Posted on 01/29/2010 9:49:10 AM PST by FutureRocketMan
WICHITA, Kan. — A man who said he killed prominent Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller in order to save the lives of unborn children was convicted Friday of murder.
The jury deliberated for just 37 minutes before finding Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City, Mo., guilty of premeditated, first-degree murder in the May 31 shooting death.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
“we are a nation of laws”
It was the same politicians who came up with the law making the killing of the evil doctor “illegal” that passed the law making the killing of 52000000 babies “legal”.
So much for the law...
Yes the overview of the ladies protest is that they are protesting the war. But that’s like saying that Roeder was protesting abortion.
They are protesting the ‘unjustified’ killing of ‘innocents’.
With that in mind, doesn’t follow that their actions are also justified?
Tiller was in the back of the church, talking with fellow ushers, disregarding the sermon, which, in my opinion, is disrespectful to God.
Simple answer: Yes, if circumstances warrant it.
How about the enslavement of 300,000,000 people, as the architecs of ObamaCare envison? The enforced monthly seperate premium for government provided abortions?
Does that rise to the level of circumstance?
That's for God to Judge. This execution was still done in His House.
Tell that to Tiller when you run into him.
I agree. We’re approaching that point for many reasons.
I will not kill doctors who kill babies, I do not have the guts, but people like Scott are killing killers and if some one works for killers they take their lives in their own hands. This is a war and it will not end until people quit killing babies.
Unlike jihad all we ask is do not kill babies.
Then the killing will stop.
I will always see the Scotts of this world as saving babies live and killing serial killers and their help. No one should work at a place that kills babies. I would tell family and friends not to and you should to. It's a dangerous place to work. I would never do it, I'm a coward, just like a did not fight in Vietnam but I thank God for our solders who do and for Scott too! It will end when the baby killing end. Just like it ended at Yorktown when the British surrendered. By the way the British said we were murderers too!
I see your point, it's exactly the same... (since, as we all know, anyone in the army has the authority to individually declare war whenever and wherever and in whatever country he thinks best, and shoot down an unarmed person in church, with no authorization from the President, Congress, the law, the Constitution, his own officers, or anyone else.) :o/
Easy. The jury COULD have ruled it “Justifiable Homicide”.
I wonder why no jury member considered it a Justifiable Homicide? Or perhaps they did, but had their minds changed?
Who are you, anyway? A leftist troll trying to pose as a heartless conservative?
You're doing a great job of being a complete jerk, I'll say that for you, newbie.
Yep Scott the hero, Like the Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders strapping those bomb-packs on young clueless young Palestinians telling them they are soldiers and will go to heaven for killing the baby killers.
You insult our soldiers by making them equivalent to Scott.
We ALL here oppose that law. It is bad law. It is evil.
So what about all the other laws that those of you who are bashing all our laws say should be disregarded?
You seem to be saying that our laws against vigilante justice should be disregarded. If that is so, then wouldn't any person who believed they were justified in killing a bad person be justified? Where do we draw the line?
Is it OK to bomb abortion clinics? Is it alright to shoot and kill every abortion doctor? Do we kill the mothers who say, "Kill my baby. I don't want it?" Do we shoot the politicians and judges who support abortion? Do we shoot our neighbors who are pro-abortion because they are complicit in the crime? Do we go after NARAL and PP?
And who is the arbiter of this anarchy? You? Me? Anyone?
It's very easy for you to bash the laws of the land because of the horrid "law" that allows the murder of innocent unborn children. It's very easy for you to sit at your computer and declare this murderer a "hero."
But what you are recommending is anarchy. What you are recommending in saying we should declare holy war on abortionists is a dangerous precedent that has no appropriate limits or rules.
Besides the fact that murder is a sin, cheering on random shooting of people we find despicable is not an appropriate Biblical or American way of solving this very difficult problem.
I really think all of you need to starting thinking about the ramifications of what you are recommending here. Use your heads and not your emotions, and think it through.
OhioBush fan: The ramifications of the status quo are too horrible to imagine.
You sound just like the apologists for slavery before the civil war broke out. Like the ones who maintained the cold war entente that sacrificed millions of people behind the iron curtain feeding the living dead Communists.
Like so many wimped and wacked out out fear filled self styled “conservatives” who would rather keep on watching from the sidelines...at the butchery that continues. Now that is really sick.
The only “anarchy” is the one in the souls of those who are frozen in fear. They cannot imagine that their safe comfy little world might crack a little so that a few more kids make it.
Pro life can do without these “gradualists”...and those who are willing to sacrifice more souls on the altar of mammon and fiscal economics...who are willing to let one more kid die.
No more Bushbots.. and Giuliani bots...although we just got another one in Massachusetts.
We either purify ourselves from within or we will be washed away from someplace else.
Can we assume that eleni121 will be the next "hero" who murders an abortion doctor, then? Or don't you have the "moral courage" to do what you so glibly and safely espouse while sitting at home in a comfy chair?
End of discussion, eleni. With you and me it always comes down to your losing emotional control and going off the deep end of rationality.
Too bad. For a moment, I thought there was hope that two avid pro-life activists could find some common ground.
But maybe only one of us is really a pro-life advocate, eh? Maybe your advocating cold-blooded murder indicates that you are not truly pro-life, eh?
Next time I'll know better than to post to you and hope for a decent conversation.
Be well. May God help you to deal with your rage.
The Bible says give unto Ceaser that which is Ceaser’s and give to GOD that which is GOD’s.
Babies are GOD’S!
Scott is a believer, and he saved lives, Killing babies is murder. Killing the murderer is justified. He has more guts than me but if tomorrow I only had 2 weeks to live, killing a “tiller” might make me braver. God even forgives murder in tiller case. According to the British during the revolutionary war we were murderers. Scott was even more justified because of babies innocence.
40 million babies killed.
And if Jesus was with the doctor when he was killing a Baby he would not do nothing.
Those babies are the temples of God, he might stop it like when he threw the tables over in the temple, you think? It was aganist the law to turn over the tables/
In your example all three truly conspire to murder a child...so all are guilty. You are limiting your view to those who actively participate. Let me give you an example of someone in the process but probably should not be held accountable for murder. There was quite a bureaucracy and process involved in killing jews, for instance, as you probably know they transported many Jews on trains. Technically, the guys who kept the tracks in repair and the engines in repair helped facilitate the murder, however they were at a reasonable distance to not be charged with any crime. Their job focus was not the jews but the trains themselves and the track. We have that in our society as well. For example, one who is pro abortion is not guilty in any legal sense of the word of aiding in killing babies. But, the abortionist definitely is. And, Roeder brought justice to him, not the clerks, not the mothers, but to the murderer.
His was a great act of love. A unselfish love for life, for the babies that Tiller had killed and would continue killing in the future. Indeed, during his trial he proclaimed that he was worried that Tiller would continue killing babies. And so, he decided he had to act.
It is that simple, even if you disagree with calling it a killing and prefer to call it murder you should be willing to accept that he acted not for his own benefit but for the benefit of others, innocent life that Tiller was killing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.