To: Wallace T.
There is a difference between vengeance and stopping the continuing murder of innocents.
Why do you call the killing of this murderer a murder. I gave you my definition earlier and asked you to explain why this was a murder.
posted on 06/01/2009 12:28:43 PM PDT
(Release the birth certificate, school and passport records.)
I agree with your definition of murder except for the term, "innocent". It is not the role of a private individual to make such judgments. This is the role of the civil magistrate, not an individual without authority to do so. There is no problem with killing another person in self-defense or in protection of other people when they are imminently threatened with death or injury. Jesus Christ said in Luke 22:36: "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one." The sole purpose of the sword is protecting self and property, not acting as a self-appointed executioner.
Besides, the murder of Tiller did not prevent one abortion. His death will not stope even one of some 1.5 million babies from being killed by abortionists this year. If anything, the act of unauthorized vengeance will be counterproductive, for even if the Left is unsuccessful in using his death to push pro-abort and anti-Christian legislation, it will persuade many people to reject the pro-life argument. If abortion is ever to end in this country, we need to win the hearts and minds of the opponents and the uncommitted.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson