Posted on 06/08/2009 10:08:40 AM PDT by markomalley
Ping
Do you all have a code of canon law to standardize the process or the specific delicts and penalties?
Secondly, is there any kind of an appeals process?
Ping for later
First, I wasn't strictly talking about abortionists in general, I was also including the impact of vigilante justice on those who enable them to do what they do.
Second, I would say that he is being elevated to martyr status. Look at how the left wingers have been exalting his name, calling him a brave man and a hero. 10 years from now, if the Lord tarries, they will point to this as just another example of how Christians are really terrorists at heart and that the religion should be suppressed. (Just as they have done in the past for certain nutjobs who have killed abortionists and bombed abortuaries)
Third, a willingness to be a martyr is a characteristic of people with strong moral grounding; a characteristic that is basically antithetical to one who would be an abortionist.
Please note that genuine martyrdom is a willingness to die for one's beliefs.
This is in direct opposition to the "martyrdom" jive going on with muzzie suicide bombers. They're not martyrs, they're just brainwashed members of a death cult
These threads can go in so many directions. Those who fired on Fort Sumter where a few over eager and foolish students (probably skipping classes) from the Citadel.
I don't know how many times I have to repeat it, but if the motive of Roeder was vengeance or justice, then he should be executed for his crimes. If his motive was his sincere belief that he was preventing another child murder by this monster Tiller, then he would be both morally and legally justified in what he did.
Pro-lifers continually call Abortion "murder" and yet they seem unwilling to admit that underneath that claim, they really DON'T believe that it is. They believe it is something less than murder, otherwise they would all be doing what Roeder did.
If there is no difference between a predator murdering a child on the street and Tiller murdering a child in his abortion clinic, then Roeder should be considered a hero rather than a monster.
If we truly believe that Abortion is Murder, and that Roeder was not seeking justice, but attempting to prevent more murders, then what Roeder did was justified.
So let me make sure I understand what you are saying:
If Tiller’s murderer was seeking justice for babies previously killed, you’re saying it wouldn’t be justified.
If Tiller’s murderer was attempting to save babies from being killed by Tiller in the future, it would be justified?
Just trying to make sure I understand what you’re saying before I respond in the AM.
What is the Office of the Keys?
The Office of the Keys is that special authority which Christ has given to His church on earth to forgive the sins of repentant sinners, but to withhold forgiveness from the unrepentant as long as they do not repent.
Where is this written?
This is what St. John the Evangelist writes in chapter twenty: The Lord Jesus breathed on His disciples and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."
What do you believe according to these words?
I believe that when the called ministers of Christ deal with us by His divine command, in particular when they exclude openly unrepentant sinners from the Christian congregation and absolve those who repent of their sins and want to do better, this is just as valid and certain, even in heaven, as if Christ our dear Lord dealt with us Himself.
They are mortified over this since they believe we see that.
Now, regarding Tiller, ten years from now no one will know. We had a perfectly good website out there whose owners bothered to identify all the dead abortionists. A federal district court ruled that it was a "threat" to the ones who weren't dead yet. The consequence is that unless someone creates something similar, no one will be able to find out what abortionists were killed, and for what reasons.
Tiller's name is already disappearing.
Killed, no.
Murdered, yes.
My statement is premised upon the oft repeated "fact" that ABORTION IS MURDER. (Not mere killing or some lesser crime).
Before you respond I would request that you tell me whether or not you really believe that Abortion is murder in the same sense that a Child Predator would take scissors to the brains of a two year old and suck his brains out on the street.
If Abortion is truly Murder, then killing an abortionist to prevent him from murdering a child is a justifiable act.
So do you really really really believe that what Tiller was doing was as bad as a child predator murdering a two year old in a neighborhood park?
If you say yes, then tell me why Roeder's actions were not heroic.
There have been no partial birth abortions in Kansas since 5/31/09.
“if his motivation was to prevent Tiller from committing more murders and all legal remedies to that end had been exhausted (and they had) then I believe he has a legal justification under the doctrine of “defense of others”.
++++++++++++++
We are hearing that all other avenues had been exhausted.
What?
Had Roeder rallied all the pro-life groups all across Kansas to oppose Sebelius and take back the state?
Had Roeder started prayer and candlelight vigils?
Had Roeder conducted Concerts of Prayer to bring revival to the churches there, usher in thousands of new conversions to the Christian and pro-life cause?
Had Roeder helped to reignite the Operation Rescue protests of the 1990s?
Had Roeder raised funds and massive awareness for adoptions and in so doing raised the bar for life - again and again and again?
Had Roeder gone to the schools with his wife to persuade the coming generation the Life and giving Life to others is the truly most blessed gift a person can give?
Had Roeder helped raise his own family and neighbors as disciples of Jesus Christ, who would disciple still others also (1 Tim. 2:2)?
How can we say ‘all legal remedies’ had been exhausted? (and I know you meant this probably in the narrow legal sense - but that’s EXACTLY my point) What does that mean in a pro-life sense? Truly??
With Truth and God on our side - the remedies to bring back a Life ethic are never exhausted. Not unless you believe God grows weary, or His Might is somehow limited. Of if you do not believe in God. Then, at that point, you may think you need to take what is God’s to do, into your own hands. That is a dangerous place of unbelief, for many who claim faith in God on this matter - and certainly for those like Roeder who apparently thought God has grown weary and exhausted.
Nothing is further from the truth. Will we accept the Truth of God, or a lie on this matter?
If all of us rise up and together do what is within our own reach to promote life in such ways as mentioned above, we will end significant abortion in this nation.
Until then we’re fooling ourselves that Roeder had any impact whatsoever, other than negative on the incidence of abortion. Roeder’s lone act was a non-sequitor.
Our combined acts of love and life, will end abortion in this nation.
How was any of that going to stop Tiller from murdering the specific children that were scheduled for execution by Tiller on Monday Morning? Huh?
Is Abortion Murder?
Really?
You actually believe that?
There have been no partial birth abortions in Kansas since 5/31/09.
Who are you going to thank for that?
“So do you really really really believe that what Tiller was doing was as bad as a child predator murdering a two year old in a neighborhood park?”
+++++++++++++++
Analogy breaks down in that the predator is fighting against the parents and the law, and Tiller was doing this with the parents and the current legal consent of the society.
Now I understand that these two acts are the same. I think they’re both murder. But I do not advocate that vigilantes kill murderers on their way to trial, concerned as they may be with a lenient sentence. Neither should we advocate that vigilantes should kill abortionists, concerned as we currently may be with the lack of legal protection for those babies.
No, we need to change the laws, or enact anarchy. We cannot have this both ways. Is Anarchy God’s will for us on this matter?
I say NO! There is so much else we can do? Will you join forces with other pro-lifers throughout the world and advocate for life in a renewed and passionate way? It is not time to give into the forces of death. It is time to promote Life Values as never before.
“The devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. But I have come that you might have life, and life to the full.” John 10:10 - Jesus Christ
Is Abortion Murder?
Really?
You actually believe that?
++++++++++++++++
Do you sir? And the more important question, what shall we best do about it? I advocate doubling and trebling our efforts - pressing back into what is surely succeeding - sometimes with fits and bursts - you seem want to defend the vigilantism hit squad mentality of Roeder - which will not stop most of the murdering.
My theory and strategy calls for stopping all of the murdering by converting and agitating the Life Ethos and Values, yours, if it could be called a strategy, will prolong the mass of murders, in giving the murderers some kind of ethical cover for a while longer.
No late term murders in Wichita sir, but how many 2nd trimester murders?? OR DON’T THOSE COUNT?? What will you do about them while you blithely argue about this non-sequitor?
What will I do about them?? You know what I think the answer is. And it’s not to murder the murderers and promote anarchy - it is to promote Life.
If you are going to refuse to answer my questions, then there is no purpose to be served in attempting to dialoge with you. Go back and answer my questions and I will respond to yours. If you can’t or won’t, then don’t waste my time or yours talking over me.
I don't think so. I have many times called it "murder" but I have never taken affirmative action to stop it in its tracks. You don't stand around and pray for a man who is about to slice the throat of a child, you shoot him in the head. Therefore, if I truly believed (as so many "pro-lifers" claim) that abortion is no different from Child killing, then I would have had to do something to stop it in its tracks and I would have done it 35 years ago!
Apparently for guys like you (and hypocrites like myself) the whole idea that Abortion is murder is nothing more than idle words and empty rhetoric.
If Roeder believed in his heart that Abortion is Murder and he killed Tiller not with vengeance in his heart, but out of concern for the babies that were scheduled for execution the next day, then he ought to be hailed as a hero. The fact that the pro-life movement is distancing themselves from him suggests to me that they think that Abortion is something other than "murder". But then hypocrisy is the natural state of man. We are all hypocrites. At least I am willing to admit it.
Great thread, thanks for the ping!
It seems that every Sunday communion is common in the LC-MS. The WELS, which is often considered more conservative, is moving toward every Sunday communion, but you don't find it in every congregation. That is, I understand, a holdover from when there was only one pastor serving many congregations and he was only present to administer communion that often. (Like 100 years ago! I told you they were conservative.) In some congregations, communion was celebrated perhaps only four times a year and was an occasion for which you might buy a new outfit! Now, in my experience, those who are reluctant to have it are afraid of being too "Catholic". With some education, that attitude can be changed.
OK then.
In which case, my opinion is that if Tiller’s murderer was doing so as a matter of vengeance, he should, after he is convicted, given some sort of judicial sanction. Exactly what is contingent upon the laws of the state, the facts in the case, and the amount of risk that the individual would have to commit further crime if he’s not given a harsher sanction.
The other situation, that whoever murdered Tiller, was doing so to prevent future bloodshed, is a little bit more nuanced.
Neither the government, nor a private citizen, is allowed to execute a sentence on a potential criminal, based on their suspicion, no matter how serious that suspicion is, that a person will *potentially* commit a crime in the future. We are not living the movie Minority Report, after all.
We are allowed, on the other hand, to intervene to prevent the immediate loss of life. Alamo-Girl, in another thread, used a very apt analogy of a hunter, using a scoped rifle, observed a murder about to happen out in the woods. Would he be justified in pulling the trigger to prevent the crime from happening? My answer would be probably, but the hunter needs to be aware that he is gambling his own life that he is right.
That’s a good analogy she draws. Let me draw my own.
Let us say that you are in an area with the good old fashioned Cosa Nostra in it. If you happen to be walking down the city street and see a hit going down (i.e., guns drawn), you would most likely be justified to intervene to prevent the immediate crime from happening.
However, there is a legal concept of minimum force. A person must use minimum force to get the job done. If a crime can be prevented verbally (i.e., “put the gun down”), that is the force that should be used. If a crime can be prevented by physically subduing the individual, that is the force that should be used. The only way that deadly force is authorized is if, in the prudential judgment of the person using the force, it is the ONLY way to stop the immediate loss of life. For example, if shooting has started already. That’s why, in hostage situations, they bring in negotiators and try to talk the situation down, rather than immediately sending in SWAT.
Also, private persons are given far narrower prudential judgment than law enforcement officers. In most jurisdictions that I’m aware of, a private person can only use deadly force to prevent the loss of his own life or that of his family.
Continuing on with the Cosa Nostra example, stopping a hit in progress from going down is one thing; however, taking the life of the Don of a family, or even taking the life of the actual “soldier,” unless the individuals were actually in the act of performing the hit, would still be plain old murder...not self defense or defense of another.
That’s why I can’t agree with your statement that if Tiller’s murderer would be justified if his motivation was to prevent future bloodshed. He wasn’t walking down the street and happened to see Tiller about to crush an infant’s skull. He didn’t try minimum force to stop that immediate crime from happening. He isn’t any kind of an agent of the government, giving him right to investigate, enter private property, and prevent something from happening, nor did he do so. The person who gunned Tiller down did so at the point in time where there was no risk to the immediate loss of life. The same would have happened if Tiller had been in church, at his home, or at a restaurant or shopping mall.
The real crime is that what Tiller was doing is legal.
And, yes, I do believe that taking the life of an infant six months after fertilization and three months before birth is as repugnant as taking the life of my teen daughter. And I am insulted at you daring to ask me that question.
That is an interesting citation, particularly considering that (so far as I understand), Lutherans do not consider Holy Orders in the same way that Catholics do (as a sacrament).
But it didn’t answer the specific questions: is there an accepted code of Canon Law within LCMS that provides standardization of the legal process (to include excommunication)? Also, is there some variety of an appeals process?
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.