|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics & Religion » Right to Life, Right to Murder

Default Right to Life, Right to Murder

May 31st, 2009, 20:24
Well well, the first terrorist attack on American soil under Obama's watch just appears to have happened. I wonder how he'll react?

[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8076253.stm ]
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#1

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

May 31st, 2009, 20:38
Interesting. Wonder how this will play out. Completely against late-term abortions, but also against shooting people dead who disagree with me. I wonder how this is going to be spun by religious people? Tempted to throw on fox news to see if Hannity and o'reilly attack atheists somehow for this.
Rithrandil is offline

Rithrandil

I bent my wookie

#2

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: VA
Posts: 2,299

Default 

June 1st, 2009, 01:06
I'm sure it's all the fault of liberal activist hispanic chick lady atheist judges or something.

Very sobering occurrence. Apparently they've got someone in custody already.
Suspect Held

I also find late term abortions a very questionable practice and would like to see them not happen except in last resort cases where the mother's life is at stake, but I find the language in this disclaimer from an anti-abortion group kind of strange:

Anti-abortion groups denounced the shooting and stressed that they support only nonviolent protest. The movement's leaders fear the killing could create a backlash..

"We are shocked at this morning's disturbing news that Mr. Tiller was gunned down," Troy Newman, Operation Rescue's president, said in a statement. "Operation Rescue has worked for years through peaceful, legal means, and through the proper channels to see him brought to justice.
"Brought to justice" is a little strong for someone who is not actually breaking any laws. And someone hasn't been working entirely through peaceful legal means during many years of harassment and protests at this clinic, including shooting the guy in both arms once before, trashing his surveillance system, and and among other "peaceful protests," vandalizing his roof, so that the whole clinic had to be "fortified."

Sounds like the war zone it is, I guess. I don't imagine any statement of Obama's tomorrow will be anything but pouring oil on troubled waters, but I suppose the WH could surprise everyone with some condemnation of vigilante justice.

Where there's smoke, there's mirrors.
magerette is offline

magerette

magerette's Avatar
Hedgewitch
RPGWatch Team

#3

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,929

Default 

June 1st, 2009, 01:39
Obama's first statement's out:

"I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence." (6:21 p.m.)
A bit stronger than I expected.

Where there's smoke, there's mirrors.
magerette is offline

magerette

magerette's Avatar
Hedgewitch
RPGWatch Team

#4

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,929

Default 

June 1st, 2009, 18:13
Originally Posted by magerette View Post
A bit stronger than I expected.
That's pretty much exactly what I expected. Obama's characterization of it as a heinous act of violence and murder was the right thing to emphasize since one side of the "right to life" issue already sees it that way, and some folks on the other side need to be reminded of it.

I remember reading a book about thirty-five years ago by Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, where he explained how society has difficulty making fundamental distinctions about life and predicted that the advancement of medical science would create a dilemma by blurring the lines between where life begins and ends.

It looks like he was right, though the debate about euthanasia is nothing compared to the one about abortion. Unfortunately, he concluded that it could never be solved and would only get worse.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#5

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

June 1st, 2009, 18:47
Originally Posted by Squeek View Post
It looks like he was right, though the debate about euthanasia is nothing compared to the one about abortion
.
Euthanasia's still mostly illegal though, god knows how divisive an issue it'd be if it was.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#6

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

June 1st, 2009, 18:49
Good article in the guardian discussing the wider context link
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#7

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

June 1st, 2009, 19:32
Though I would certainly expect someone on the other side of this issue to speak out bluntly in rejection of what just happened, I thought some of Filipovic's conclusions were knee-jerk. She made some legitimate points but seemed determined to provoke ugly reaction and rejection of what she clearly feels are ugly people.

She's right to encourage mainstream right-to-lifers to reconsider the consequences of some of their actions (and raised some good points) but wrong to insist that they share the blame for this murder. It was an individual act, and we would all be better off understanding that.

Rick Warren is an example of a high-profile right-to-lifer. He was able to broach the subject calmly and sensibly in the presidential debate. Obama didn't agree with his point of view but was able to say so without rejecting Warren or anyone else. That's how the mainstream does it.

Obama got it right. Filipovic's article was ill-considered and went too far.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#8

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

June 2nd, 2009, 13:53
Originally Posted by Squeek View Post
She's right to encourage mainstream right-to-lifers to reconsider the consequences of some of their actions (and raised some good points) but wrong to insist that they share the blame for this murder. It was an individual act, and we would all be better off understanding that.
I think her conclusion is spot on personally. There were sections of websites giving daily updates of his movements, along with endless inflammatory language calling him a baby murderer.

What the hell was that about if not about setting the scene for an "individual act" to just, obviously TOTALLY unexpectedly, happen? Remember - this was not the first time this had happened, he'd already survived an assassination attempt in 1993 in which he was also shot although not fatally. If it really had been a shock that anyone would go taking the law into their own hands, that is the point at which people would have backed the fuck off and stopped posting full details of his comings & goings.

I agree there are some mainstream anti choicers that wouldn't have wanted this to happen, but there is still a disgustingly prevalent element in a supposedly "mainstream" movement that at the very least laid the groundwork for this "individual act".
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#9

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

June 2nd, 2009, 13:57
Let's try my favorite trick, the substitution test.

Suppose some group of people were constantly hammering that George W. Bush is a traitor, murderer, and war criminal. Suppose the same people set up a network of observers to monitor his comings and goings. Suppose they published this information on the Web in real time. Then suppose somebody went and whacked him.

Could this group of people in good conscience claim that they're completely innocent of the assassination?
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#10

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

June 2nd, 2009, 14:03
Originally Posted by Prime Junta View Post
Let's try my favorite trick, the substitution test.

Suppose some group of people were constantly hammering that George W. Bush is a traitor, murderer, and war criminal. Suppose the same people set up a network of observers to monitor his comings and goings. Suppose they published this information on the Web in real time. Then suppose somebody went and whacked him.

Could this group of people in good conscience claim that they're completely innocent of the assassination?
Especially if there had been a previous failed assassination attempt which highlighted the fact that there are some "individuals" who might do something so totally unexpected . . .
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#11

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

June 2nd, 2009, 16:35
Also, take into account that this isn't even the first murder by ironically named pro-lifers.

IMO there is more than enough evidence that the anti choice tactics used create an environment in which individuals are extremely likely to step over the line, so the "mainstream" anti choice movement must accept some responsibility for the murders that occur in the environment they are working hard to create.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#12

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

June 2nd, 2009, 18:29
Originally Posted by Benedict View Post
If it really had been a shock that anyone would go taking the law into their own hands, that is the point at which people would have backed the fuck off and stopped posting full details of his comings & goings."
Thanks for explaining that, but I think the author already made that clear, and I already agree (and that's what I was referring to when I said she made some good points).

But that's not all there is to consider, and it just isn't that simple. Filipovic may not like the fact that some people consider abortion murder, but they do consider it that. And large-scale murder isn't something any normal person can ignore. It's the last thing anyone can get comfortable tolerating.

IMO, right-to-lifers should stop and take this opportunity for a reality check. They should reconsider their tactics. But what should they do, considering how they feel? Obama's answer to that (when it was put to him during the debate) was smarter than Filipovic's conclusion.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#13

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

June 2nd, 2009, 19:21
Originally Posted by Squeek View Post
Thanks for explaining that, but I think the author already made that clear, and I already agree (and that's what I was referring to when I said she made some good points).

But that's not all there is to consider, and it just isn't that simple. Filipovic may not like the fact that some people consider abortion murder, but they do consider it that. And large-scale murder isn't something any normal person can ignore. It's the last thing anyone can get comfortable tolerating.

IMO, right-to-lifers should stop and take this opportunity for a reality check. They should reconsider their tactics. But what should they do, considering how they feel? Obama's answer to that (when it was put to him during the debate) was smarter than Filipovic's conclusion.

That's how I see it, anyway.
I'm confused. So you agree that they should have backed off and stopped publishing the necessary info for someone to murder a man they were going out of their way to portray as pure evil, but you think it's wrong to say they should share some blame for the murder?

Surely if they should have backed off but didn't and as a result someone dies then they should share some blame? If you want them to take a reality check, that's not going to happen unless they actually recognise that they have contributed to a murder and accept some blame. While they still consider themselves blameless why would they take a reality check?
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#14

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

June 2nd, 2009, 19:29
This issue is too difficult and too big for black-and-white thinking, Benedict. If you're going to balk at partial agreement, then good luck trying to wrap your mind around this problem.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#15

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

June 3rd, 2009, 00:58
I think Squeek is correct when he says this can't be reduced to B&W thinking. Do a hypothetical and try to put yourself in the shoes of people who totally believe that abortion is MURDER. Now, what are the consequences of that thinking? Not simple is it? Capital Punishment is a similar non- B&W issue. I don't believe murder is the correct response to another perceived murder, but I can certainly understand the motivation. Stretching an analogy somewhat ( ) Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer and many people believed he needed to be 'taken out'. People cheered when he was executed. Some anti-abortionists see doctors who perform abortions in the same light!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#16

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,387
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

June 3rd, 2009, 06:49
Originally Posted by Corwin View Post
I think Squeek is correct when he says this can't be reduced to B&W thinking. Do a hypothetical and try to put yourself in the shoes of people who totally believe that abortion is MURDER. Now, what are the consequences of that thinking? Not simple is it? Capital Punishment is a similar non- B&W issue. I don't believe murder is the correct response to another perceived murder, but I can certainly understand the motivation. Stretching an analogy somewhat ( ) Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer and many people believed he needed to be 'taken out'. People cheered when he was executed. Some anti-abortionists see doctors who perform abortions in the same light!!
That's not the point, Corwin. The point is that when one of theirs murders the abortionist, they act all shocked and deny any and all responsibility for it.

You can't have it both ways: demonize somebody as a murderer, publish his photos, address, and movements on the Internet, and then when he gets whacked, pretend like you've nothing to do with it at all.

— "I am shocked (shocked!) to discover that gambling is taking place here!"
— "Your winnings from yesterday, Inspector Reynaud."
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#17

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

June 3rd, 2009, 08:05
Hey, I'm in agreement with that too. I was only trying to defend the idea that it's not just a simple B&W debate. There are WAY too many issues in play here for simplistic solutions!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#18

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,387
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

June 3rd, 2009, 08:12
Yeah, I agree. I think it amusing, though, that some of the people seeing all the shades of gray in this case are the same ones who only see black and white when the terrorists are brown and wear beards. (I don't mean you.)
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#19

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

June 3rd, 2009, 09:00
Originally Posted by Squeek View Post
This issue is too difficult and too big for black-and-white thinking, Benedict. If you're going to balk at partial agreement, then good luck trying to wrap your mind around this problem.
Isn't accepting a share of the blame partial agreement?

I'm not saying they should march themselves down to the police station, I'm not saying that they should consider themselves full fledged murderers & fry in the chair, but they should recognise that their behaviour was a contributing factor.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#20

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics & Religion » Right to Life, Right to Murder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 18:20.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch