• June 2009
    S M T W T F S
    « May   Jul »
  • Dave's Dominion...Where opinion, news, and fact sometimes converge into one glorious mess!

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Blog Directory - OnToplist.com
  • Advertisements

Abortion Doctor Murdered

Tiller 120608

Doctor George Tiller, dubbed by some as “Tiller, the Baby Killer” was gunned down on Sunday in the foyer of his own church in Wichita, Kansas.  Authorities announced the suspect is 51-year old Scott P. Roeder.  It appears that he acted alone.

Tiller, 67, was a controversial figure and one of the few doctors in the country performing late-term abortions at his clinic in Wichita.  He had previously been shot and wounded in both arms in 1993.  He was shot once just after 10:00 AM  on Sunday as he stood in the lobby of Reformation Lutheran Church where he was serving as an usher.  The gunman apparently also threatened to shoot two men who attempted to apprehend him.  The suspect was arrested without incident about three hours later on I-35.

As some of you probably know, I am completely opposed to abortion in most situations and I believe that what Tiller was doing in his clinic was morally wrong and, some think, legally wrong since he was involved in ongoing legal battles.  However, the outright murder of ANY person, regardless of their involvement in such practices, is categorically wrong.  The suspect should and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and, in my opinion, should face the death penalty as well.


7 Responses

  1. Is it wrong to kill one in order to save many, especially when it’s killing a killer in order to save children? Hell, you’re advocating for Roeder’s death, so where does that leave you?

    I find that I can’t bring myself to condemn Roeder – or whoever killed Tiller – for his deed. I’m saddened that he went outside the law, and agree he must be prosecuted, but the law and what is right and wrong are not the same thing.

    • This boils down to, “who is the final arbiter of laws and punishment?” We’ve given that authority to our government due to our representative government we’re all accustomed to. This is the construct within which we have chosen to work as frustrating as it may sometimes be. If we go “outside” of the laws to implement what we deem as justice then we open the doors to others to do the same according to their views of justice. I think Martin Luther King and Gandhi are the pinnacle of people to emulate to try and implement constructive change in a society. People who take the law into their hands like this take the easy road in an attempt to force their way on society and individuals. To go the way of Gandhi or MLK requires character, integrity, and perseverance. What he did is not in any way noble or justified. Anyone can pull a trigger. After that act of murder he became the very thing he sought to prevent.

      • Agreed. I couldn’t have said it any better.

      • theflakes,

        If we were talking about a normal abortionist I would completely agree with you, as I would agree with you in the point of ““who is the final arbiter of laws and punishment.”

        But, in fact, we’re discussing a man who killed late term – 3rd trimester – babies, often through partial birth abortions. That’s a rather heinous practice in and of itself, though still marginally legal.

        We also don’t know if Roeder killed Tiller out of desire to exact punishment or to enact societal change – or merely a desire to make this most egregious form infanticide stop. There were only a very few – two I think – doctors performing the procedures. Now there is one less, which might leave only one.

  2. That leaves me, theoretically at least, supporting the death penalty for convicted killers. I don’t remember the last time an unborn child was convicted of murder. Being pro-life in terms of an INNOCENT unborn child and supporting the death penalty for a GUILTY murderer are completely different things.

    While you’re correct that the law and right/wrong are not always the same thing, you are dead wrong that Roeder shouldn’t be condemned. If he’s convicted, the law will see fit that that is exactly what happens.

  3. Ahhh…we have a semantics problem. By “condemn” I meant that I could honestly say that believe that Roeder was morally wrong in killing Tiller.

    That he broke the law is without question, as is the fact that he must be punished under that law or the greater good of society. That doesn’t make him wrong in my eyes.

  4. I see…We still don’t agree but I see where you’re coming from.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: