Is bombing clinics and killing abortionists moral?

  • Thread starter Thread starter grampben
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Leaving morality aside for just a moment, simply from a practical perspective, killing abortionists is the kind of thing that the abortion-rights movement lives for.

Violence against a clinic galvanizes their supporters, prompts fund-raising by the carload, allows for blanket condemnation of pro-lifers, enables media posturing, and forces politicians to support them–because the pols can’t be seen supporting domestic terrorists.

The results are so predictable that I don’t know why abortion-rights people don’t torch a clinic now and then just for the positive publicity they inevitably get. (Comment made cynically, not seriously.)
 
RobbyS said:
The civil rights movement was hardly as nonviolent as people remember. Dr. King managed to keep ther young men restrained, but not perfectly. Many policemen were injured during these protests. Arresting young, strong men against their will is like
trying to play football without padding. And most state troopers were in good shape themselves.
Click to expand...
If it were up to the protesters, no one would have had a thought on violence only protest, but the frightened racist /police/National Guard with the mace, the attack dogs and oh yea, the rifles that shot down 4 white unarmed students at a University could not allow that to happen. The only time it became violent is when the police aggitated the event, but that was their goal and intent. Only after the protesters were continually used as punching bags, did they begin to retaliate. Everyone has limits you know.

Check out any documentary on film from that time period at your local library and decide for yourself. I;m not justifying violence, just giving you the reasons it occurred.
 
The_Iambic_Pen said:
If you see a person out on the street, about to kill a child, do you think it would be morally permissible to use deadly force against the would-be killer to save the child’s life? If you say yes (which I would say), how do you have a different answer when the killer is within the walls of an abortion clinic and the child is still in the womb? I’m not advocating killing abortionists, but I do think this is an apparent contradiction we need to resolve.
Click to expand...
If you see a person out on the street, about to kill a child, it is probable that the use of deadly force against the would-be killer would actually save the child’s life.

If you kill an abortionist who is about to perform an abortion on a woman who voluntarily came into a clinic in a country where abortion is legal and common, how likely would that be to save the child’s life? Isn’t it probable that the deed will be done just a little later, by another abortionist?
 
Sadly, I have thought for a while now it was only a matter of time until something like this happened. This will not do anything to help the pro-life cause, and much to hurt it. The whole pro-life cause will be linked in the popular mind to whoever killed this doctor and you can expect the hypocrisy charges to begin.

If the way you talked about something caused someone you knew personally to commit murder and they told you they did it because of what you said, how would you feel?

The escalation in pro-life rhetoric over the past ten years or so has created an environment where it is very easy for someone to conclude that to murder this doctor was morally justified. In some way, has the harsh rhetoric about abortion contributed to this murder? If you don’t care, then do the ends justify the means? Why not advocate for wholescale vigilante justice across the country against abortion doctors? If that’s not OK, then this single act isn’t either.

I would hope that people would begin to recognize that the odds of getting Roe v. Wade overturned in this country in the next hundred years are approximately 0%, especially after an incident like this. If we understand this, I think those of us who are against abortion need to consider that the “battle” (there’s that rhetoric again!) against it needs to be fought in the consciences of individual women in this country who choose to get abortions. If every woman were convinced it was not an acceptable choice to make, there would be no abortions whether or not they were legal.

I fully expect to be attacked on the basis that the law needs to respect human life, it begins at conception, natural law, abortion is murder, etc. I don’t disagree with any of those points (maybe except the last), but we do not live in a Catholic state. We live in a secular/Protestant country, and most Catholics don’t even care or know about the theology and morals of Catholicism, so if that is the citizenry voting in this democracy, the odds of the Catholic moral and legal positions on abortion being enshrined into law are nil.

Witness to your friends and neighbors, get people to learn and accept the fundamentals, and they will accept the pro-life position and there will be fewer abortions. Bring up your kids in the faith and there will be fewer abortions in the future.

Call abortionists and women who get abortions murderers, impotently demand changes in the law affecting people who have no understanding of Catholicism, act like voting for the GOP punches your ticket to heaven, and equate anyone who differs from your view with Satan and this is what you’ll get… and Roe is no closer to being repealed.
 
Hello jpm1977, don’t be so sad, I herd about the abortionist that someone shot, but I dont think it was a Catholic and who ever it was put their own opinion to flight. It is not what a Christion would do, or even other churches. I know most protestants end even Mormons don’t believe in abortion. It was a lunny from the lunny bin that did that. When you kill someone that is sinfull you are killing them in their sin’s and you own it. Because they might have changed their minds and came to the Lord and realized they are doing an unjust thing taking a life, but to kill them, you are not doing God or country any good, things like that need love and prayers and correction, but not abuse. Cheer up God is watching he know’s your heart and sees your pain and so do I Love of Christ Nancy. 🙂
 
Why doesn’t the defense of the innocents fall under legitimate defense? (fyi-I do not support the murdering of Tiller)
 
I thought this was going to happen sooner or later. This is going to become one heck of a mess for the pro-lifers. What a drag, well, this is going to push the pro-choice movement quite a bit.

The who protection of innocense won’t count becuase a fetus does not count as alive in everyones eye’s, but a live adult person does count as a live. So, it’s like murdering, a person who has not been convicted but accused of murder in most people’s eye’s.
 
grampben said:
Are those who kill workers in abortion clinics, bomb abortion clinics etc committing righteous acts?
Click to expand...

In case anyone missed this:​

I never fully understood the contempt of some people for those who claim to be “pro-life”. Now, I think I do.

I thought a link to a page of videos was preferable to selecting one or even a handful, so that people can make up their own minds about this. MO ? This killing, and the circumstances in which it occurred, shows up the talk of self-styled “pro-lifers” as the hollow rhetoric it too often is.
 
Well, the person who killed the abortionist can’t be called pro-life anymore. It’s going to be called anti-choice. Since he killed someone, you can’t be pro-life when you kill someone, it’s just a plain logically impossible.

No, it’s not moral! Murder is murder, no matter how you spin it.
 
buffalo said:
Why doesn’t the defense of the innocents fall under legitimate defense? (fyi-I do not support the murdering of Tiller)
Click to expand...
Because some people and thank the lord , not all are trying reallly hard to jusify and or negotiate murder. But, murder is murder of any kind. There’s always a knucklehead who thinks he is the “chosen one” and or doing “Gods work.” They are also referred to as terrorist. Osama thinks he is doing Gods work too???

Who’s God and what region of the world may change. This is why religion in general gets a bad rep. It’s bad enough that a doctor was murdered, but we have cheerleaders on the sidelines burning the cigarette at both ends, speaking out of both sides of their mouths. "OOH he shot the doctor and that was not nice BUT, the babies will be saved and we can be happy about that. Can you say: Bi Polar? You can’t have it both ways, you either condemn the action of murder or condone it. I know what abortion is, and also know what faith based pre-meditated murder of a doctor is too. You stand against it or you also have blood on your hands. What’s the difference here? Nothing! Abortion here is the symptom and is being used as a free pass for murder. What’s next? Murder begats murder, live by it and die by it.

This makes religious nutty people get ideas and think they can go take people out they don’t like, like in a clinic or maybe they might visit your church? That is what creeps me out and it should creep you out. 😦
 
We all know the answer is “NO”

Where we disagree is when, how, or if defense of the innocent and just war theory could change that all cap word.

Image the world in Logan’s Run - where people are euthanized on the “lastday” (in the movie it was their 21 birthday, but for this lets so a more imaginable 50th birthday). To what extent would individuals be responsible to stop this - to what extent would other countries be responsible to stop this.

As individuals, I think acting politically and providing an underground rail road would be moral. I don’t think killing a “sleepcenter” employee would be, and I think it would be self destructive (you could save more lives by not being a criminal and being arrested). I do not know how another country would force this issue under a just war doctrine - anymore than we could force another countries mandatory, abortion enforced family size policies…
 
Of course it is easy for me to say what I did above. What if it was my wife being drug to the “sleepcenter”?
 
The catholic church allows killing in the defence of an innocent. Do not forget that right now there are several little babies resting peacefully in their mothers wombs, instead of writhing in pain from the saline Tiller would have injected, if he had the chance.
 
chain said:
Of course it is easy for me to say what I did above. What if it was my wife being drug to the “sleepcenter”?
Click to expand...
You have the right to defend your unborn child from an attack against his life, no different from frustrating the attempt of an attacker against the lives of your born children. Double effect applies here as well, the intention is to use means sufficient to stop the active attack against ones own or another’s life even if it results in the death of the attacker. The willful intention must be to subdue the intruder using only (an no more than) means sufficient to stop the attack. The intention cannot be to kill the attacker even though it is accepted that death may be an unintended consequence of the action of self defense or defense of another. No discrepancy.
We do not have the right however to proactively kill because such would indicate that the intention of ones action is to murder or cause grievous injury rather than the intent to subdue. Such action is always condemned by the Church.
 
RomeoCharlie said:
It is moral for a nation to make war on another nation when it does so to save innocent life – either of its own citizens or of its allies – provided war is used as a last resort or to stop an immediate threat.

Although you can make the same argument to defend the use of violence against abortionists, we live in a nation in which abortion is legal. We, as Catholics, are bound by the laws of our nation.
Click to expand...
Well RC I am sure glad that the founding fathers of the good old US of A did not feel the same as you when it comes to being so particular about a nation’s or government’s laws. The minutemen were not acting as a nation against another nation they were good men and women fed up with tyranny and unjust laws. If they had taken your attitude then they never would have started that nasty illegal act of revolution and a whole lot of us would not have enjoyed the freedoms gained by their lack of giving a big rat’s patootie about laws that destroyed innocent lives and liberty.😃

Sturatsfeather
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top