Sunday, May 31, 2009

The Fetus Fetishists Strike ...

[Update 31/05/09 18:50]
So, I see that Randall Terry is out flapping his gums about how George Tiller was a mass murderer - as if that justifies some nutcase gunman shooting him in church.

I am more concerned that the Obama Administration will use Tiller's killing to intimidate pro-lifers into surrendering our most effective rhetoric and actions.
...
"Those men and women who slaughter the unborn are murderers according to the Law of God. We must continue to expose them in our communities and peacefully protest them at their offices and homes, and yes, even their churches."


All that this statement does is give the wingnut who shot Dr. Tiller reason to think he's some kind of hero. He's not - he's a vigilante, a murderer and a criminal ... and a man who deserves to be treated far worse than how he treated Dr. Tiller.

The Fetus Fetishists have lost the moral high ground. It is time to recognize that their judgmentalism is giving the worst society has to offer the license to kill. Directly or indirectly, they are responsible for what happened in Kansas today.
[/Update]
Come and talk to me about the "angry left" sometime ... last I checked the pro-choice lobby doesn't go around murdering doctors in cold blood.

It's things like this that make me downright furious most days, and today more so than average.

When we hear politicians musing about introducing abortion controls, they are pandering to the same wingnut extremism that thinks it's some kind of heroism to gun people that offend them down in the streets.

This isn't the first time that a doctor has been murdered, simply because he provides women with abortion services. It is time for politicians in both Canada and the United States to condemn these acts of violence, and close the door to the anti-abortion crowd.

H/T: Feministe

5 comments:

Cardinal Pole said...

"So, I see that Randall Terry is out flapping his gums about how George Tiller was a mass murderer - as if that justifies some nutcase gunman shooting him in church."

Mr. Terry implies no such thing; the non sequitur is entirely your own (two wrongs don't make a right).

"He's not - he's a vigilante, a murderer and a criminal ... and a man who deserves to be treated far worse than how he treated Dr. Tiller. [...]It is time to recognize that [the "fetus fetishists'"] judgmentalism is giving the worst society has to offer the license to kill."

This is truly vintage MgS. Few can shoot themselves in the foot as artfully as you can. In the second quoted sentence you denounce "fetus fetishists" for giving murderers a "license to kill" because of their denunciations of abortionists(despite the fact that two wrongs don't make a right). But in the first quoted sentence you go much further than a mere denunciation of Dr. Tiller's assassin--you prescribe the punishment of which you adjudge him deserving. So if someone from the pro-abortion movement were to assassinate the assassin, are you then guilty, and all the more strongly than the anti-abortion movement, of handing out a "license to kill"? By your logic the answer is an emphatic 'yes'. (But of course the pro-abortion movement is only comfortable killing defenceless babies, so I'm sure you've no need to worry about someone acting on your advice.)

Now knowing how dense you are, I suppose I'm going to have to spell out the logic there for you like I've had to do on other occasions, so here we go, step by step:

1. You think that the denunciation of abortion makes the denouncers directly or indirectly responsible for the killing of abortionists.
Proof: "Directly or indirectly, they are responsible for what happened in Kansas today."

2. You have denounced the assassin (rightly, of course), but have also gone one step further and prescribed the punishment that he ought to face.
Proof of your denunciation: "[the assassin is] a vigilante, a murderer and a criminal"
Proof of your sentencing of the assassin: "[the assassin is] a man who deserves to be treated far worse than how he treated Dr. Tiller."

3. Now if denunciation of an action incurs reponsibility for acts that are intended to stop, or even just to punish, that action, then a fortiori, denunciation of a vigilante, coupled with the pronouncement of what amounts to an extra-judicial sentence for that vigilante (and as shown in 2., you have done both these things), incurs responsibility for any attacks on that vigilante (by 1.). So if someone from the pro-abortion movement decides to act on Your Honour's sentence, then you are responsible for that act. Q.E.D.
4. And furthermore, this process turns into a vicious cycle that can only be brought to an end once all denunciations of vigilanteism cease. But of course, the cycle can be avoided altogether simply by acknowledging that two wrongs do not make a right!, and hence he who denounces something as wrong incurs no responsibility for those who try to remedy that wrong with another wrong.

Cardinal Pole said...

[Second part (too many characters for one comment)]

"The Fetus Fetishists ..."

Have we been elevated to that encyclopedia of fetishists, the D.S.M., yet? We haven't? Oh well, there's always next edition. I'd better start lobbying for our inclusion in that august tome, that way you'll have no choice but to respect our feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings!

"last I checked the pro-choice lobby doesn't go around murdering doctors in cold blood."

Yeah, the pro-abortion lobby would never choose prey who could respond with proportionate force or take evasive action. And shooting is sooooo passé--the pro-abortion lobby likes to be a bit creative; never in my darkest nightmares could I have come up with the idea of killing babies by slicing their heads opening and sucking their brains out by vacuum suction (keeping the head three inches inside the mother's body, of course, so as to preserve the illusion of your all-important 'biological dependence'), but that's just another day at the office for courageous men (are there many female abortionists?) like Dr. Tiller.

"It's things like this that make me downright furious most days ..."

You poor thing. It must be terribly draining to be a standard-bearer for the angry Left.

"When we hear politicians musing about introducing abortion controls ..."

Good to be reminded of what you stand for: a completely uncontrolled power of life and death of mothers over their children, whether born or unborn up to the equivalent of nine months gestation, unrestricted with respect to both the timing of the abortion and its method.

Now let's conclude by reflecting a little on what you said about the punishment that the assassin deserves:

"the wingnut who shot Dr. Tiller [is] a man who deserves to be treated far worse than how he treated Dr. Tiller."

Now how the assassin 'treated' Dr. Tiller was to shoot him, and you want to see the assassin treated "far worse" than mere shooting. So it seems that MgS, that staunch opponent of that wicked practice, the death penalty (which you labelled "murder"), is now advocating not only the death penalty, but presumably the death penalty preceded by some kind of torture (and a particularly excruciating torture, it would seem, since the assassin's treatment has to be "far worse" than a quick kill). Thank you, MgS, for proving beyond all doubt that the only thing giving your ethics any consistency is your own tastes and preferences. How pathetic.

(This time I really don't expect you to publish this comment--it's possibly even more ego-deflating than the one where I refuted that post you did raging against me, and you're already "furious"--but I'm publishing it at my blog, where you're welcome to comment; I'm certainly not afraid to defend my opinions in open, mature discussion.)

David Murdoch said...

You really need to learn how to love your enemies and treat people with respect who don't share your ideology.

God Bless,

MgS said...

Apparently, Cardinal Fuckwit, you don't get it, do you?

Why is it every time someone ends up dead in the abortion discussion, it's a doctor that some raving anti-abortion lunatic has murdered?

It's because they've listened to one too many ranting tirades by the fetus fetishist crowd that takes itself seriously.

Randall Terry's limp condemnation, followed by characterizing Dr. Tiller as "mass murderer" says it all in my books. He doesn't really condemn what happened at all. Terry's more worried about the political fallout than he is about the role that the rhetoric of his organization and others like it have played in this travesty.

We hear governments talking about not negotiating with terrorists, and yet the fetus fetishists are acting exactly like textbook terrorists. Killing people in hopes of inspiring fear in others.

BTW - I didn't say what I thought would be appropriate punishment did I? I merely said that he deserved far worse than he gave Dr. Tiller - your imagination filled in the rest, quite incorrectly I might add.

One last parting thought: You may consider yourself banned from this blog. No further comments from you will be published here.

MgS said...

@ Dave Murdoch:

I'll keep that in mind ... when the fetus fetishist crowd stops inciting murder to achieve their ends.

Dr. Tiller's murder is an outrage beyond excusing, and shows us exactly how far awry the anti-abortion lobby has gone. I will point out that every murder in the abortion debate has come from the anti-abortion side ... think about that - it's not just ideology any more.

Until that changes, there will be no respect from me.