Abortion Doctor Geroge Tiller Murdered this morning

[aicirt]

Reformation Lutheran Church, where Tiller was a member, is in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America.

reformation-lutheran.org/aboutus/index.html

This is the ELCA’s statement about abortion:

This statement is one of the reasons I left the ELCA and converted to Catholicism. I thought it was disgustingly wishy-washy.

Do you think there are others like you who want to convert because of the ELCA abortion stand? I know of a Presbyterian who converted one reason being Catholicism’s stand against abortion. Maybe this is the good that will come from this. Maybe this church and others like it will see what we see. Very happy for you that you were led by the Holy Spirit. I have Protestant friends and I wonder how much longer they will stay in their churches with the policies they must accept.

 

[gnjsdad]

What happened in the case of George Tiller is a violent man who happened to hold pro-life beliefs, but who had no formal involvement with either a religous (as far as we know) or pro-life group decided to commit murder.

Partially blaming the pro-life movement, rather than the invididual who killed Dr. Tiller, is like blaming television for the assisination of Oswald.

No religion, or pro-life movement within a religion, promotes the illegal assisination of sinful people (with the exception of Islamic terrorists).

There is no comparsion. It isn’t even close.

I myself find it very hard to have sympathy for a hired killer like Tiller. But a perusal of this thread reveals that a significant (I don’t say large) number of people in the pro life movement subscribe to the erroneous notion that his murder is justifiable homicide. This is a problem. It needs to be forcefully addressed. These people need to be shown the errors in their thinking. When it is being shown that this man was a member of Operation Rescue for a time, it’s hard to argue that he was some kind of lone nut job. It pains me to say this, because I have a lot of sympathy and admiration for people who put themselves on the front lines in the abortion wars, but the fact remains that there is an aberrant strain of thought (that Tiller’s murder was a justifiable act) that must be removed.

 

[aimee]

I myself find it very hard to have sympathy for a hired killer like Tiller. But a perusal of this thread reveals that a significant (I don’t say large) number of people in the pro life movement subscribe to the erroneous notion that his murder is justifiable homicide. This is a problem. It needs to be forcefully addressed. These people need to be shown the errors in their thinking. When it is being shown that this man was a member of Operation Rescue for a time, it’s hard to argue that he was some kind of lone nut job. It pains me to say this, because I have a lot of sympathy and admiration for people who put themselves on the front lines in the abortion wars, but the fact remains that there is an aberrant strain of thought (that Tiller’s murder was a justifiable act) that must be removed.

justifiable homicide?? or ‘karma’

 

[adamsapple]

To be even*** clearer***…then using your reasoning,Tiller and his killer are “kindred” rationalists, they believe it is right to** take a life,in exchange for others.** Clear?

In exchange for whose life??

 

[St_Francis]

"… Are there no prison, no workhouses? … I help to support the establishments I have mentioned-they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there.’ " Ebenezer Scrooge “A Christmas Carol”

You are correct, starvation in the U.S. is uncommon, hunger is not (or, as the Bush administration called it “food insecurity”) . The existing programs help, but do not cure the problem - they prevent starvation, but not hunger. It is not known how many children will be permanently damaged by poor nutrition.

I was responding in a series of posts the first of which claimed that children were dying of hunger in the USA because of conservative policies. When I asked the poster to give some sources for this information, he refused on the grounds that the sources had been previously decried as unreliable liberal sources here.

frac.org/html/hunger_in_the_us/hunger_index.html

However, at least 18,000 Americans die every year because they have no access to medical care. A couple years ago a child in Baltimore died because he had an infected tooth. His mother didn’t have the $80 to pay a dentist to treat him. The infiection spread to his brain and he died (after running up a $250,000 bill at the hospital that admitted him when the problem became medical).

And there are people who die under universal health care systems because it takes so long to get seen or because the treatment is rationed… *Every *system has its difficulties.

The “pro-life” govenor (who also can be very pious about what a fine Christian he is) in my state just made massive cuts to the medical programs so more children and adults can go without necessary medical care.

I am unable to find any information on these cuts, but we are in an economic situation which has caused a lot of problems, which are reflected in tax revenues.

And all because conservatives think tax cuts for the wealthy are more important than programs that help people.

Yes, conservatives realize that taxing the wealthy unfairly causes problems and decreases revenues to the state. Most proponents of tax increases for the wealthy are more interested in punishing the wealthy by redistributing the money they earned and fomenting class envy than they are in enacting fair and sensible tax structures which will maximize tax revenues.

Like so many prolifers the governor loses all interest in a child’s well being once it’s born. Then they’re on their own and if they made the mistake of being born into a poor family, it’s just their tough luck.

This is simply calumny, which is sinful. Among other things, conservatives give more money to charity than do liberals, who simply work to force other people to support charitable enterprises and call *that *compassion.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

I myself find it very hard to have sympathy for a hired killer like Tiller. But a perusal of this thread reveals that a significant (I don’t say large) number of people in the pro life movement subscribe to the erroneous notion that his murder is justifiable homicide. This is a problem. It needs to be forcefully addressed. These people need to be shown the errors in their thinking. When it is being shown that this man was a member of Operation Rescue for a time, it’s hard to argue that he was some kind of lone nut job. It pains me to say this, because I have a lot of sympathy and admiration for people who put themselves on the front lines in the abortion wars, but the fact remains that there is an aberrant strain of thought (that Tiller’s murder was a justifiable act) that must be removed.

That’s why I said, “no world religion promotes the *illegal assisination of a sinner *(except terrorist)”.

Brutal killings occur in some Muslim countries, but these are not condoned by the theocracy if done in an illegal manner.

Religious institutions, without exception, do not promote any illegal acts of violence. War is not an illegal act of violence. The death penalty is not an illegal act of violence. They are lawful exceptions to the taking of human life.

The argument that we belong to a different morality, thererfore may justify this killing, is very flawed. Crusade metaphors are being brought up. Here’s the big difference… crusades were undertaken by theocratic governments. We don’t belong to a theocratic government, and unless you propose ceding from the Union and creating your own, the idea fails as justification.

If you condone this illegal action, you break from the lawful protection of the United States government. That’s serious. That’s foolish with severe consequenes. That is walking away from the civil rights you are afforded as a citizen. That will not change what is happening in this country with abortion.

This murder was not justifable homicide. It was illegal. That rhetoric needs to stop and needs to be taken seriously.

This rhetoric will destroy the pro-life movement, because it is inherently anti-life. I pray that the pro-life movement will move deliberately to promote peaceful non-violence and the upholding of its values through education. It may not change a thing, but it is without any doubt the only way of preventing abortions.

EVEN IF abortion became illegal tomorrow, abortions would occur. Morally wrong and self-destructive acts on the part of other people cannot be stopped by force. Those people must be changed from the inside out, and only love and God’s grace will reach them and change their minds.

 

[gnjsdad]

justifiable homicide?? or ‘karma’

I can accept ‘karma’ (reaping what one sows) but not self defense or other rationalizations.

 

[joe_clark]

Enough of this could’ve, would’ve. Tiller wasn’t robbed of any chance. He didn’t need it was more like it.

What’s done is done. If it wasn’t time for Tiller to checkout, God would not allow his death. Nothing that was done that was not allowed by God. He would know if the heart is capable of changing. Even you living 'til this day is because God allows you to.

And you know this because you talked to Tiller? Did you talk to the church and recieve this information? Roe of v Wade turned away from abortion and to the Lord. What makes you believe the Lord is fresh out of miracles? I’m not feeling charity or much compassion here, only more anger because Tiller’s death will be used to lump everyone into his world including anyone pro-life, is that it?

God does not allow one to kill another, like the gun, they don’t get up by themselves and kill people…People kill people. This is where responsibility should meet the road. The happy harry feelings of God won’t let anyone die or live is rubbish. The lord gave us all free will and a brain to use. We are all responsible one way or another. Everyone that posted his name, address phone number pictures, O’reilly putting him in the media, everyone that wished him death, or ill will, are responsible. The shooter as well as the rest of us enjoyed the retoric, the only difference is the shooter acted on it and murdered a human being. If anyone wants to go with the eye for an eye routine, just be ready for the response. So what I am hearing is, some people can’t wait for another, and maybe to a church near you, because that is what is coming. It needs to stop now. My way or the highway is not going to work today because when you push people today, they push back.

You will only find violence when you sew the seeds of anger.

 

[gnjsdad]

That’s why I said, “no world religion promotes the *illegal assisination of a sinner *(except terrorist)”.

Brutal killings occur in some Muslim countries, but these are not condoned by the theocracy if done in an illegal manner.

Religious institutions, without exception, do not promote any illegal acts of violence. War is not an illegal act of violence. The death penalty is not an illegal act of violence. They are lawful exceptions to the taking of human life.

The argument that we belong to a different morality, thererfore may justify this killing, is very flawed. Crusade metaphors are being brought up. Here’s the big difference… crusades were undertaken by theocratic governments. We don’t belong to a theocratic government, and unless you propose ceding from the Union and creating your own, the idea fails as justification.

If you condone this illegal action, you break from the lawful protection of the United States government. That’s serious. That’s foolish with severe consequenes. That is walking away from the civil rights you are afforded as a citizen. That will not change what is happening in this country with abortion.

This murder was not justifable homicide. It was illegal. That rhetoric needs to stop and needs to be taken seriously.

This rhetoric will destroy the pro-life movement, because it is inherently anti-life. I pray that the pro-life movement will move deliberately to promote peaceful non-violence and the upholding of its values through education. It may not change a thing, but it is without any doubt the only way of preventing abortions.

EVEN IF abortion became illegal tomorrow, abortions would occur. Morally wrong and self-destructive acts on the part of other people cannot be stopped by force. Those people must be changed from the inside out, and only love and God’s grace will reach them and change their minds.

Thanks for the clarification. I completely agree.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

I myself find it very hard to have sympathy for a hired killer like Tiller.But there is an aberrant strain of thought (that Tiller’s murder was a justifiable act) that must be removed.

This incident has caused a firestorm of emotions and we must not cloud the issue by singling out those who condone the killing of a killer or not.
We’re all simply** venting**,** trying to sort it all out****; bouncing it off of each other**; searching for meaning in all of this…this is what a healthy discussion/debate is all about. Maybe a fruitful dialogue will ensue after the smoke clears.
For now, we can all have our say, can we not? I mean, I think we can all agree on this much-
regardless of what we think, God will have the final say.
“For we have here, no lasting city…”

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

In exchange for whose life??

“** It is poverty to think that you can kill a child , so that you can live as you please**…”
(Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta)

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

:banghead:
For all we know, he could have had a miraculous moment of repentance and conversion during the service, and decided to close his clinic. Now, we’ll never know.

Nor do we have to, God knows-that’s all that matters.

 

[adamsapple]

“** It is poverty to think that you can kill a child , so that you can live as you please**…”
(Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta)

You didn’t answer the question. Whose life are you referring to?

 

[lil_flower_luv]

You didn’t answer the question. Whose life are you referring to?

Didn’t Tiller claim to be performing abortions on women to save their lives? Isn’t “health” of the mother a requirement (that he willfully violated) in order to legally obtain this “service”?

 

[TMC]

Let’s put the Pro-Life position in the perspective of world opinion, shall we?

Rather than the pro-life movement being a radical and violent deviation from religous doctrine and teaching (as Islamic terrorism relates to the Muslim position as a whole throughout the world), the pro-life position is upheld by every major world religion except Judiasm.

freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1442381/posts

Therefore, the majority of pro-choice people are atheist or agnostic, and if not, either part of a Jewish, very liberal Protestant, or pagan (though there are big exceptions here, too) religious system.

The vast majority of conservative religious people in all areas of the world and all major world religions are strongly pro-life. It is the default position, not the aberrant position.

Just in the interest of accuracy, I don’t think you are right here. There are sects within Christianity, Buddism, Hinduism and Islam that allow for abortion within certain limits. Given that the vast majority of all people are deists or believers of some sort, it seems highly unlikely that the majority of pro-choice people could be atheist or agnostic. For example, the US is split pretty evenly between pro-life and pro-choice, and the US is about 78% Christian, with another 5% members of other major religions. Only about 5% of Americans consider themselves agnostic or atheist.

I agree with your core point that the pro-life position is not radical or isolated, but it is not as clearly identified with mainstream religion as you portray. There are religious people that are pro-choice, and atheists that are pro-life. The consistent discriminator is when people believe that life (or more accurately, personhood) begins. An atheist that believes a human person begins at conception is likely to be pro-life. A Christian or Muslim that believes that true humanity begins at quickening or later is likely to favor limited abortion rights. The difference in opinion does not stem from a difference in opinion over how to treat people, it comes from a difference in opinion over when people start being people.

 

[adamsapple]

Didn’t Tiller claim to be performing abortions on women to save their lives? Isn’t “health” of the mother a requirement (that he willfully violated) in order to legally obtain this “service”?

The health of the mother doesn’t necessarily mean she would die if she gave birth. I don’t think he ever said that all his patients would die if they didn’t get an abortion.

 

[jimpres]

Flower,

I do believe he did the abortions for the mother’s health. But at 8 months, seems someone waited to long. The procedure at that late in the pregnancy is ugly.

The priests for life have descriptions etc. of the procedure…

priestsforlife.org/

 

[rlg94086]

Sure, the same sorrow He felt when Satan fell from grace…

Exactly. We are supposed to be perfect…like Our Heavenly Father is perfect. We can’t force sorrow, of course, so I apologize if my earlier posts seemed to infer that. However, if we incline our hearts toward God, we will feel sorrow for Dr. Tiller. He was a fallen being…as we all are. It doesn’t mean that our sorrow for the souls of the many children whose lives he helped to terminate is any less.

 

[DeoSalvatoreMeo]

I think it’s really disturbing that Tiller arranged for the “moms” (his words) to be photographed with their dead “babies” (his words) after he killed them. He admitted to killing 60,000 babies (his words). Most abortion supporters try to gloss over the fact that abortion is murder by denying that they are babies in the womb. Tiller didn’t. In fact, he specialized in viable, late-term cases. One of the testimonies that I read of a former “patient” of Tiller’s, said that most women were sedated and don’t remember the actual delivery of their baby, but this woman clearly remembers Tiller tossing her dead baby’s body to the side before continuing his “work” on her. He even had a crematorium at his office where he would burn the bodies. There are pictures of the flue stack from the crematorium on this website: dr-tiller.com/rites.htm . This was a very sick man. He did things that the Nazis did under the guise of promoting women’s health. It is a great tragedy that someone killed Tiller and turned him into a pro-abortion martyr. It is a great tragedy that he never turned from his evil ways, like Dr. Bernard Nathanson, to become a force for good.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

Just in the interest of accuracy, I don’t think you are right here. There are sects within Christianity, Buddism, Hinduism and Islam that allow for abortion within certain limits. Given that the vast majority of all people are deists or believers of some sort, **Saying you believe in a Supreme Being is not the same thing as being a follower of a religion **it seems highly unlikely that the majority of pro-choice people could be atheist or agnostic. For example, the US is split pretty evenly between pro-life and pro-choice, and the US is about 78% Christian, with another 5% members of other major religions. Only about 5% of Americans consider themselves agnostic or atheist.

I agree with your core point that the pro-life position is not radical or isolated, but it is not as clearly identified with mainstream religion as you portray. There are religious people that are pro-choice, and atheists that are pro-life. The consistent discriminator is when people believe that life (or more accurately, personhood) begins. An atheist that believes a human person begins at conception is likely to be pro-life. A Christian or Muslim that believes that true humanity begins at quickening or later is likely to favor limited abortion rights. The difference in opinion does not stem from a difference in opinion over how to treat people, it comes from a difference in opinion over when people start being people.

The statement is that the official position of all major world religions (Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddism) with the exception of Judiasm is to oppose abortion. That is an accurate statement.

The fact that 78% of people purport believing in a Supreme Being perhaps clarifies the statement that by adding “other non-relgious” to the atheists, agnostics, liberal Protestants and pagans who do not oppose abortion. Those “other non-religous” who happen to believe in God are not followers or a religious tradition.

If you don’t believe that opposition to abortion is “clearly identifed” with major world religions, then back up that statement with facts on the percentage of religious followers within the whole group who do not oppose abortion. Because some sect here or there condones abortion isn’t evidence.

In fact, the majority of Protestants either condemn abortions or concede it is acceptable in very limited cases. So, Christianity as a whole is associated wtih being in opposition to abortion. As are the other world religions, except Judiasm.