A Kansas man, Scott Roeder, has been arrested for the murder of Dr. George Tiller (left), 67, who was shot while serving as an usher at his Wichita church Sunday morning. Tiller was one of the few U.S. doctors performing late-term abortions in the country and had previously survived a 1993 shooting outside of his clinic when he was shot in both arms. I discussed this case on this segment of Rachel Maddow Show.
Tiller died Sunday morning in the foyer of Reformation Lutheran Church, where he served as an usher. Witnesses were able to identify the gunman’s car and give police its license plate.
Tiller practiced for 40 years and was the target of fierce criticism and anger. This anger was fueled by commentators like Bill O’Reilly who repeatedly attacked Tiller by name as guilty of “Nazi stuff” and described him as “Tiller the Baby Killer.” For a description of the Fox statements about Tiller, click here.
He is only the latest victim of such an attack. In 1998, Dr. Barnett Slepian was killed by a sniper in his Amherst, New York, home.
In 1994, Dr. John Bayard Britton and a volunteer escort were shot and killed outside an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida.
In 1993, Dr. David Gunn, was shot to death outside his Pensacola clinic.
Eric Rudolph also attacked clinics, maimed a nurse, and killed an off-duty police in a spasm of violence in 1998. ,
For the full story, click here.
AY: ‘Are we not the educational elitest. lol’
——————
May be. 🙂 Have a good night, I’m gonna’ have a beer and get some sleep, the better half’s ‘puter HD died yesterday and we have a tech. coming tomorrow morning to replace it. Two HD replacements in about a month, (and a power source, DVD drive and video card between them in the past 9 months) it’s a plague I tell ya’.
Slartibartfast, As I said to AY’s posting, I’m not saying you can’t play with him, just don’t be fooled into thinking he’s not playing with you. It’s not my place to censor anything, I was just calling him out for what he shows me he is. Have at him.
lottakatz 1, June 2, 2009 at 9:51 pm
I’m just saying his BS isn’t lost on me and shouldn’t be mistaken for intellectual inquiry.
*********************
Are we not the educational elitest. lol
The mandatory pregnancy people always manipulate the argument back to a more nebulous basis to avoid dealing with the issues that are not faith based and more difficult to justify. If he wasn’t engaged on his terms he’d be left posting broadsides like Carl and some of the other ‘all caps’ brigade.
I’m not saying you can’t play with him, I’m just saying his BS isn’t lost on me and shouldn’t be mistaken for intellectual inquiry. His propaganda is faith-based, bigoted, and hardly subject to change.
Health care for women provided with armed protection against murdering faith-based jihadists. Really? In America? In 2009?
lottakatz,
You’re right, I apologize to everyone for engaging with JB. As a man who considers himself a feminist (I certainly am by your definition), I should know better than to think that I could ever change his mind.
I will not feed the trolls
I will not feed the trolls
I will not feed the trolls…
GWMom,
Great Gloria Steinem quote.
lottakatz 1, June 2, 2009 at 9:27 pm
This just speaks to the willingness of reasonable people to engage a persistent troll and bigot.
****************************
I am guilty as charged. But are you sure the word should not be enrage?
Mike A: ‘…since the topic has switched from murder to the definition of life’ (Thanks for the lead-in, yo.)
Maybe it shouldn’t. This just speaks to the willingness of reasonable people to engage a persistent troll and bigot. Bigot? Oh yea. The posts wherein JB reveals this are the ones that attack Domino (totally unprovoked) by using the word ‘feminist’ as a derogatory term and switch up later to espouse that women are natural care givers and men are more suited to extra-family work based on their muscular bulk. Thus it was so ordained by God. Bigot please.
Feminism is no more than an adherence to the philosophy that women should have full human and civil rights. To us the word as a pejorative belies a fundamental disagreement with that tenet. And if one of those rights- comprehensive health care- needs to be denied by murdering doctors (to keeep them from taking an innocent life), oh well. How quaint. How traditional.
To imply that gender roles imposed by sex need to be maintained and provide the blueprint for a persons destiny and societal value is primitive at best. It clearly denies all respect for person-hood as a function of thought and confines all persons to a model better suited to the care and breeding of animals than evolved social beings. Same old, same old, fundamentalist religious drivel.
JB is just another anti-woman, fundi that thinks it’s OK that medical providers for women’s health have to go about their work under the protection of Federal Marshals. Srsly. Ain’t it amazing that someone espousing 14th century religious doctrine can do it (on the Internet) with all the tech progress the intervening 600 years can bring to bear?
His arguments are disingenuous and meant to misdirect the argument from domestic terrorism to less clear-cut realms.
Make no mistake, JB is just a reflection of the same culture that would put your mothers, wives, daughters and sisters in Burqa’s and tell them they can’t leave the house without permission of a male. The abortion argument is the tip of the spear.
http://andreaweckerlecopywriting.typepad.com/new_millennium_pr/2005/12/burqa_barbie.html
Jim Byrne Writes: Do you really expect me to know what was in the mind of the shooter?
Me: no. I do expect you to know and be able to articulate what is on your mind.
Jim: Ask yourself this; If Tiller had not been killed, would he likely have performed another abortion in the near future? –The answer is Yes.
Me: so what? he did nothing illegal and if you talk to any of his patients i think you might find that he did good, that he helped them through a difficult time. When late term abortions are performed it is not through whim — it is really really difficult to terminate a pregnancy older than 12 weeks. It is because there is serious harm to the mother.
Do you know Jim, that when a fetus dies, an abortion is not performed in most instances? Labor is induced and a woman has to go through the whole labor process as if she is giving birth to a live neonate instead of to a dead one. You did not know that, did you?
Jim: If I was someone who had the intent of stopping him, by any means necessary, could I see the shooting as justified? The answer is Yes. –Fortunately, that is not my calling in life. I didn’t have the need for such justification.
Me: so you only advocate murder from the sidelines. how lovely for yo.
Jim: I’m not going to tell you that it’s ok to break the law, and I’m sure not going to condone anyone else doing such.
Me: you just did that. you saw this murder as justified because Dr Tiller is not able to perform abortions. You may no have the intent to stop him yourself, but you don’t mind if someone else does it for you.
Jim: As far as being done with me…Fine. I may shed a few tears, but I’ll manage to survive.
Me: this makes you a coward.
Jim Byrne writes: Are you prepared to let the paternal donor be absolved of his responsibilities if, when notified, he makes a clear statement that he wants nothing to do with having a child?
Me: the paternal donor? you are kidding right? Fathers of actual real live children abandon their parental responsibilities everyday, abdicating the decisions about schools, medical care, housing and nutrition without a second thought. And you want pregnant women who made the mistake of hooking up with bounders like these to have to carry unwanted pregnancies to term? For what possible reason? to what end and to whose benefit?
Christian anti abortion groups love to talk about how much they love what they call the unborn. Right up until the moment they are born and the dollars to care for them means funding programs for unwed mothers, or welfare or before/after school daycare programs. And when unwanted children grow into youthful offenders or adult criminals they are happy to house them, then, in prisons or sentence them to death.
Jim: Doesn’t he have a right (make that a duty) to mitigate his damages? If he is willing to pay for half the cost of an abortion…that should be the limit of his responsibility.
Me: If a man who impregnates a woman wants rights then half the birth control responsibilities ought to be his as well.
Jim: Sorry ladies. You can’t have the decision be all yours, unless you willing to make the responsibility all yours too.
Me: Women do take the majority of the responsibilities. And because it is their uterus and because the impact of bringing a child into the world largely falls to them, then the medical decision to abort or not belongs to her. exclusively.
as Gloria Steinem once wrote: If men could become pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
She was right 30 years ago when she wrote those words and is still right today.
Sorry ladies. You can’t have the decision be all yours, unless you willing to make the responsibility all yours too.
—
Wanna bet?
You answered everyone here except the doctor in the house.
It is a woman’s choice whether to continue with HER pregnancy.
A woman’s decision to abort is not just about whether or not to ever produce offspring, it is a medical one made privately in consultation with her physician because it also concerns HER body which also includes HER physical AND psychological well-being.
The two cannot be separated unless male, of course, and done without consulting anyone else.
Good luck with that!
On a personal note, the fastest way to get a woman to decide never to want to have family WITH you, is to force her to do so against her will. You’ll ‘pay’ all right and so will everyone else, unfortunately.
Slartibartfast,
If a women is found to be burdened with a parasite, the occurance of which, a man is admittedly partially responsible for, fails to seek out or take advantage of a opportunity that was reasonably available to her under the circumstances, to rid herself of such parasite, then the amount of damages awarded may be reduced by the amount she could have reasonably realized if she had taken advantage of such opportunity.
Our laws are such that when choices are left solely in the hands of others, we are not required to incur additional costs because of their decision.
Put another way; If we were building a shed, and my hammer hit your thumb…splitting it wide open…and you chose to keep working rather than seek medical assistance. And I told you to stop working and see a doctor, but you did not. Then infection set in..and you ended up losing your arm. –How much do you think I would be responsible for? My carelesness caused the initial damage…your failure to seek medical services is what cost you your arm.
Well Ollie (Mike), this is a fine mess you’ve gotten us into. :>)
If the embry is defined as a human being, with all the rights therefored afforded; why are we permitting them to be frozen in the first place? (I know..some/many already exist)
If such rights were granted, this would present a transitional dilemna. Responsibility would be noticed, and the opportunity to implant or donate would be made available. If neither option is desired; they may become wards of the state.
I’m sure we’re sharp enough to come up with something that is workable.
Jim B,
For the record, I’m a man not a woman. I was just pointing out that by your own logic, neither of us have an opinion which should be considered on the issue of abortion – and that I’m willing to agree to that if you stand by it. The question of a father’s paternal rights and obligations is an interesting one. When most (if not all) of the laws regarding parenthood were written it was practically impossible to establish paternity and trivial to establish maternity while now both can be established beyond reasonable doubt. In light of this maybe these laws should be rethought (and by people with a better understanding of the law than me). That being said, I don’t think that the father has the right to interfere with the mother’s right to choose (not until he can carry the fetus to term or it can be done outside a womb). The responsibility from conception to birth is completely in the hands of the mother so again, by your own arguments, the decision should be as well.
Gyges,
Do you really expect me to know what was in the mind of the shooter?
Ask yourself this; If Tiller had not been killed, would he likely have performed another abortion in the near future? –The answer is Yes. If I was someone who had the intent of stopping him, by any means necessary, could I see the shooting as justified? The answer is Yes. –Fortunately, that is not my calling in life. I didn’t have the need for such justification.
I’m not going to tell you that it’s ok to break the law, and I’m sure not going to condone anyone else doing such.
As far as being done with me…Fine. I may shed a few tears, but I’ll manage to survive.
Okay, kids, since the topic has switched from murder to the definition of life, let’s make it more interesting. If all scientists were to agree that the formation of a zygote constitutes the beginning of human life (and if the law were to adopt that definition), it would automatically follow that a human embryo is a person under the law. I assume that Mr. Byrne would agree, based upon his own arguments, that the creation and cryogenic storage of human embryos is gravely immoral (not to mention an act of battery and false arrest). I assume he would also agree that every time a frozen embryo is discarded, it is an act of murder. Where does this lead us?
Jim,
I’m done with you until you’re willing to admit that your statement, “If the person that killed Tiller did so to protect the life of another; it may be morally justified,” when taken with your attempts to prove that any abortion is the taking of a human life is an attempt to justify a murder.
I don’t talk to people that hide behind statements like “I merely explored the possibility that it could be morally justified by someone.”
The murder of Dr. Tiller by an anti-tax, anti-government, violent pro-life activist challenges our society. This murderer can expect to be fairly tried. As apposed to the execution he administered Dr. Tiller.
Thank you for the justice lesson JT.
Carlin is a god of a comic/cosmic creator!
DOMINO, thanks for your service.
Slartibartfast,
Are you prepared to let the paternal donor be absolved of his responsibilities if, when notified, he makes a clear statement that he wants nothing to do with having a child?
Doesn’t he have a right (make that a duty) to mitigate his damages? If he is willing to pay for half the cost of an abortion…that should be the limit of his responsibility.
Sorry ladies. You can’t have the decision be all yours, unless you willing to make the responsibility all yours too.
Jim Byrne,
You raised an interesting hypothetical:
If we acquire the capability to sustain the life of the fetus, outside of the uteris, at 3 weeks of gestation; would you limit abortions to only those prior to 3 weeks?
Suppose this were the case and abortions after 3 weeks were illegal, but from 3 weeks until birth, mothers could have their children removed and sever all of their parental rights and obligations (those obligations that people like you are so eager to thrust upon people, but unwilling to help with). The 3 week old fetus is now a ward of the state – who pays for it? Would you and the rest of the pro-life crowd take responsibility for the fetus and child until it reaches adulthood?