It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Roeder: Abortion doctor's fatal shooting justified to protect unborn children Read more: http://ww

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Roeder: Abortion doctor's fatal shooting justified to protect unborn children Read more: www.kansas.com...


www.kansas.com

"Because of the fact preborn children's lives were in imminent danger this was the action I chose. ... I want to make sure that the focus is, of course, obviously on the preborn children and the necessity to defend them," Roeder said. "Defending innocent life — that is what prompted me. It is pretty simple," he said.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.huffingtonpost.com
www.rgj. com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Christian terrorists release Defensive Action Statement, justify political assassination

edit: Mods can you fix the title? Some news articles add the link when you paste from them.

[edit on 10-11-2009 by nunya13]




posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Also, from the article:


His confession came on the same day several strident abortion opponents released their "Defensive Action Statement 3rd Edition" that proclaims any force that can be used to defend the life of a "born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child." The statement's 21 signers demand Roeder's jurors be allowed to consider the "question of when life begins" in deciding whether lethal force was justified.


First, there's the obvious problem of these people saying that abortion doctor's should all be murdered (but that's another thread, link in the initial post). Then there's the possibility that precedence will be set as to when life begins in the womb. Very shaky ground. How can anyone make that call? How can it be PROVEN? (this is the focus of the thread, please keep a cool head guys)

I will definitely be very intersted in the outcome of this trial.






www.kansas.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 10-11-2009 by nunya13]



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Bumping my own thread is so degrading, but whatever.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 


Don't expect cool heads with this subject. For me it's a big non issue but alot of americans don't. I recently moved to Amsterdam where abortion is gov. subsidized up to the 24th month, I believe. Don't quote me. I expect to see a lot more of this in the states from both sides. I have a feeling in 2010 and 2012 America is going to take such a swing to the right it will make your head spin. Americans love to murder one another for all sorts of crazy reasons. National pasttime.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
How about we apply the enemy combatant label to these mouth foaming idiots, because they have basically said they intend to kill people.


"No, I don't have any regrets because I have been told so far at least four women have changed their minds, that I know of, and have chosen to have the baby," Roeder said. "So even if one changed her mind it would be worth it. No, I don't have any regrets."


This person is clearly not mentally sound as they believe coercing their will upon others is fine, so I can only hope he is found guilty and sentenced to the maximum possible time in jail. Murder is murder even if you claim you were giving divine inspiration to commit the crime.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
I fear that this trial will be THE trial that sets the precedence for defining when life begins. It's already bad enough that these people have just published a justification for murdering people. Now we have to contend with the possibility that these 12 jurors will be forced to decide the answer to a question that not even scientists can corroborate.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
While I could never feel sorry for a monster like Tiller, this kind of violence is unacceptable and not the way solve the problem. This was the premeditaded, calculated and rationalized murder of a man, all be it a scum bag, in the middle of a church. The shooter should go away for quite some time, probably life to stop more of his 'justified' murders.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by nunya13
I fear that this trial will be THE trial that sets the precedence for defining when life begins.

I don't see why. In this country, abortion is legal, shooting someone to death is not.

It should be a quick, decisive trial, especially as the shooter admits it and shows zero remorse. Trying him for murder has no bearing on when life begins.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by concernedcitizan

Don't expect cool heads with this subject. For me it's a big non issue but alot of americans don't. I recently moved to Amsterdam where abortion is gov. subsidized up to the 24th month


Ok, I just had to laugh when I read this post. Are we talking elephant abortions here?

Having had 4 children of my own, I would have killed myself if I had to be pregnant for 24 months!

Back on topic, and very seriously, here. I had a very good friend while I was growing up, who had a father that was a gynecologist. He was murdered along with a patient, and a woman who worked with him in his clinic. This friend of mine was never the same after the death of his father. A gorgeous, brilliant mind, was also snuffed out like that of his father, because my friend chose a dark path down a drug filled road of life, and still hasn't been able to see a light.

What these people don't get, who commit these crimes, is that murder is still murder, no matter what the reason is. Claiming to murder for the protection of an unborn, is still murder.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Blanca Rose
 


I think i meant weeks. I said don't quote me.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   
It's an interesting line of defense. Consider this scenario for a moment. Suppose you had a gun and were walking down the street in WWII Nazi Germany and saw someone beating a Jew to death with a baseball bat. What is the ethical response to this situation?

A) Use your gun to wound or kill the Nazi to prevent him from further Jew killings.
B) Let it pass, after all this activity is sanctioned by the state so it must be right.

Most people would actually choose B), because the consequences of A) could be very dire, including the loss of one's own life. Post WWII we would call such a response cowardice and the one who does nothing to stop evil shares the guilt.

Now switch to our modern baby killing society. Suppose that you truly believe that a fetus is a human being, and are convinced without a doubt, therefore that every abortion is a murder. The concept that a fetus is a human is certainly very compelling, especially at 24 months where modern technology could keep the baby I mean fetus alive outside the womb.

Nevertheless for some there is great controversy concerning whether a fetus is a human, much as there was controversy as to whether black people were human or had souls during the 17th century.

Continuing with this line of reasoning. If you are confronted with the certainty that a fetus is a human being, then you are also confronted with the monstrosity of a state sanctioned mass murdering facility such as an abortion clinic. If a fetus is a human, than an abortion clinic can not be morally superior in any way to a Nazi concentration camp, and it's operating full time in a neighborhood near you. How does a man with conscience and a gun or two respond?

That's what's happening here. It's actually a matter of conscience for the abortion clinic killer. Of course it creates a tremendous conundrum for what is supposed to be a rational and ethical society.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join