Skip to comments.Jury Finds Man Guilty of Murder in Kansas Abortion Providerís Death
Posted on 01/29/2010 9:49:10 AM PST by FutureRocketMan
click here to read article
“he was performing a LEGAL procedure”
So was Mengelez. And Hitler.
Why that is an interesting view.
So Roeder would have also been justified in killing anyone in that church who worked as a pharmacist and dispensed morning after pills to women and would have also been justified in murdering every woman in that church who had an IUD in their uterus?
It is not within our realm of understanding, our responsibility, nor our right to take another human life. Regardless of the obvious fact that the world is a better place without George Tiller, it was still both a crime and a sin to murder him.
There are 20-50 million more completely evil vermin in this country who would gladly take Tiller’s place at the alter of child sacrifice. Fortunately, they aren’t intelligent enough to pass medical school.
The fact that this house of God was not of your particular sect does not make it any less a house of God. I’d advise you to repent your habit of insulting a house of God before you find yourself before its resident.
>> Jury Finds Man Guilty of Murder in Kansas Abortion Providers Death,
The inevitable outcome that will remind everyone that even the most disgusting, reprehensible, depraved scumbags benefit from the protection of U.S. law.
Abortion, today, is legal killing of unborn human life.
Those that were killed by Tiller are not recognized by U.S. law.
What say you that exist outside the rule of U.S. law? Is Roeder a hero to you? I’m talkin’ to all you prenatal noobs out there.
If it involves murdering someone in cold blood, then YES.
I’m glad he did it. I think it was a courageous act. I also think, under the current law, the jury came back with the right verdict.
I think history is going to look back on this case as ‘one of life’s tragic ironies’, in that Roeder believed he was intervening to stop the murder of other people. That those people required an umbilical cord to live is no different than those requiring a similar device (or devices) in a critical care unit.
I think future classes will scratch their heads and say, “They use to abort perfectly good human beings, can you imagine?” They certainly ask similar questions about human slavery today. At least a slave was allowed to live, and perhaps one day win their own freedom.
“Yep Johnny, they use to pull babies out of their mommies, and then put a spike in their skulls. Can you imagine?”
The right to own slaves used to be the law of the land. It was a perfidious law then, and it remains so today.
Roeder is guilty of murder as he should be under current law, but I also think he committed a courageous act. Certainly, he would have been lauded as a hero had Tiller pulled a gun in a shopping mall and started to kill people there. That he did it one at a time in a clinic, to me, is not really much different. It is most certainly just as indiscriminate.
Perhaps future generations will look upon NOW and Planned Parenthood with the same disgust that history looks at Hitler or Stalin. Abortion has claimed about 40 million lives since 1979? Stalin only killed, what, 20 million? Each and every one of those 20 million at least had the opportunity to defend themselves, even if they didn’t avail themselves of it.
NO you left out facts that precipitated Roeder’s heroic action:
Fact: Tiller premeditated and accepted money for killngs in his abbatoir.
Fact: Tiller carried out these premeditated murders daily and deliberately.
He might reduce the stink a bit by washing. If he's wise, he'll put his soap on a rope so he doesn't have to bend down for it.
Don’t get carried away, dogz, the posited silliness is based upon the faulty notion that the perp establishes the legality. Ain’t that way, as you know. A murderer murdered a murderer might sound right, but the law was protecting Tiller the killer so he was not leaglly a murderer, unfortunately for our twisted American society.
No, murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with intent. Big difference. And Roeder's actions were obviously and clearly unlawful.
Well then our entire society is whacko for allowing abortion and Roeder is just one of the many. Welcome to the club.
Not in this lifetime.
You understand that Roeder elected to engage an affirmative defense, right? Do you understand the principle of an affirmative defense? When you employ an affirmative defense, the burden of proof shifts from prosecution to defense. It then becomes the defense's burden to prove their case.
As for, "this case shouldn't have been confined to the state either", I have no idea what you mean.
Do you want me to answer that philosophically?
Here’s a direct quote from editor-surveyor on another thread: “He should be lauded for his courage.”
Try as we might, me and some others just couldn’t convince this guy that selective outrage about 1st degree murder works against prolifers.
I’ve read the entire thread and see that others have already corrected you as to the evidence and confession of Roeder.
I agree with the jury’s findings and was not surprised at the guilty verdict.
There is one question that I’d be interested in knowing the answer to from those who feel that Roeder was justified in murdering the abortion doctor and/or that he should not have been found guilty. The question is: Would you murder an abortion doctor? If not, why not?
I'd be very much surprised if any FReepers said it was applicable in a 1st degree murder case. I knew, personally, such a murdrer once (Jim Kopp). My best guess is that he would attract a measure of conflicted pity here, but no applause.