

Rather, I say we all denounce violent extremist of both the left and the right. You with me?

"showing pictures of abortion, insisting that abortion is morally reprehensible and that those who act as abortion providers are doing something that is morally evil, is not designed to incite violence..."

No of course it isn't, just like giving guns to kids is not intended to incide gun accidents. But considering the high percentage of erratic, disturbed, and easily-influenced people in the extreme rightwing, the results are not surprising. I don't like abortion either, but anyone who wasn't born yesterday should not act surprised when something like this happens.

Freelunch,

I had no idea either until last month when I saw the PBS documentary. But it makes sense. The whole Jonestown "experiment" was all about creating a socialist type Shangri La on Earth. It was very much a hippie commune taken to an extreme in politics. It was called, after all, The PEOPLE'S Temple.

I also learned the Jones' cult was instrumental in the election of Mayor Moscone in San Francisco. Moscone appointed Jones to head a major city deparment (Housing IIRC).

I don't think Moscone, or anyone else for that matter, had any idea at the time of the election what was up with with the People's Temple" or that Jones was such a sick individual. That came out later in an edition of the SanFran Chronicle. Jone's moved everyone to Guyana in the middle of the night before the morning edition came out.

"I could be wrong, though, which is why I asked. And I'm still curious about what "sidewalk counseling" is supposed to be."

Yeah, I don't know. I always figured it amounted to, "Please don't abort your baby; we can help."

Freelunch,

Jones was heavily invested in leftist political organization in San Francisco back in the day. Had a close working relationship with Harvey Milk.

I mean, that's pretty much common knowledge. Not surprised your feet are flat, but still...

Sigalaris, Wikipedia on "anti-abortion violence" has this entry:

Following the 1998 bombing of a clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, Feminists for Life offered a reward for the arrest and conviction of those responsible.[36] In 2001, Priests for Life, a group of pro-life Catholics in the United States, put in place a $50,000 reward for information that leads to the arrest of fugitives wanted in connection with violence against abortion providers.[37] The American Life League issued a "Pro-life Proclamation Against Violence" in 2006.[38] Joseph Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League has a chapter in his book called "Violence: Why It Won't Work." [39] Other pro-life groups to take a stand against violence include Center for Bio-Ethical Reform and Pro-Lifers Against Clinic Violence

from a former Operation Rescue member:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/2/738234/-Tiller,-Operation-Rescue-and-Bonhoeffer

Yet the zealously committed (the ones who really did to their very bones see abortion as the murder of an innocent child) couldn't bear that all this effort resulted in... well, nothing. No changes in legislation, no awakening in the culture, no real shift in values among those who professed to be pro-life (you'd be astonished how many pro-lifers have either had abortions or have paid for them secretly).

The first tentative conversations I heard about murdering abortionists happened over dinner at one of the Operation Rescue leader's homes. Jon and I sat among the large family of kids with our own growing one (there were at least 9 kids among us) and Jeff (staffer) said that clearly the movement needed to escalate. Passive resistance was not effective. There needed to be graphic symbols and social/shaming pressure on abortionists to make them give up their abortion practices. This is when picketing abortionist homes became popular (using those graphic signs of aborted fetuses). But Jeff went further. He said if that didn't work, he could understand the need to take this cause all the way to murder (though quickly added that he didn't yet feel led that way himself).

It was a breath-taking statement followed by breathtaking reality when we heard of the first abortionist murder not many months later. Jon and I were rocked back on our heels. The leadership in OR was quick to distance themselves saying they didn't approve of those tactics.... but really? One of our best friends, an avid pro-lifer and missionary, shared on the QT with us that he felt this act was justified, and used Bonhoeffer to defend the position.

From there, I began to hear the drip drip drip of private, quiet support for these heroes, regardless of how the publicity from the pro-life camp was framed for news media and pro-choicers. Behind the public statements of 'we condemn this activity' was a deeper sense of 'this is what it comes to when you follow Christ' and Bonhoeffer served the purpose of theological support very well.

Thanks for that link, Jillian. It is chilling and eye-opening. To those who have offered evidence that Priests for Life, bishops, etc. have denounced individual killers after the fact, yes I know. What I was asking for was evidence that they have done anything to distance themselves from any organizations or spokesmen--like Randall Terry, like the infamous Nuremberg Files--that offered inflammatory rhetoric that encourages the kind of thinking Jillian's source describes. So far you haven't given me any examples. I wonder if Priests for Life will give that $50,000 to the witnesses who got the license plate of the suspect in Dr. Tiller's murder? Probably not. I think that's probably just window dressing.

Erin's description of "sidewalk counseling" sounds rather innocuous. So I went off and looked for other examples. Behold, an online manual by someone named Karen Black--hopefully devoid of some of the sick misogynistic crap found in many a website run by male anti-abortionists, I thought, so I began to read.

But I want to tell you, that if you're not out there because you care about the moms, you will never become a truly effective sidewalk counselor.

Well now, that sounded promising. Unfortunately, much of the manual is about how extremely difficult it is to project caring about women when all you really care about is babies. I found the attitude, both overt and covert, very disturbing. Here are a few quotes showing how the kinder, gentler anti-abortion forces approach women:

Sometimes I have a real struggle with respecting my gender when I see selfish woman after selfish woman after selfish woman go in there for abortions day after day after day.

The one who's standing in front of you is an arrogant, willful woman that says, "I am going to choose."

You -- as best as you possibly can -- lovingly, kindly, take control. She is a little robot. I've seen them come, and they're in trances. They've got a glaze over their eyes. And they just do what they're told.

The woman you're talking to is self-centered and selfish, and she's not about to put herself through that discomfort.

You're going to have a woman come across your path who simply has a spirit of murder.

So, if she’s self-centered and selfish, fine. Play right into it. "Oh, honey, please! Think about yourself. Think about yourself!" You know, that’s what she wants to hear.

[Speaking from the point of view of a woman who has an abortion after rape] And I'm worse than that rapist because I'm a murderer, and I killed that child.

If she's having an abortion because her life is in danger, or if she thinks her life is in danger if she continues this pregnancy, she's throwing her baby overboard to save her own life. She will hate herself for that.

So we need to love her enough to take the decision away from her in a loving and gentle way.

To sum up: Women need to be controlled. Women need to have choice taken out of their hands. Women are selfish. Women are better off dead than having an abortion, even when their life is at stake. Women benefit by bearing the children of their rapists.

They don't give a rat's patootie about the women. Women are just the vehicles they have to go through to get babies. This manual is advice on how to do that by any means necessary: con them, threaten them, lie to them.

It's also replete with references to Satan and demonic activity. And she cautions people against screaming, harassing, showing giant pictures of fetuses, and running after women. There would be no need to warn against doing those things if they were not, in fact, being done.

An interesting sidelight is that Karen Black confesses that while she was out standing in front of abortion clinics, her adult son called to tell her he had impregnated his girlfriend. And one month later, her unmarried daughter called to say she was pregnant, too. But it was okay, because God had arranged for Dr. Dobson to be on the radio during the phone call, and Dr. Dobson was telling her not to feel responsible for her adult children's choices. Oy. Abstinence-only education still working well, I see.

That is to say, if pro-lifers were uniquely violent in response to rhetoric, there would be a whole lot MORE than five casualties, given the number of pro-lifers and the high volume of strong rhetoric in the debate. That's not a claim that the five don't matter, but that if Schaeffer's argument held water, things would be much, much be worse than they are.

Sig - misunderstood your question - I know of no pro life organization which has condemned Terry's tactics or the Nuremburg Files. I think it is more than time to do so. The Karen Black info is appalling.

Mr. Schaeffer is on a long, soul searching journey. I wish him well on this road he travels. Sadly, he turns and throws rocks, even at his departed father.

Perhaps Mr. Schaeffer's new found position on abortion is wrong, quite wrong, but the liable of people who disagree with him, including himself in past years and his father too, seems troubling.

I hope Mr. Schaeffer works out his beliefs and ideas. I hope he reaches achieves some measure of peace with his father.