I think there is something that at this point in time we should still keep in mind.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

There are millions of people in this country who do oppose abortion to some degree or extent. Millions of people who do support restrictions on the abortion procedure to some extent or another. Millions of people who label themselves as "pro-life" (although I have long eschewed the "pro-life"/"pro-choice" rhetorical dynamic as being unnecessarily divisive). And while there are also millions of people in this country who support keeping abortion as a legal right, it is still an issue that divides us bitterly and ensnares our passions.

Believe it or not, I do think that very few people who advocate against abortion could possibly construe what happened today as being a good thing. And I think very, very, very, very, very few of those people would ever think of putting into action anything along the lines of the deeds of Mr. Roeder today.

No matter how shocking or horrible the deed, the actions of a rogue few should never be imputed against the larger group. And that remains the case whether one is ultimately sympathetic to the larger group or in opposition to it.

And I say this in the hopes we may still have some dialogue and understanding in all of this.

That's all I really want to say about this issue for the time being.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. They own Roeder

He is one of them. They can try all they want to separate themselves from him and his violence but the anti-choicers own Roeder. The nutjobs at Operation Rescue need to be charged with conspiracy and inciting murder.

They own it.

[RagAss]

3. Terrorism.

[Control-Z]

7. Did you see this? From prime buzz:

More words from Randall Terry:
Submitted by liberal socialist on May 31, 2009 - 3:25pm.

"I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you... I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good... Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism." August 16, 1993.

"When I, or people like me, are running the country, you’d better flee, because we will find you, we will try you and we will execute you." 1995.

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/18662

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. Consider the relationship between eco-terroism and Greenpeace

Without more evidence, its a close parallel.

[flvegan]

12. Army of God.

Operation Rescue is a red herring.

[BuyingThyme]

2. I think Mr. Roeder just reached the end of the line.

No job, no friends, no future...

Nothing but the little world he created with the help of the Glenn Becks of the world.

Sad.

[shadowknows69]

5. Well you think he'd just have stayed at the scene and tried for suicide by cop then

No, these murderers are self righteous cowards. If they really wanted to be defenders of the "unborn" by gunning down the already living, they'd drop the gun and wait to be arrested after their "Holy" quest was done.

[patrice]

4. To the extent that any of them supported or continue to support, directly or indirectly, the killing

of 1,000,000 Iraqis, they are exactly like Scott Roeder and that's my problem with them on Women's Right to Reproductive Services; they are NOT REAL Pro-Lifers.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

6. I don't see a blanket condemnation

of people who oppose a woman's right to choose.

I do see people correctly identifying groups that have advocated violence against medical people who are lawfully performing their duties. Those are the people who are doing the dividing, making the terribly nuanced situation appear to be a black-and-white one, and who are woefully intolerant of those who do not share their religious beliefs.

This event with promote, I think, the dialogue among the reasonable people who have different takes on the matter of choice.

But, what hasn't changed - and what won't change in the foreseeable future - is that Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, and to hurt someone for performing a lawful act is beyond hateful. To murder someone because he doesn't share your religious perspective on one particular matter is beyond hateful.

To murder a Christian in his church on a Sunday morning and to present yourself as a protector of lives, to portray a lawful and diligent doctor, husband, father, and grandfather as a murderer because what he did didn't conform to what you decided was divine law is beyond the pale.

This is a case, though, where silence equals assent, and it is time for those who do not support Roe v. Wade, who are advocating a legal way to change the law, should speak out against outfits like Operation Rescue, against flamethrowers like Randall Terry ..

[havocmom]

26. If I could Recommend a reply...

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[omega minimo]

8. and yet many call themselves "Pro Life"

Look, your apologist appeasment aside, the clock has been turned back for quite a long time on women's rights.

People have been mindfucked by Limbaugh and his Feminazi crap.

People have been mindfucked by their churches.

Today is a wake up call for anyone who pretends not to understand the issues and the propaganda, because they were too young when "Pro LIfe" and murdering women and doctors in the name of "The Unborn" was invented.

You get to decide. On the side of TRUTH or LIES?

[mitchum]

9. He is an anti-choicer and belongs to THEIR movement...

and no amount of hand wringing will change that fact

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. I tend to agree with you to a point

I see this as much like eco-terrorists and their relationship to Greenpeace and the Nature Conservatory. Similar underlying views but sharply divergent views on what should be done.

If it was a conspiracy, it was a damn poor one. Even thugs who rob banks don't use their own cars and even switch vehicles. Roher did not of the above.Sounds more like a lone fanatic wanting martyrdom at a practical level. In another thread it was asked how he got a gun. Excellent question considering he was a felon.

Law enforcement has much to do. I am willing to wait and see what they find since they have the putative shooter in custody.

[villager]

13. no -- their rhetoric, the climate of their hatred and intolerance, created this

it is, in their view, "justifiable homicide"

And as along as we keep mollycoddling these anti-democracy criminals, more of these incidents will happen.

After all, with "God on their side," how can they ever see themselves as being in the wrong?

[ljm2002]

14. I had a discussion today...

...with an old friend who happens to be a white, very Christian male. Not rightwing Christian, although he is distressingly susceptible to some of the framing that goes on. He is not a violent man, I hasten to add, and he abhors this act.

He started complaining that he hears people saying bad things about "white Christian males". Obviously he identifies with that and reacts defensively.

I told him that, if people are saying bad things about the Christian right wingers, then I'm right there with them. He objected, saying "But they aren't (real) Christians, and murdering that man was not a Christian thing to do". I responded that there is a well known political faction who self-identify as Christians and who the rest of us identify as the Christian right, and that they absolutely OWN the murder of Dr. Tiller. He said "But that does not describe *all* white Christian males". I told him, it's funny, but somehow I must have missed the forceful denunciations of these lunatics by the rest of the Christians who do not want to be lumped in with the rabid fringe. I told him, if you are concerned about this, then maybe you ought to think about speaking out, and getting other Christians to speak out, before it comes to this. Because it's a fact, the Christian community at large has not done much of anything to lessen the influence of these dangerous elements who have taken the mantle of Christianity and run with it. I told him, a lot of people asked why so few Moslems denounce suicide bombers and terrorist acts; my question is, why do so few Christians come out and unequivocally denounce acts like this, and the hate speech that foments such acts?

We changed the subject after that.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

16. Here's my problem with the "Why don't more of them condemn the act?" argument always thrown out

When an act is so horrible and so shocking that the common person, regardless of ideology or identity, can easily realize the irrationality and immorality of the act, a simple statement of condemnation of an act by someone else really doesn't do much in the end. So the ultimate "cry to condemn" is simply a way by some to get their licks in against the greater ideology/identity by those who may not see eye to eye with it.

We all heard after September 11th the cries by mostly conservatives against the Muslim community, "Why don't you speak out more? Why don't you condemn this?" And the answer is quite simple--to the average Muslim, the hijacking of four planes by nineteen men who just so happened to be Muslim and brainwashed by a terrorist ideology was just as shocking and horrifying and against their values as it was against non-Muslims. It wasn't a Muslim act, it was a sheer terrorist act done falsely in the name of Islam. That should speak for itself. Common sense dictates that it should speak for itself, that the need to condemn by the rational minded would be superfluous and unneccessary.

However, the fact of the matter is, other than Randall Terry and a handful of other radical nutjobs, there was sufficient condemnation by abortion opponents. Most mainstream anti-abortion groups have issued statements of condemnation. And while the vast majority of people on this board are supporters of abortion rights, I would hope that they have the common sense to realize that the actions of a radical few do not speak for the whole group, no matter what disagreements may exist.

[ljm2002]

24. I think you may be missing my point...

...the fact is, the so-called "fringe" Christians are anything but "fringe". They have amassed a huge influence in our politics nationally, they run 10,000-member-plus "mega-churches", they promote their views through many, many avenues including infiltration of the Air Force and other military organizations, school boards, city councils, etc. And they define the issues upon which Christians are supposed to vote when they put on their "values voters" hat: abortion, gay marriage, communism.

With all of that as a backdrop, I stand by my original statement: if someone is a Christian (particularly a white male Christian), and they don't subscribe to the loony Taliban wingers' positions, then WHERE THE HELL HAVE THEY BEEN FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS? Because these people, under the guise of Christianity, have been undermining our science education, they've been eroding women's rights, they've been promoting the worst kind of regressive religious thinking, they've even got Catholic bishops getting into Presidential politics what with their stupid grandstanding on not giving communion to politicians who support abortion rights (notably John Kerry) -- while at the same time saying nothing about the worst war mongers, and not even acknowledging that their own damned Pope was against our invasion of Iraq.

I'm sorry. All of those Christians who do not espouse these views, and who now want us all to "understand that not all Christians are like that": okay, and what did YOU do to take it to the phonies who have co-opted YOUR religion and who are trying to take us back to a barbaric past? Where were YOU when they were retooling the religious thinking of the masses to regress it from a New Testament understanding, to the most punitive aspects of the Old Testament?

Sure there were some who spoke out. But most were content to let the crazies take over. And there have been damned few Christians who have been outspoken on the issue of women's rights -- whether it be abortion, which is often a medical necessity; or subservience to men in general. The way I see it, Christianity in this country is in about the same state as the Republican party: they've let the inmates run the asylum, and the result is that the reasonable and moderate people have left in droves.

So now they all want to divorce themselves from Dr. Tiller's assassin. Too bad they did not want to divorce themselves from the crazies who have been promoting this mindset for lo, these many years now. Talk about reaping what you sow: my point is this: don't come whining to me about the fact that people might say bad things about white Christian males. You might have thought about that when you were going along with the rabid religious right nutjobs, when you failed to make even token statements in support of women's rights, et-fucking-cetera.

</rant>

[havocmom]

27. I'd Recommend that reply too. Nailed it

:applause:

[lapfog_1]

15. Yeah, all well and good to straddle the fence again

and call for understanding.

But there is ONE big difference between the anti-abortion people and the pro-choice people.

There aren't ANY pro-choice people running around and shooting anti-abortion people in their homes or churches, nor are there any pro-choice people bombing their gatherings or protests.

The same can't be said about the other side, no matter how much they will claim that "this isn't the solution, we don't really want these things to happen". Their rhetoric and TOLERANCE of such rhetoric says otherwise. They condone it, at least tacitly, if not wholeheartedly.

"should never be imputed"... bullshit! They fund it, they allow it, and they silently encourage it.

I don't want understanding and dialog. I want them to go away. And if they refuse, I think we should SEND them away.

[WeDidIt]

17. Roeder is now the poster-boy for "Pro-Life"

Sorry, but that's the way it is.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

18. No he's not.

Unless you are prepared to call Osama Bin Laden the poster-boy for the religion of Islam.

Well, are you?

[WeDidIt]

19. In terms of public perception

He is.

Public perception paints with a broad brush.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

20. And painting with a broad brush against millions is always wrong. Always. nt

[WeDidIt]

21. I made an observation

The so-called "Pro-Life" movement can attempt to distance themselves from this terrorist assassin, but it won't work.

Public Perception has already been formulated. All that can alter this reality is time. The same thing happened when David Gunn was shot. After a time with no more assassinations, public perception altered.

[KittyWampus]

22. Both Osama bin Laden and Terry Randell use HIGHLY inflammatory language that their followers imitate

And that's the point you seem to miss.

There are many who wouldn't have an abortion themselves and prefer women with unwanted pregnancies to choose different avenues. But they aren't actively making it difficult for women to make their own choices and they ESPECIALLY aren't calling doctors who perform abortions murderers and baby killers who need to be dealt to save the unborn innocent children.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

23. And their followers represent a miniscule fraction of the larger group. nt

[redqueen]

25. People oppose abortion "to some extent"? What does that even mean?

It seems the legal debate is over whether to keep it safe and legal or ban it outright.

It's already got so many restrictions on it as to make it much worse on the woman than it needs to be... what the hell do these people who "oppose it to some extent" fucking want? Ugh.

[LadyHawkAZ]

28. Dialogue is good-- to a point

You can have a dialogue about crime prevention at a Neighborhood Watch meeting. It's somewhat more difficult to have one with a mugger who is holding a knife to your throat. To have a dialogue you have to have two sides willing to engage.

I've been watching any number of blogs, newsgroups, stories, comments and newsfeeds for the past 24 hours and here's what I've seen:

From the official anti-abortion organizations: A lot of "The shooting of the mass-murdering bloodstained crazed ungodly evil killer was wrong and we do not support it".

From a lot of anonymous extremists on the conservative blogs: "Hooray! The evil mass-murdering bloodstained crazed ungodly killer is dead! Although we don't actually support vigilantes, of course. But Hooray! Lots of babies are saved!"

On the more mainstream media comment areas: "I feel that abortion is murder and what Mr. (rarely Dr., usually Mr.) Tiller did was kill babies for money. But I think the shooting was wrong and don't support it. He should have been tried and given the death penalty instead."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me there's a certain "wink wink nudge nudge" element going on here. There's no wholesale condemnation from the anti-abortion side anywhere that I've been able to find, which means there probably isn't a whole lot of it actually out there. I'm not entirely sure that there's any kind of dialogue possible with a movement that carries that mindset, or at any rate no dialogue that will be of any use. Because the reaction in the past day tells me that the anti-abortion movement and its members, at some level, support killing people to advance their cause- even if they won't all acknowledge that support at a conscious level.

It's just my opinion of course, YMMV. But I don't see useful dialogue or any kind of understanding as being possible at this point in time. A lot of mindsets will have to change before that becomes possible.

[omega minimo]

29. When discussing this, it's important to keep in mind the recent history and background

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5763397&mesg_id=5763397