Forums | MacLife

Look, I'm not any happier that this guy is dead, and I strongly believe his killer should go to prison for a long time - particularly since it was clearly premeditated. Let me reiterate that the shooter is wrong in every possible way you can be wrong. I don't agree with what he did at all.

All I'm saying is that by being a high-profile abortionist who specifically performs late-term abortions (that many consider infanticide), you really can't be all that surprised when someone comes after you. I have no doubt that most of Tillers cases were probably medically necessary, and I don't doubt that he was probably a good doctor. It still doesn't ease the tensions that a lot of people feel about killing an unborn child.

This is NOT similar to the civil rights movement either. The difference being that black people can't help being black, but Tiller had control over his career choices and public profile (for the most part).

Bat wrote:

The latter, tho I wouldn't swear to it. And altho technically true, most rifles characterized as military wouldn't likely be called '.22' in the same sentence.

Technically, the 5.56mm Nato round is a .22 caliber round. That often confuses people in the media. Let's remember that it's our very same media that doesn't now the difference between a squad and a squadron, and will refer to a fully automatic assualt pistol as a machine gun.

Farmerkev wrote:

bratboy wrote:

Daddyo wrote:

"reap what you sow" does not assign a value one way or another, it simply means that one's previous acts influenced the outcome.

I suppose it could be used to indicate something positive (unlikely), but the phrase most certainly does carry a value judgment.  Good follows good, evil follows evil.  The man was murdered.  I think there's a judgment of value in there for this particular speaker.

Of course there is a value judgement.
Everyone here has been making value judgements.

Actually, I think if you review my comments here, I don't think they fit with your characterization. At least about the event and alleged perp.

OTOH, commenting on other comments...yeah.

Last edited by daemon (2009-06-03 9:03 am)

radarman wrote:

All I'm saying is that by being a high-profile abortionist who specifically performs late-term abortions (that many consider infanticide), you really can't be all that surprised when someone comes after you. I have no doubt that most of Tillers cases were probably medically necessary, and I don't doubt that he was probably a good doctor. It still doesn't ease the tensions that a lot of people feel about killing an unborn child.

There is a very big different between knowing of risk and having a reasonable expectation of it or even more to justifying it.  Someone breaking into someone's house at night has a reasonable expectation of getting hurt or killed.  Someone doing his legal job that some people don't like is not by any stretch of the imagination.

radarman wrote:

This is NOT similar to the civil rights movement either. The difference being that black people can't help being black, but Tiller had control over his career choices and public profile (for the most part).

MLK was not killed because he was black, he was killed because of what he fought and stood for.  Had he been white and still garnered the same support and message he would still be just as big of a target.

P.S. rez despite your doubt I do believe it's a great analogy.

Seems there'll be no autopsy. (I can't find any reference to it.) Is that standard?

Here's the one piece about a gun:

"We did not find a weapon on him. He did not have a weapon on his person," said Lt. Mike Pfannenstiel of the Johnson County Sheriff's Department.

So, AP has updated a detail or two:

Scott Roeder was charged with murder and aggravated assault Tuesday. He is accused of killing Dr. George Tiller with a single gunshot as the doctor handed out programs Sunday while ushering at the Lutheran church he attended.

Single shot. To the head? Heart? Groin?

Burgess ordered Roeder held without bail and barred him from communicating with Tiller's family and the two witnesses he allegedly assaulted before leaving the church and driving away.

Glad that's cleared up.

Police have said it appears the gunman who shot Tiller acted alone. Roeder was arrested about three hours after the shooting near Gardner, about 170 miles northeast of Wichita. His last known address is in Kansas City, Mo

Seems like everything's cleared up now.

Last edited by daemon (2009-06-03 10:15 am)

Farmerkev wrote:

Yeah well, I'm not sure where I stand on this guy getting killed.
The survival rate for premies born at 26 weeks is 95%.
I think a very good case could be made this guy was a mass murderer that put Bundy and Gacy to shame.
It's a bit of the old "would you kill Hitler".

Yes, but he was not aborting 26 week old healthy fetuses that would not have caused considerable impairment of the mother's bodily functions (as is allowed by Kansas law). He aborted fetuses that either 1) had a serious or fatal defect that developed late in pregnancy, or 2) healthy fetuses which would have caused "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" as allowed by Kansas law with agreement of a second impartial physician.

He was tried, and acquitted earlier this year for consulting a second physician who was not completely impartial. Since he was acquitted, that means that he was operating within the law. I seriously doubt that a 'good case' could be made to justify the slaying of a private citizen operating within the bounds of the law.

sturner wrote:

Also, do not dismiss the .22 caliber rim fire cartridge. It has more then enough velocity to screw someone up when it hits a body. It is a very efficient close quarters weapon. It has been used by tunnel rats in Vietnam, as well as for clandestine assassinations. Small, low recoil, high velocity bullet within 100 meters.

Is this chitchat, or do we know what caliber of gun was used? It's been located?!

Hallelujah!!

I suppose it would be too much to expect it to confirm our suspects' prints, eh?

Farmerkev wrote:

bratboy wrote:

Daddyo wrote:

"reap what you sow" does not assign a value one way or another, it simply means that one's previous acts influenced the outcome.

I suppose it could be used to indicate something positive (unlikely), but the phrase most certainly does carry a value judgment.  Good follows good, evil follows evil.  The man was murdered.  I think there's a judgment of value in there for this particular speaker.

Of course there is a value judgement.
Everyone here has been making value judgements.

Here's another that came to mind as I was posting a new topic.

"This means simply that Obama and his administration planted new seeds for hatred and revenge against America," bin Laden said. "With that Obama has followed the same footsteps as the last president to create more hatred against Muslims.

"Let Americans prepare to reap what the leaders of the White house sow."

The Daddyo statement puts bin Laden on equal footing. Interesting.

sturner wrote:

Bat wrote:

The latter, tho I wouldn't swear to it. And altho technically true, most rifles characterized as military wouldn't likely be called '.22' in the same sentence.

Technically, the 5.56mm Nato round is a .22 caliber round. That often confuses people in the media. Let's remember that it's our very same media that doesn't now the difference between a squad and a squadron, and will refer to a fully automatic assualt pistol as a machine gun.

And at least one of you knows I know the difference. I wouldn't class the .22 rimfires as toys, but the .22 CFs are in an altogether different class. I'd not use them in the same sentence in writing a general news piece.

Chickenhawk wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

Yeah well, I'm not sure where I stand on this guy getting killed.
The survival rate for premies born at 26 weeks is 95%.
I think a very good case could be made this guy was a mass murderer that put Bundy and Gacy to shame.
It's a bit of the old "would you kill Hitler".

Yes, but he was not aborting 26 week old healthy fetuses that would not have caused considerable impairment of the mother's bodily functions (as is allowed by Kansas law). He aborted fetuses that either 1) had a serious or fatal defect that developed late in pregnancy, or 2) healthy fetuses which would have caused "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" as allowed by Kansas law with agreement of a second impartial physician.

He was tried, and acquitted earlier this year for consulting a second physician who was not completely impartial. Since he was acquitted, that means that he was operating within the law. I seriously doubt that a 'good case' could be made to justify the slaying of a private citizen operating within the bounds of the law.

Only 3 MD's in the US did what he would do.
If it was so necessary there would be more.

I am looking into whether there is a clinic here and whether they have a coordinator to for volunteer clinic guardians.

Might as well put my anti-wingnut bile to good use.

Last edited by Pariah (2009-06-03 5:16 pm)

Chickenhawk wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

Yes, but he was not aborting 26 week old healthy fetuses that would not have caused considerable impairment of the mother's bodily functions (as is allowed by Kansas law). He aborted fetuses that either 1) had a serious or fatal defect that developed late in pregnancy, or 2) healthy fetuses which would have caused "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" as allowed by Kansas law with agreement of a second impartial physician.

He was tried, and acquitted earlier this year for consulting a second physician who was not completely impartial. Since he was acquitted, that means that he was operating within the law. I seriously doubt that a 'good case' could be made to justify the slaying of a private citizen operating within the bounds of the law.

Only 3 MD's in the US did what he would do.
If it was so necessary there would be more.

Or... its a relatively rare procedure that many MDs do not wish to have to deal with the special ire of anti-abortion groups to provide.

Do you wish to refute the fact that he was operating within the bounds of the law?

He didn't break the law nor have I ever said he did.

Farmerkev wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

Yeah well, I'm not sure where I stand on this guy getting killed.
The survival rate for premies born at 26 weeks is 95%.
I think a very good case could be made this guy was a mass murderer that put Bundy and Gacy to shame.
It's a bit of the old "would you kill Hitler".

Yes, but he was not aborting 26 week old healthy fetuses that would not have caused considerable impairment of the mother's bodily functions (as is allowed by Kansas law). He aborted fetuses that either 1) had a serious or fatal defect that developed late in pregnancy, or 2) healthy fetuses which would have caused "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" as allowed by Kansas law with agreement of a second impartial physician.

He was tried, and acquitted earlier this year for consulting a second physician who was not completely impartial. Since he was acquitted, that means that he was operating within the law. I seriously doubt that a 'good case' could be made to justify the slaying of a private citizen operating within the bounds of the law.

Only 3 MD's in the US did what he would do.
If it was so necessary there would be more.

Or maybe people just don't like getting shot.