Tiller, language and violence

Rod,

This isn't the most impressive example of what you're trying to do.

You still can't resist a few spurious digs at the liberals, even if you soften them with a few qualifiers. In other words, it's still blaming the other guys.

But it was your side that targeted this guy. Wouldn't it be better to say "we will not say these things because some people are weak, and some are mad, and some will take what we say and act on it?"

I agree that the gladiatorial approach is destructive to our political discourse. But part of addressing it would be to apportion blame fairly in cases like this.

Pro-lifers, by definition, believe George Tiller murdered babies for a living. How can that be "nuanced"? Trying to add nuance lessens the evil of his acts. No more than a very small handful of pro-lifers conclude from George Tiller's evil acts that George Tiller should be murdered.

Liberals who criticize all pro-lifers for Tiller's murder are arguing in bad faith. Here's the logic: "Wouldn't it be better to say "we will not say these things because some people are weak, and some are mad, and some will take what we say and act on it?" No, because that is to give up and accept the continued killing of babies.

To turn it around, wouldn't it be better for liberals and democrats to stop arguing against free market libertarianism because it might incite another Unabomber, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or Hitler?

Tiller and his killer were quite alike. Both promoted the idea that the autonomous individual can choose to kill without the sanction of the state finding a man guilty of a crime worthy of death.

Ruth,

Considering that you have no idea who Your Name is, what evidence do you have that he or she bears any responsibility As a matter of logic, Your Name is correct that Tiller and his murderer have more in common than Tiller and any pro-life Catholic I have ever met.

And why no castigation of Dick Bottoms claims about crazies? I mean, under Bush we had people arguing outright that he deserved assassination.Pro-lifers, as opposed to anti-abortion folks, have never called for violence against any individual.

Get over yourself before you try to put one over on me.

Thomas, this is my opinion. I am pro-life, in that an unborn baby is a complete innocent. It did not cause itself to be concieved, and has no concept of convenience. A convicted murderer has taken a life by malice. He is NOT innocent. I would hope that you can see the difference. For instance, if the guy that murdered Tiller is convicted of 1st degree murder, and sentenced to death, I'll have no problem, as I wouldn't if he were sentenced to life in prison. He CHOSE to murder. A baby doesn't choose to be created. All that said, as long as the Death Penalty is an option, I have little problem with it's use. Should it change, then life in prison with only the basics will have to suffice. Hope this helps.

Rod, no doubt I will get sanctioned for even suggesting this, but here goes.

Had the perpetrator of the murder been a Muslim, and the phone number found in his car being that of the local office of CAIR, would you still be saying we should not hold the entire Muslim religion accountable for his actions? Would you not be calling for an investigation, even a raid, of every mosque and CAIR affiliate office in the midwest?

The inability of conservatives to call this a murder, to call the suspect a murder suspect, and then to LEAVE IT AT THAT invites comparisons such as the one made yesterday by Katheryn Jean Lopez.

"What George Tiller did was evil and that should not be glossed over or sugarcoated. But here Randall Terry is doing exactly what CAIR does. When someone dies at the hands of a Muslim, CAIR rushes to warn the rest of us not to use it as an excuse to scapegoat Islam."

The thinly veiled slaps at liberals, the entertaining of the idea that it may be right to murder abortionists...all of it invites the comparison Rod.

No doubt you will disagree vehemently. So be it.

Rod said, "George Tiller was a violent man," but in fact he prevented more abortions than he performed, according to people in Kansas who actually knew the man. Because he was known as an "abortion doctor," women came to him from all over the country, giving him the opportunity to counsel them about adoption opportunities.

Yes, he did do late-term abortions, and the "pro-life" movement needs to get an education about how rare and awful the circumstances are that require such a procedure:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=22002

"Two days later our joy was turned to unspeakable sadness when the new sonogram showed conjoined twins. Conjoined twins alone is not what was so difficult but the way they were joined meant that at best only one child would survive the surgery to separate them and the survivor would more than likely live a brief and painful life filled with surgery and organ transplants. We were advised that our options were to deliver into the world a child who’s life would be filled with horrible pain and suffering or fly out to Wichita Kansas and to terminate the pregnancy under the direction of Dr. George Tiller."

"Pro-lifers" need to learn to trust doctors and families to make medical decisions that they consider best for everybody concerned--including the child's quality of life. The media can help the dialogue by not jumping to conclusions about a doctor's so-called "violent" nature without getting all the facts.

"need to learn to trust doctors and families"

TR: If my parents had trusted doctors I'd have been dead a long time ago. Although some evidence indicates Tiller isn't quite the one-dimensional monster he'd been made out as.

How nice for you that your family made an independent decision, after consulting a doctor. That's all the pro-choice movement is about, choice.

How insipidly condescending. I apologize to Thomas R, who will most likely take you down a peg quite well without my help, but what choice would he have had in that situation? If they had made the other choice, would it have been equally "nice" for him?

Whose choice? "Don't like slavery? Don't own one." That was the argument ca. the mid-19th-Century, you know.

"The problem with CAIR is it gives the impression, fair or not, is that the worst thing about Islamic terrorism is it might encourage people to think ill of Muslims."

You mean by using words like this?

"We already see that despite the plain fact that the overwhelming majority of pro-life activists are peaceful, and peace-loving, people, many on the other side demonize all pro-lifers as potential abortion-clinic murderers. Whoever committed this murder is not only guilty of a heinous crime and a moral outrage, but prudentially, he or she has also done tremendous harm to the noble cause of protecting unborn life."

What you are saying, Rod, is that it is the fault of others that you cannot provide a clear, unequivocal condemnation of a murder. Even Michele McGinty was able to provide such in one of her posts, and I commend her for it.

In your first words on the execution of Dr. Tiller you do EXACTLY what you accuse CAIR of doing...you mourn how the actions have brought ill-repute on the pro-life community.

What is it about you that prevents you from simply offering condemnation of the action and condolences for the wife, children and grandchildren of Dr. Tiller and the members of his church that had their place of worship violated by this executioner? You accuse those of us on the left of politicizing Tiller's death, but your very first post on the matter did EXACTLY THAT.

Have you become that which you despise, Rod?

"Well, not quite. Murder for hire is still considered "with malice." And that's the situation that analogizes most closely to Tiller."

Plus, in relation to common law definitions of murder, "malice" is a bit of a legal term of art. A homocide is done with malice where death or serious injury is a 'virtually certain' result of the perpetrator's act and the perpetrator has knowledge that death or serious injury is a virtually certain result. Actual malice as the term is commonly understood is not required.

"How nice for you that your family made an independent decision"

TR: As Dan indicates this is kind of condescending.

If my parents had never even contacted the doctor who told them I should be subjected to a surgery with 90% chance of death or paralysis, because science would benefit, I think my life would've been the same. Possibly better. Or the one who yelled at me for going into respiratory failure because it was "my fault" and besides why weren't my parents pulling the plug anyway?

I went to the site of Tiller patients praising him and I do understand that there are issues with babies that have conditions that are 80% terminal or whatever. However part of me is sad that people just blindly believe when the doctor says that. In one case they even indicated "if there was a chance my baby could've lived the doctors would've had to tell me." And I think people believe that and I suppose if they went to Tiller they have to believe that. I don't really want to cause them pain. However I personally think that kind of faith is unrealistic bordering on childlike.

Doctors have all kinds of outlooks. Some doctors did, do, and always will be most concerned with general health. The life of chronically unhealthy people is therefore a burden to them and, as they only see them at their worse, probably feels to them like it's a burden to the person as well. I hate bring in the Nazis, but Action T-4 was not merely some weird oddball idea of Nazism. Doctors supported and dreamed much of it up. One of the worst serial killers in history was a doctor. The only serial killer I ever met was a doctor.

I know how this sounds, but I'm not saying doctors are evil terrible people. I think it's possible Tiller wasn't even per-se evil. (Forgive them for they know not what they do, etc) Obviously I'm alive because of doctors. However doctors aren't all saints or infallible. Sometimes they do have motives and outlooks you may or may not agree to.

"Think about the harsh criticism of the US torture policy under Bush. "

The criticism that at times was so extreme as to demand Bush and Cheney's impeachment? Yeah, that's exactly the same thing.

I find it ironic that you state: "Our words are not spoken in a vacuum. In our media today, they are amplified to a degree previously unimaginable."

You have had numerous posts against same-sex marriage. While not as vocal as Maggie Gallagher and Tony Perkins, you help contribute to the background noise that homosexuals don't deserve the same civil rights as heterosexuals. In response, a small subset of the people who listen to this babble have been going out and vandalizing peoples' homes and cars, and committing acts of violence against gays and lesbians. I would suggest you monitor the website Towleroad for a week to see the large number of gay bashings that occur in our country. These take place because people, mainly religious fundamentalists, are stirring the pot by stating we are perverts, child molesters, and that we are demanding the sacred status of marriage "special rights".

Frankly, I am tired of being called names because of who I am and what I want to be. About once a week I hear Maggie Gallagher invent yet another far-fetched reason why homosexuals are ruining America. And then last week a friend of mine had his car vandalized with the word "Fag" scratched into the paint. I can't prove a direct link, but I believe it is the endless demonization by people who make a nice income from doing so that contributes to these hateful crimes.

Rod, as you probably know, I have great respect for many pro-life advocates, including yourself, because I think that you raise enormously important issues that people who consider themselves pro-choice ignore at their peril.

However, referring to Tiller as "evil" and as "an abortionist" (as if that were the sum total of the man) because he, in his professional life, did something you find abhorrent, I believe is wrong. From where I sit, Tiller showed enormous courage in standing up to anti-abortion terrorists, such as those who shot him in both arms. While you may not agree with what he did, he was a husband, father, grandfather, doctor, church member, and a man who did what he believed. I'm sure some will say, "Tiller did what he believed and the man who murdered him did what he believed" but I don't think it's that simple.

As someone who is as anti-terrorist as you are, I'm surprised you don't come down much harder on those who use terrorist tactics to advance a cause in which they believe.

"George Tiller was a violent man."

I've thought a lot about this statement in the posting of this comment, and a case could be made for it: abortion being a "violent" procedure, George Tiller in his white coat and mask directing it.

And yet, to call Tiller "a violent man" still seems terribly unfair. I don't recall ever hearing about Tiller being charged or otherwise accused of any violent crimes. He was a doctor, practicing what he thought of as medicine. And though many of the things that happen in an operating room --from hacking off diseased limbs to replacing organs to vacuuming out the last remnants of an unborn fetus-- are indeed horribly violent things, I'm not sure that alone justifies calling him a "violent man."

Conservatism: the party of illegal war, torture and murder. Congratulations. Hope you are really proud of yourselves.

This was not the work of a lone kook. Dr. Tiller's murder was the culmination of almost two decades of worth of violence and intimidation. Not only is there there Dr. Turner's murder but there were the murders in Pensacola and the bombings perpetrated by Eric Robert Rudolph. The anti-abortion movement has long bee a refuge for those who use violence to advance their cause.

The reason those who oppose abortion need to be quiet is because they have not figured out a way to passionately advocate for their cause in a way that does not provide inspiration and cover for acts of domestic terrorism.

Nobody expects you to be quiet or go away. What I expect is that most people will begin to see you for the brutish, hateful thugs you are.

Dear Rod,

I'm a faithful Christian who has had to help support a young sister, age 12 at the time, through her late-term abortion with Dr. Tiller. I want to let you know that the doctor was not a violent man and you shouldn't characterize him as such. My sister was raped by my father since the age of six, and eventually she became pregnant. She hid the pregnancy out of shame until the family inevitably put things together, and our family hid this out of shame.

We didn't visit doctors or give her proper pre-natal care for fear that they would put our father in jail and bring further shame upon the family. She began having health issues at a late stage, and it became apparent she was physically too small and too young to carry the pregnancy full term. She cried and cried every night telling me how she wanted to kill herself, how this was all her fault and I had to reassure her it wasn't so. I eventually snuck her to an emergency room, where we found something horrible had gone wrong with the pregnancy. My sister was basically being torn apart from the inside.

After seeing a high-risk specialist at the hospital, we were referred to Dr. Tiller because he was the only one with expertise to understand the later pregnancies, what would be best for the woman and baby. After an examination and long discussion of all of the options, we decided the risk of losing both mom and child was too high if the pregnancy continued. Dr. Tiller prayed with my sister and I a lot about the decision, giving us every opportunity to go a different path. He was a very religious, peaceful and thoughtful man. I know this is difficult for many of us Christians to comprehend, but this is the truth. Calling him violent, a Nazi even, that is not the truth. I think one of the Christian's highest orders is to try and find the truth. You just don't know what a Godsend this man was to us. I can't begin to describe.

I fear for other young girls and women who might find themselves in my sister's position, but no longer have anywhere to turn.

Rest in Peace, Dr. Tiller.

Eleanor

Right-to-lifers will never cooperate on preventing terror until right-to-lifers SUFFER terror, regularly.

In other words, it's PAYBACK TIME.

After Sunday, right-to-lifism is murder and ALL right-to-lifers are murderers. This information comes directly from God and it cannot be contradicted nor even questioned.

Professor Robert P. George of Princeton is a MURDERER (i. e. a right-to-lifer). He murders every day and he will go on doing so UNLESS SOMEONE STOPS HIM.

Shooting Professor George in the head would be a sin and a crime and a tragedy and vewy vewy sad and I hope no one will ever do it, but it would be NO WORSE than the murders (right-to-life activities) Professor George commits every day.