Skip to comments.Defence will not turn pro-lifers into killers
Posted on 01/14/2010 10:27:08 AM PST by rhema
The killing of Wichita, Kan., abortion doctor George Tiller was wrong. It was terrible. There just isn't any question about it; in fact, it doesn't need to be stated because it's so obviously the truth. Yet, pro-choice proponents seem to believe that pro-life people -- those who believe in the sanctity of all human life -- have just been given a licence to kill by the judge presiding over the trial of the man accused of fatally shooting Tiller.
There is no dispute about Scott Roeder's admitted guilt. On May 31, 2009, he shot Tiller as the doctor was talking to an usher in the foyer of Wichita's Reformation Lutheran Church. Tiller was one of just a handful of American doctors who provided late-term abortions. Roeder is facing first-degree murder charges, but his defence is arguing that the shooting was justified because it saved unborn babies from being aborted, and therefore the charge against him should be reduced to voluntary manslaughter.
The defence's argument is ludicrous, but it's not the first ludicrous defence any lawyer has offered up in court on his client's behalf, and it won't be the last. Clearly, walking up to someone and shooting him in the head with a .22-calibre handgun is first-degree murder. There are no mitigating arguments. Yet, the judge ruled that Roeder's defence arguments would be allowed -- a ruling that was challenged by the prosecution team on Tuesday in court, delaying jury selection in the trial.
If the defence ultimately succeeds, Roeder might face five years in prison instead of life.
Legal wrangling aside, the most troubling aspect about this case is the assumption that lowering the charges against Roeder will turn otherwise peaceful, law-abiding people into gun-brandishing fanatics ready to rush out and kill other abortion doctors.
(Excerpt) Read more at canada.com ...
The absence of a pro-life peril is an easily grasped truth for everyone. Everyone, that is, but hysteria-mongering pro-aborts whose hyperbolic prevarications aren’t being peddled successfully anywhere these days ... except to other pro-aborts.
Does anyone here believe this is a valid defense?
Correction, partially delivered babies, not "unborn babies". Is it still an abortion when the act takes place outside of the womb in open air?
I do. In fact if one truly believe that abortion is murder, it becomes ones moral imperative to act in a similar manner.
Now personally I'm opposed to shooting abortionists but I certainly don't want to impose my morality on anyone else.
It doesn't require murdering someone to stop their slaughtering alive unborn children the way Tiller practiced his demonic rites. Murdering someone is prima facia evidence of other motives beyond merely protecting/saving alive unborn the bloody monster, George Tiller, would murder.
Because we have so many leftists now posing as fellow freepers, I'm not going to elaborate. But murdering someone to stop their behavior done with bloody hands ... well, let's just say Roeder had/has selfish motives.
The Left denies the evils of Communism and Islamic jihad and yet paints every pro-lifer with the slur that all are potential murderers.
Vigilante acts are wrong. Two wrongs do not make a right.
In Virginia we send murderers off on final gurney rides with some degree of frequency so it's pretty much a life and death issue for the defendant.
That applies, BTW, whether or not the defendant admits to murder ~ after all, he's not a jury, he's not a judge. As Illinois' officials can tell you just because they got a confession out of somebody that doesn't mean their guilty.
It would be very nice to find a nonviolent end to legal partial birth abortion. Thing is, what are we supposed to do when they start legalizing the killing of toddlers and young children? They are already doing infanticide so we can expect the evil to grow and grow as the years go on.
At that point we would have to kill every liberal on sight. Hopefully that day will never come but we have very little chance of avoiding it.
So, you support the individual's right to choose?
Nope, not a valid defence at all.
Just for the sake of argument, let’s look at an impossible scenario.
Let’s say that you were sent back in time to 1910 where you met a young struggling artist in Linz named Adolf Hitler. You knew what a monster he would become and how many millions would suffer and die at his hand.
You also knew that killing him would be cold-blooded murder. Would you do it knowing that this would not be a valid defence?
Roeder murdered him. He should suffer the consequences of that murder. What he prevented and what he caused is not at issue here. If he truly believes that he saved thousands of lives with his actions, then death is not that much of a penalty for him. No punishment would be if he held that conviction in his heart.
There aren’t that many pro-life leftists to worry about.
Isn't 'choice' the Holy Grail of the Left?
I know ‘murder’ is part of the pro-life/anti-abortion rhetoric but ‘murder’ is a specific legal term for a specific action that doesn't include abortion. I don't like Roe vs Wade at all but it is the law. Under Bush, Liberals went nuts and threw around terms like murder every day, but we expected them to follow the law.
Shooting one of them, most of us would recognize as an heroic act.
If the government won't act to protect the innocent, then individuals must.
Call me when a millions-strong Protestant or Catholic denomination calls for jihad against the United States.
The belief is in the sanctity of innocent human life. Tiller was a mass-murdering madman. He was a hitman of the innocent and defenseless. A dr. of death for hire. Don’t get me wrong, while I am personally opposed to killing abortion doctors, I don’t want to force my beliefs on others. sarc
The “justification” doesn’t remove the perp’s knowledge of the wrongness of his actions. If he didn’t have the capacity or knowledge of the wrongness of his killing Tiller, there might be mitigations.
Committing an illegal act to end a great evil does not make the illegal act LEGAL - just perhaps makes the illegal act RIGHT. The illegality is the source of required punishment.
Keep in mind, the arbitrary laws set in place by whatever man happens to wield power have been used to slaughter serfs by the millions. In short, many laws are evil and should be disregarded if not subject to the rules of decency. The Laws of God transcend those of man.