I knew this day would come eventually

good riddance

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,523581,00.html

5/31/2009 1:45:14 PM

It's what Jesus would want.

5/31/2009 2:06:52 PM

Things like this help keep abortion safe and legal.

5/31/2009 2:14:28 PM

Quote :

"good riddance"

You are a worthless human being. Seriously. Yet, if you were brutally murdered, I doubt I would get on here and post (or even think to myself) "good riddance".

5/31/2009 2:15:52 PM

here's some archived comments from the freerepublic thread about this:

http://tinyurl.com/ktfytm (it's a pdf)

some real winners you've got there on the wingnut right.

5/31/2009 2:24:27 PM

Should be reported as an act of terrorism.

5/31/2009 2:34:57 PM

sounds to me like homeslice was making some assbackwards attempt at absolution. committing suicide in a church seems like the kind of thing someone who sucked infant brains up with a salad shooter for a living would do

5/31/2009 3:09:15 PM

WTF are you talking about? Nothing I've read even hints at suicide.

5/31/2009 3:15:19 PM

Quote :

"sounds to me like homeslice was making some assbackwards attempt at absolution. committing suicide in a church seems like the kind of thing someone who sucked infant brains up with a salad shooter for a living would do"

So you're saying he committed suicide by hiring a hit man to kill himself?

5/31/2009 3:16:56 PM

didn't see anything about it in the article i read.

either way, good riddance

5/31/2009 4:00:48 PM

Quote :

"You are a worthless human being. Seriously. Yet, if you were brutally murdered, I doubt I would get on here and post (or even think to myself) "good riddance"."

do you even know anything about this guy? do you have any idea how many deaths he is responsible for? this isn't just your average abortionist, this guy admitted to performing some abortions the day before delivery was scheduled. I don't care whether you're for a woman's right to choose, this is way beyond that, some of the late term abortions he has done are so atrocious they would make Hitler's stomach churn. This guy has been in and out of court for years for this, and I'm surprised it's taken this long for someone to come whack him.

Yet you come on here in your tirade of ignorance, calling me a "worthless human being" for shrugging my shoulders when this notorious murderer got a taste of his own medicine.

5/31/2009 4:26:01 PM

"notorious murderer"?

I was unaware George Tiller had ever been charged, must less convicted, of murder.

5/31/2009 4:33:37 PM

terrible argument

neither was Hitler, doesn't mean he wasn't

yawn

5/31/2009 4:43:59 PM

hitler in 12 posts.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 4:49 PM. Reason : .]

5/31/2009 4:48:37 PM

Godwin wins again!

I was unaware George Tiller had ever been charged, must less convicted, of murder. broken any murder or manslaughter laws.

Happy? Of course you are. You like it when people you don't agree with are murdered.

5/31/2009 4:55:39 PM

pro-life indeed. People are fing crazy

5/31/2009 5:29:49 PM

The more I think about it, the more I stand by my original statement:

Quote :

"I was unaware George Tiller had ever been charged, must less convicted, of murder."

We're (ostensibly) a country of laws; no matter how repugnant George Tiller's action may have been, he has never been charged or convicted of murder.

Fuck your lazy and worn out Nazi comparisons.

Tiller is a murderee, not a murderer.

5/31/2009 5:42:27 PM

and I always thought puree of fetus stopped bullets

5/31/2009 6:43:31 PM

heard about this on NPR on the way from Durham to New Bern today...

...and I knew this argument would come up--"he didn't do anything illegal/was never convicted of anything/etc" vs. "maybe not, but justice was served".



The first thing I thought of was the jury nullification argument in the waterboarding thread. The second thing that I thought of was that this one might be for the best. Partial birth abortion is super fucked up, and I can't imagine how anyone could defend it.

5/31/2009 6:46:46 PM

Murder advocates ITT

5/31/2009 6:58:27 PM

PBA is unbelievably fucked up, but who the fuck advocates that somebody should be executed illegally for it?

5/31/2009 7:35:35 PM

Needs more Bill Hicks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJcebIEOkhY

5/31/2009 7:40:11 PM

I was under the impression that such extreme late-term abortions were illegal nationwide, but apparently there are three places it can be performed. I wonder if somebody could explain to me what the deal is with that?

That said...ugh. I fucking hate the subject of abortion. On the one hand, I think that -- especially in later stages -- it is wrong and essentially murder. But in this very forum, pro-choice people have told me that if I really think that, I should be taking up arms and shooting people to prevent them from happening. And I can see the logic there.

Quote :

"We're (ostensibly) a country of laws"

True, and the guy who did the shooting is probably going to be punished. I've yet to see one person in this thread suggest that he go free. Sort of reminds me of a torture thread recently, when someone suggested that torture should be made illegal -- and that, if at some point down the line someone official thought torture was necessary to save lives, they should do it and accept the legal consequences.

Sure, the shooter is probably a religious nut, but this is one of those cases where his religious nuttery isn't all that abstract or otherworldly -- the guy really believes that Tiller is a mass-murderer. We as a society tend to think well on people who stop mass murderers, even by deadly force (although most of us, probably me included, would be unlikely to do much about it ourselves). And we think that regardless of whether the law is on their side. The only thing that makes this guy a horrible asshole instead of a hero is that a lot of people don't think Tiller was a mass murderer.

---

So, my concluding thoughts: I'm not particularly upset that George Tiller is dead. I believe that the man who killed him should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Given his probable ideological motivation and other issues, I believe that he should probably be executed, as there is little chance of his successful reformation; a good chance that, given the opportunity, he would repeat his crime; and at least some chance that his actions may motivate others to follow in his footsteps. As far as I can tell, radical pro-lifers aren't much for becoming martyrs. Maybe making one will cause them to think twice before they resort to violence.

5/31/2009 7:47:53 PM

This is like those assholes who throw acid on the faces of muslim women who are just living their life within the law, which the assholes can't stand

5/31/2009 8:51:58 PM

no not really

5/31/2009 9:38:20 PM

executed illegally = cold blooded murder

The guy who was killed was a doctor. He operated within the law and preformed medical services for those who sought them. The people who did 'wrong' (if wrong is was done) are the politicians who allowed and still allow abortion to be legal, the citizens who voted for them, and the individuals who got the PBA done.

PBA is almost infanticide. Infanticide is murder.

However, if a clear majority of the people in the nation agreed that PBA is murder, then it would be illegal. End of story. The only evil that I see here is that an individual took a battle that occurs in the arena of public opinion and made it a 'real' battlefield where people get killed. All to advance his cause over the other side through fear and terror.

Despicable.

I'll say "good riddance" when the murderer gets dealt his sentence. (preferably life in prison)

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 9:56 PM. Reason : ]

5/31/2009 9:55:17 PM

even if it is murder it still doesn't make it right to want him to be killed

5/31/2009 10:13:22 PM

Quote :

"executed illegally = cold blooded murder The guy who was killed was a doctor. He operated within the law"

I'm not with you here. Yes, he was a doctor who operated within the law. But as we all know, the law can be despicable. Operating outside of the law to overcome unjust laws can be good and right, under certain circumstances.

I, for one, would not call whoever shot Osama bin Laden a "cold blooded murderer," regardless of the circumstances. And that's not to compare the two people, but the point is that extralegal execution needn't, as an absolute necessity, be "cold blooded murder." If a guard shot Ted Kaczynski in the face today, I bet a lot fewer people would be throwing around terms like that. And that's because most people, I think are in agreement that the manner of killing matters at least somewhat less than whether the killing was necessary/deserved.

Quote :

"However, if a clear majority of the people in the nation agreed that PBA is murder, then it would be illegal."

That's not necessarily true, either. Certain voting blocs are more influential than others. More to the point, not everybody is a single-issue voter. I can agree that PBA is horrible, but think that the rest of the PBA-opponent's platform is even more horrible. So now my choice is to abstain or to vote for the lesser of two evils. In either case, there's that evil thing.

Quote :

"All to advance his cause over the other side through fear and terror."

I agree that this is almost certainly true. The guy probably hoped to use fear to scare people into agreeing with him, and that's not really kosher.

Quote :

"even if it is murder it still doesn't make it right to want him to be killed"

If someone is getting away with mass-murder and the law is incapable of stopping him, you want him to continue to get away with it?

---

Mind you, I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here. What I'd really like is for the abortion issue to just go away. We could be doing more important things that involve less violence between opposing sides.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 10:20 PM. Reason : ]

5/31/2009 10:18:26 PM

Quote :

"I agree that this is almost certainly true. The guy probably hoped to use fear to scare people into agreeing with him, and that's not really kosher. "

I don't agree here. I'm inclined to think that he probably just viewed it as taking out the garbage, because nobody else would do it.

Of course, I know that it takes a certain sort of person to view things that way, and we're a minority. I'm similar in a lot of ways--I've just channeled my drive into a more legally accepted path (the USMC...I've said several times before that I did not get into this business to pay for college, or play with zillion dollar jets, or have a springboard into politics, or whatever else. I'm in this business because I wanted to make the world a better place by slaughtering people who were fucking it up). Make no mistake--there exists a small minority of people who are more than willing to do terrible things to terrible people, getting their hands dirty for the greater good.

I can tell you, from what I have a feeling is at least somewhat of a like mindset (although I think that I'm more stable and less extreme), that making a political point or instilling fear likely had nothing to do with it. I suspect that it was more a simple case of "Fuck him, he deserves it, and this is for the greater good."

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 10:40 PM. Reason : I'm also neither particularly religious nor rabidly anti-abortion]

5/31/2009 10:38:43 PM

Quote :

"I'm in this business because I wanted to make the world a better place by slaughtering people who were fucking it up"

So you're going to do an inside job on your bosses?

5/31/2009 10:40:39 PM

No longer my bosses, not the right thread for that discussion, those issues are MUCH more complicated and full of grey area than you're making them out to be, there are better mechanisms for dealing with that stuff, and so on.

...but nice attempt at a partisan-hack cheap shot.

5/31/2009 10:44:21 PM

How is it partisan to oppose empire-building?

I'd venture a guess that the non-racist libertarians on this board would agree with me, and we're as ideologically opposed as you could imagine.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM. Reason : .]

5/31/2009 10:46:28 PM

I am a non-racist libertarian, I oppose empire building, and everything in my previous post still stands.

now, if you want to continue discussing this, start a new thread. Actually, don't do that--search and find one of about 50 old, suitable threads. if it's too old, PM me and i'll be glad to bump it to be active.

5/31/2009 10:49:10 PM

Of course, the late term abortions were done on totally healthy fetuses that would of been an super model (aka something like the elephant man) or a child genious.....yeah right.... If any would of gone to term they would of ended up in a state mental institution since those are the kids that have such severe mental retardation or deformaties that nobody would be able to really take care of them other than the state.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 10:53 PM. Reason : w]

5/31/2009 10:51:07 PM

even so, most people wouldn't tolerate the killing of 2-day old infants, and I can't really see that there's any difference. and are you OK with killing people in state mental institutions who have severe developmental disorders?

not to mention that a lot (most? almost all?) of that stuff can be detected far earlier in the pregnancy.


I'm not saying that I would do this--I'm not willing to pay the price, legally (or live as a fugitive or looking over my shoulder). I'm not even saying that vigilantism should be generally accepted. I'm just saying that I'm not really bothered by this guy killing George Tiller (and I personally don't think it was done to instill terror or really even make any sort of political gain).


[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 10:58 PM. Reason : asfd]

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 11:01 PM. Reason : asfd]

5/31/2009 10:56:36 PM

Curious what people who where complaining about this:
http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=563871
take is on this subject.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 10:57 PM. Reason : x]

5/31/2009 10:57:24 PM

Good arguments from GrumpyGOP.

Quote :

"That's not necessarily true, either. Certain voting blocs are more influential than others. More to the point, not everybody is a single-issue voter. I can agree that PBA is horrible, but think that the rest of the PBA-opponent's platform is even more horrible. So now my choice is to abstain or to vote for the lesser of two evils. In either case, there's that evil thing."

The government, be it monarchy or democracy, by all means has ways of instituting 'evil' in the law. It's always up to the individual to work to constructing a moral society. But before we get hot and revolutionary in our thinking, it's important to make the judgment not as to "pro" or "anti" the issue, but whether or not democracy is working effectively on that issue.

A modern USA action-movie kind of example of the pro-lifer case would be some branch of a secretive government agency running around on a world domination or control scheme that involves, say, a crazy CIA conspiracy releasing Ebola all over Africa and killing millions. Not good right? And plus, no constituency of voters or representatives would ever allow it. But at the same time, that representative system set those secret agents in place and knew they were doing so, but the agency oversteps its bounds. Not just that, but the people may even knowingly put someone in power and permit a certain measure that is immoral (we'll use WWII Germany here). It's justified in that case to oppose the system, as many people did in the quintessential 'Hitler' example.

So I will concede your point to the extent that if the American voters and representatives allow an immoral form of a severe sin, then it can be moral to oppose some very basic ethical boundary in opposition of it to achieve the lesser evil. But what about relativity of morals? In the case of PBA, the law is deliberate in allowing it, and the judges have supported it, and our system of government seems to be working. No brainwashing is going on and pro-choice voters are not ignorant to what they're voting for. If you're the shooter from the recent incident, then face it, your problem is that you can't get the rest of the nation to agree with you on an issue of morality. Murder and even moreso, the use of terror to achieve those means is what sets this apart. Numerically, the doctor killed many and the shooter killed one, but the doctor worked in narrow confines and exercised ethical boundaries (even if that meant the baby was half way out) whereas the shooter showed he was willing to use ANY means to achieve his victory over people who have a different view on what law is moral.

In fact, you shouldn't even have difficulty claiming that the pro-life voting and representative block is completely immoral - those are just your own morals. I mean, certain demographics in history certainly supported slavery. So that's up to the history books, maybe we'll change as a society and never kill a baby after some point. But here, the doctor seems to be an alright person and worked within his own thought out ethical bounds.

When someone takes a specific action so drastically immoral against a practice okay'd by such a large fraction of society with such a strong claim to legitimacy, I'm sorry, but he's definitely the crazy one and the people praising his actions are too. There could exist conditions under such an assassination would be moral. But the present story is a far far far far cry from that.

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 11:37 PM. Reason : ]

5/31/2009 11:28:57 PM

Quote :

"(and I personally don't think it was done to instill terror or really even make any sort of political gain)."

Riiiight. That's a tall tale.

The (most) rabid pro-life campaigners have shown time and time again that they're willing to use terror to achieve results that can not be achieved through peaceful actions. This isn't the first time someone tried to shoot this doctor, and people get the message - there are people out there who want to kill abortion doctors.

You see, with that kind of strategy, a small number of crazies can keep many doctors from preforming a procedure by coercing them with fear. Now only the boldest of the bold will do PBA, not because of legal campaigning, but because of terror. That's almost the exact definition of terrorism. I don't know if you've ever tried to get a late-term abortion, but it's not exactly easy. The difficulty isn't just because of legal barriers. Many people out there want to make abortion doctors lives a living hell. From a utilitarian ethics standpoint, it could make sense. They are "saving lives".

But I'm glad most of the pro-life group isn't like this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8076253.stm

Quote :

"In a statement, Troy Newman of Operation Rescue said his group had worked for years through peaceful and legal means and through the proper channels to see Dr Tiller "brought to justice". "We denounce vigilantism and the cowardly act that took place this morning." Phill Kline, an opponent of Dr Tiller and a former attorney-general of the state of Kansas, said: "I am stunned by this lawless and violent act, which must be condemned and should be met with the full force of law." "

[Edited on May 31, 2009 at 11:52 PM. Reason : ]

5/31/2009 11:52:00 PM

Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord.

OMG J/K LOLZ

6/1/2009 12:52:46 AM

Quote :

"If any would of gone to term they would of ended up in a state mental institution since those are the kids that have such severe mental retardation or deformaties that nobody would be able to really take care of them other than the state."

Of course, this argument has been used before. And it really only leads to one place.

Quote :

"No brainwashing is going on and pro-choice voters are not ignorant to what they're voting for."

I'm not sure that this is true or even demonstrable. As with every heavily polarized issue, both sides have their own ideas of "the truth." And rarely do either of these ideas have much in common with reality. Along that line of thought, neither side ever really pays attention to the other. When someone protests with dead-fetus posters or pro-choice rants, what do you see on this board? People complaining about protesters. It's representative of the rest of the country.

But really the most important sentence in your post is this:

Quote :

"But what about relativity of morals?"

Many don't believe that there is such a thing. I'm one of them. And of course, it's impossible to argue very far, especially when one argues that the other's side is, effectively, relative. Along these lines:

Quote :

"the shooter showed he was willing to use ANY means to achieve his victory over people who have a different view on what law is moral."

The other way to word this is to say, "he was willing to use ANY means to achieve his victory over bad people."

6/1/2009 1:17:05 AM

Don't some people claim that it's not ethical to take any action to triumph over evil? Don't some people claim that we should never use certain methods no matter what? .... cue torture debate here.

6/1/2009 1:41:40 AM

I find this whole situation to be akin to that when say, someone of notorious infamy - like say, a convicted child molester who has served their sentence - is shot dead in the public square.

Outside of the ideological fringe, I doubt that many people are cheering for what Dr. Tiller did. Frankly, I think the lateness of the abortions he performed made even pro-choice people squeamish (I know it does for me, whereas I'd identify as "tentatively" so.) In that sense, it's hard to work up a whole lot of direct sympathy.

But the fact is, he was operating within the margins of the law. And if he wasn't, it was for opponents to prove - which they had previously tried to do, and failed. The whole belief that someone can circumvent the law when it doesn't produce an outcome in their favor undermines the whole idea of a civil society - what's to stop a radical pro-choicer from summary execution of Dr. Tiller's killer, should the jury prove uncompliant? (Other than hypocrisy, natch.) You of course see where this goes.

Back to the original analogy; few people are going to miss a person of notorious infamy. But that doesn't mean it's right or even praiseworthy for "extra-judicial" measures, no matter how disgusting or horrible you think they are. Acting that way speaks more to such peoples' contempt for the law above all else.

6/1/2009 8:11:06 AM

Right wing nut kills baby killer. Just anothe story of whack jobs killing whack jobs. Mehhh... no sympathy for either person.

6/1/2009 9:51:54 AM

Face it, there's even a good moral case for Dr. Tiller's practice. He ran one of THREE clinics that did PBA in the nation, and he largely did so in order to prevent people from doing illegal homemade abortions. If you're desperate enough to get to his clinic (make it past the pro-life vigil), then you're probably pretty darn committed to the decision to abort the child and it's disputable as to whether events would or could play out in a manner not endangering the mother's life in the absence of the clinic. Like I said: home made abortions. Not a happy thing.

And he was shot ushering for a Lutheran church. This guy was a productive member of society who saved as many lives as he took, and prevented droves of unwanted and disabled children from living a life of tragedy in foster homes.

I would entertain the prospect of legislation that bans partial birth abortions. My own moral compass would be "allow it, only in the extreme of the extreme cases". But getting squeamish? Hardly. There is a well founded ethical case FOR partial birth abortions, and Dr. Tiller believed in that. Dr. Tiller was a hero who stood up in the face of unthinkable terror for what he believed in.

The man was a Saint. Those condemning him are whiny brats who saw an educated man who thought out the abortion issue and arrived at a different conclusion with good cause. If you can't see the good that Dr. Teller did (whether or not you agree with the rationale), then you're an ignoramus.

6/1/2009 10:02:31 AM

pro-life people that commit murder.. makes sense it also amazes me that most pro-life people are usually for the death penalty as well.

but,

Quote :

"There is a well founded ethical case FOR partial birth abortions"

what is it? i consider myself pro-choice but i would vote for a PBA ban. shit is fucked up

6/1/2009 11:48:57 AM

^did you even read the rest of his post?

6/1/2009 12:33:53 PM

Quote :

"it also amazes me that most pro-life people are usually for the death penalty as well."

it amazes me that many pro-choice people are so willing to kill an innocent, unborn child, but yet will fight so hard to prevent a convicted rapist, murder, or repeat violent criminal from being given the death penalty/having the penalty carried through.

6/1/2009 12:48:34 PM

i think all it shows is that people are willing to rationalize their moral decisions when there are no correct answers.

6/1/2009 12:56:43 PM

I'm no defender of Tiller's actions, but this murder should be condemned by all. I guess it's okay to abort a fetus in the 268th trimester.

6/1/2009 2:40:46 PM

Murdering Tiller was abhorrent, and the killer should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

At the same time, I can't help but being glad that no more babies will be killed by him.

just a little cognitive dissonance here...

6/1/2009 2:54:03 PM