Also me comparing Tiller’s death to Hitler’s stopping the holocaust was at best exaggerated and at worst just as absurd as comparing Tiller and Hitler in the first place. I think that it should have been more like killing the leader of a single terrorist cell, or shutting a cell down. Even that might be much though.

Also ways it was ineffective and damaging as well. Though I hardly think that this is some kind of mass conspiracy or chess match with pro-choice and pro-life on opposing sides. I am extremely hesitant to argue that this could actually be considered an act of war. That would be a whole new can of worms.

As for them being unhappy about how he died rather than that he died, that kind of sounds similar to him having a heart attack. They could then declare that his death was fine and dandy and everyone should have a party and sing “ding dong the witch doctors dead!” (I think that was in the WWWtW link actually). But now that it was murder… And as you said not all pro-lifers are Christian so they may be able to be quite happy to declare that he had it coming.

The careless slander part was directed at those who really thought that Tiller was as bad as Hitler. It makes perfect sense to be glad the abortions have stopped, or even be glad that he died, or at least not be sorry about it and still say that the murder was bad. I wouldn’t be particularly unhappy if died, but I wouldn’t condone murder. And as I said, I don’t believe that there are actually all that many people who seriously equate Tiller to Hitler. Or Dahmer.

The press like inflammatory rhetoric almost as much (maybe more) than that Fraser guy seems to. Saying that pro-lifers collectively responsible is stupid. I cannot think of something more colourful to say about it.

Thanks.

That’s a very, very good point, one that I completely failed to research. Here’s a CDC table for 2005 that shows that 21+ week abortions are NOT a Tiller monopoly; Tiller simply was a big name. Kansas reported 459 late-term abortions during that year (probably not all of which were done by Tiller); the total was 8,482.

So I’ll have to completely disagree with your point: killing Tiller was not effective if your goal was to reduce abortions.

However, I should note that my argument against this being an act of war is only a partial argument; it would be defeated by finding a way in which it was effective. I believe that killing Tiller was not a proper act of war for other reasons that I haven’t stated because explaining them would require explaining why they were necessary conditions… And I didn’t want to simply depend on the Christian theory of Just War.

“Perhaps mourn was a bad choice of words, I’ll try to re-phrase: If someone hates Tiller so much as to see him as morally the same or worse than Hitler, why would they say that they are sorry he died?”

I’d say they misspoke, OR that you’re misinterpreting, and they’re actually sorry about HOW he died.

“I figure it means one of three things. Either they never really considered Tiller to be as bad as Hitler in the first place or they would have said the same thing about Hitler’s death if it was not justified by war or (finally and perhaps more likely) they really are not sorry he was murdered and are only saying so to attempt to (badly) mend the damage done publicly to their cause.”

Agreed.

Now, they HAVE said that Tiller’s killing was wrong, and a murder.

“I’m not saying that everyone who did not like Tiller is happy he was murdered”

“Happy” is not the same as “not sorry.”

“but those who actually believed that he was as bad or worse than Hitler are happy morally that he was murdered. Just unhappy about the consequences of that murder.”

This is careless slander.

I’m relieved that he’s stopped killing harmless fetuses. I wish he’d stopped killing them by means of deciding that he’d only kill the harmful ones (the ones actually threatening the health of the mother). I am NOT happy that he was murdered, and I fully endorse punishing his murderer to the full extent of the law.

“Then again how many people actually considered him as bad as Hitler… I hope very few. It is an absurd comparison anyway.”

Yes, or Dahmer. I think chaospet made a good point that such comparisons are awful.

From another post:
“Though now that makes me wonder if Tiller had suddenly died of a heart attack instead of been murdered would some people be more willing to declare that he had it coming? Question for another time I suppose.”

Any Christian who makes that claim needs to go back to Sunday School — Jesus refused to make it, and was offered the chance many times.

Aside from that, I suspect we’d hear a bit less from the press about how pro-lifers are collectively to blame for his death. They’d still blame us, probably for stressing him out. So we’d have to defend ourselves less, and we’d also have to worry less about our less stable members deciding to copycat (that’s a serious worry!).

-Wm

Wm Tanksley: Good point, I see the two as very intertwined, but I should have said “and they are killed” and “why condemn that murder.” Bad word choice.

Though now that makes me wonder if Tiller had suddenly died of a heart attack instead of been murdered would some people be more willing to declare that he had it coming? Question for another time I suppose.

Thanks to everyone who participated (and put up with my unceasing chatter)!

But that’s not what’s in question. The question is whether, and on what grounds, we should condemn the killing, not the death. There are two people involved here, and the killer is the one whose actions are being assessed in order to decide on condemnation. The victim’s (Tiller) actions, and even the fact of his death, are only relevant in a few of the possible reasons the killer might bring up.