Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Pro-Lifers Joyful After Doctor Murdered

Sarah's picture
Thread: 

I won't link to Free Republic or their sister sites, but I can report that FoxNews is carrying comments lauding the shooter who murdered Dr. George Tiller, a Kansas women's health practitioner who did not stop offering abortion despite repeated incidents of vandalism and burglary at his clinic, and a prior attempt to kill him that resulted in gunshot wounds in both his arms.

He worked with women in the direst of circumstances, and provided them a medical treatment they desperately needed. RIP Dr. Tiller.

And to all the so-called "pro life" commenters, activists, and 'Army of God' members out there -- your bigotry, your misogyny, your murderous advocacy of lawlessness is not the way to succeed.

The violence you adore will come around to you, someday.

0
No votes yet

Comments

koshembos's picture
Submitted by koshembos on

The followers of Jesus, and other religions, forgot very fast that their lord was a socialist and a pacifist. They join bloody hands with the somewhat non-religious right wing in an orgy of violence that starts from killing people with whom they disagree and go on to commit war crimes or support them.

That's blasphemy, but it's also a tragedy.

Submitted by lambert on

Could be stronger.

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

Why do we have to add in this "but we've got to respect their viewpoint" bullshit for the so-called pro-lifers when they've just murdered a doctor?

More detail from McClatchy.

UPDATE Via Shakesville:

"Women and Families are intellectually, emotionally, spiritually, and ethically competent to struggle with complex health issues -- including abortion -- and come to decisions that are appropriate for themselves."

--George R. Tiller, M.D., DABFP, Medical Director

Damon's picture
Submitted by Damon on

Why do we have to add in this "but we've got to respect their viewpoint" bullshit for the so-called pro-lifers when they've just murdered a doctor?

I couldn't for the life of me understand this, either. It's almost like an involuntary action, for him. As far as I'm concerned, this crusade to find the truth at the center of the political spectrum even when it doesn't exist, there (and most of the time, it doesn't), is not only a sickness and insulting, but ultimately a dangerous one, because it always at least half-way legitimizes the other side, even when it obviously doesn't deserve it, and obviously when it needs absolute condemnation. You don't even have to agree with the doctors practice not to offer the other side anything in this. A man was murdered in cold blood in a house of worship; that's it; that's where it ends; that's all.

Unlike what they claim of the left, these extremist right-wingers have brought us death, and death in abundance. I don't want to hear that the left's extremist are just as generally dangerous. They aren't, period.

dr sardonicus's picture
Submitted by dr sardonicus on

Why do we have to add in this "but we've got to respect their viewpoint" bullshit for the so-called pro-lifers when they've just murdered a doctor?

Because nobody wants to stop the next bullet, that's why. For all the hoopla about the demise of the American right, you have just seen why the wingnuts will never go away, and why they wield power far beyond their numbers. Simply put, they are willing to kill in defense of their beliefs.

Damon's picture
Submitted by Damon on

I do hate to nit-pick, but I think it'd be even more correct to say that they kill because of their beliefs. I just don't want to give them anything in this debate. This was offense; dangerous, brutal, horrific offense.

I see why Kathleen Sebelius was so wary of being around George Tiller, now. Thank the FSM she got the hell out of Dodge, as they say. The backwards thing in all of this is that I bet you more than half of metropolitan Wichita is either praising his death under their breath or simply believing it to be karma.

dr sardonicus's picture
Submitted by dr sardonicus on

I lived there five years myself; I graduated from Wichita State. Wichita is a fairly tolerant place, especially by Kansas standards. I guarantee you, not many communities in the Sunflower State would have put up with an abortion doctor in their midst for any length of time. On the other hand, in rural Kansas you'll find a lot of people praising Tiller's death as you said.

Realist's picture
Submitted by Realist on

All day yesterday they called him "abortion doctor George Tiller" - this morning it's "abortion provider" which is better than nothing, I guess. It's really cute how they can simultaneously preach the sanctity of life and dehumanize someone they don't like in order to justify his murder.

If you have a strong stomach, read the comments on any of the Star's Tiller-related stories. Some of the worst have already been deleted - I posted a representative sampling on my personal blog.

Submitted by lambert on

See MacBeth.

Looking it up on dictionary.com, it seems like the noun is "under conditions specifically covered in law", but the verb is not. Interesting.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

No one is called a murderer, until a conviction.

I remember watching the Laci Peterson* case unfold, since I monitored San Fran and Sacramento news at the time, and after her body was found, the crime was referred to as murder constantly in the media, though her husband hadn't yet been convicted.

If Dr. Tiller had been found in his home, with an unexplained wound of indeterminate cause, it would be inappropriate to call it murder. But he was gunned down in broad daylight, in the view of witnesses. It's completely appropriate to call it murder.

*Crimes against women are usually referred to as murder, especially pregnant women, though that's not surprising since the number one cause of death amongst pregnant women is murder. But, I find it interesting, since I am unsure of the motive. Sometimes it's obvious, like in the case of Peterson, to gin up outrage, but also very predominant in the reaction, was the "property" crime aspect, since the husband and family were an big part of the media's focus. Laci wasn't remembered for who she was, but as a wife, daughter and potential mother, which were all a part of who she was, true, but it seemed like the horror of the story, focused on those to whom she "belonged", instead of on the ordeal she suffered.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

Westen offers a somewhat counterproductive answer to what Obama should say:

Freedom and responsibility go hand in hand. That's why I'm both pro-choice and pro-personal responsibility. Politicians shouldn't intrude on a woman or couple's most personal and painful decisions, and no one has the right to use government to impose their religious beliefs on somebody else. But that doesn't mean people should engage in unprotected sex and use abortion as a form of birth control. The best way to reduce abortions is to reduce unwanted and teen pregnancies. That means making sure every adult has access to medically accurate information and birth control, and providing honest, age appropriate sex education to our kids.

This message beat an evocative, well-branded conservative message by 19 points with the general electorate and by 20 points with swing voters. This was the only message we tested that used the term "pro-choice" that strongly appealed to voters, but it was one of the most effective ways of speaking to voters, particularly in the political center, for several reasons. It paired choice with responsibility, rather than suggesting, as the right often does, that choice implies a casual attitude toward sex, contraception, and abortion. It did not disenfranchise men from this issue the way the language of "a woman's right to choose" normally does, referring instead to "a woman or couple's most personal and painful decisions," which in most cases is actually more accurate (because although the final decision lies with the woman, most women deciding whether to have an abortion talk to the man who impregnated them). It inoculated against the right's "slippery slope" argument that Democrats really believe in "abortion on demand." And it emphasized sex education, which strong majorities of even evangelical Christians want their children to get.

First, doesn't he ultimately equate a woman or girl deciding on her own whether or not she wants to continue a pregnancy with "disenfranchising" men? Second, what's wrong with having your rights "on demand?"

Oh, and here's a good Salon piece on how devastating Tiller's death will be to the women and girls who needed his services.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

"and use abortion as a form of birth control.

What, exactly, is wrong with using abortion as a form of birth control? Isn't that what it is? And of course choice implies a more casual attitude toward sex, and reproduction. We should have a casual attitude toward sex. Trying to divorce choice from our society's fucked up views about sex, doesn't help women.

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

The subtext is fundamentally anti-sex.

It's a relatively dangerous and expensive form of birth control, but these arguments aren't founded in that, they're founded in a chastity-belt mentality.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

Dangerous, no more than a tooth extraction.

Having had both, I'd choose the abortion, to be honest. Though I got better meds after the tooth extraction.

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

Even the relative danger of not using condoms (i.e., no STD protection nor protection from any pregnancy-related complications [though I'm not sure those are significant in the phases when most abortions are done]) means abortion should be a, well, plan B, doncha think?

Submitted by hipparchia on

especially early on, and especially for emergency contraception. and have you priced birth control pills lately?

nor does it especially imply a lax attitude toward sex and responsibility. not all women can take birth control pills, nor can they necessarily force their partners to wear condoms. i could probably think up other scenarios.

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

My point is that -- while I wouldn't recommend treating abortion as the best first line of contraceptive defense -- I agree with Aeryl that the tut-tutting is substantially because sex is evil.

Submitted by hipparchia on

nor worst either. depends who you ask and whose data you look at, and how you interpret that data, but abortions are probably safer than pregnancy and childbirth, especially in this country where we have a noticeably higher maternal death rate than many other countries, and pills may or may not kill you, but since it's only women, and not men, who are affected, why do any definitive research?

Submitted by hipparchia on

‘Do what we tell you to do or we will kill you,’ and they do.

i'm against the death penalty, no matter what the case, but i could rethink my position for people like this.

adrena's picture
Submitted by adrena on

How many people among the anti-abortionist groups are against abortion for truly religious-based reasons versus those who are opposed to abortion as a means to deny women rights over their own bodies (to keep women subordinate)? Or is there even a distinction, a line, that can be drawn between these two supposedly differing factions of the same cause?

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

1. Adhering to the patriarchal constructs of their cohort?
2. Correctly understanding the actual word of God, as written in scripture and/or as revealed to holy men?

Call me arrogant, but my money's on #1.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

But you're absolutely right, you can't seperate the patriarchy from the religion.

But I think adrena is actually asking, is who is doing it to oppress women, and who is doing it to out of a true concern for the fetus.

But, when you consider the life of the fetus more important than the life of a living breathing woman, you are oppressing women, which is why I give no sympathy to the fetus fetishists. And why we(and our president) need to stop acting as if they have something worthwhile to say, because their values, that are touted so highly in the media, are values that prizes the concept of a person, over actual people.

And that is a fucked up set of values.

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

Is kneejerk respect for religion, which is a get-out-of-jail-free card for the irrational, the bigoted, and the patriarchal elements. What better example could one give than Obama's timidity about fulfilling his promise to outlaw GLBT discrimination at beneficiaries of his burgeoning faith-based initiatives?

The Lord said gays aren't proper humans. How dare we not respect that -- and blessed attempts to rein in those promiscuous daughters of Eve....