Dr. George Tiller, a Kansas doctor who ran one of three clinics in the United States specializing in performing late term abortions (post 21 weeks), was murdered in his church on Sunday.  The alleged assassin, Scott Roeder, is a 51 year old male with no immediate links to extremist "pro-life" groups.  This doctor had previously been shot in the arms in the early 1990s and had his clinic bombed by the self-professed "pro-life" movement. 
I am a generally conservative guy, some would call me a monarchist.  I am, however, firmly in the "pro-law" / "pro-choice" side of this debate.  The President stated that no matter how profound our differences, they can not be resolved with violence.  I agree with him in this fully.  What is most disturbing is that these social issues, abortion, gay-marriage and others seem to evoke such irrational responses from the advocates from each side.  Mind you, I believe there is a definable right and wrong for almost any moral quandary, even if the definition is "less wrong".  Requiring women to act in a subservient manner to men due to some religious tenet is wrong.  Prohibiting two consenting adults from entering into a contract making their relationship permanent in the eyes of the state and the public is wrong.  Shooting a person because you don't agree with the practice of their legal profession is wrong.
The spokesperson for Operation Rescue made a public statement denouncing the shooting, and disavowing involvement.  I can not help but find their words specious when they are couched in the following phrases, "we have been pursuing legal means to bring Dr. Tiller to justice". 
Ah, the mantra of the zealot - bring them to justice.
Sound like Al-Queda to me.


And what of people like Bill O'Reilly, who ran a campaing against the murdered doc, calling him "baby killer", "tiller the killer", etc? To quote from the Salon article: O'Reilly didn't tell anyone to do anything violent, but he did put Tiller in the public eye, and help make him the focus of a movement with a history of violence against exactly these kinds of targets (including Tiller himself, who had already been shot). In those circumstances, flinging around words like "blood on their hands," "pardon," "country club" and "judgment day" was sensationally irresponsible."

Yet, these people are the voices of the far right. Do they not bear some of the responisbility for enticing unballanced minds to action?

Citizen Deux said…
I would hold O'Reilly equally culpable for incitement. Casting aspersions on a person for their beliefs and "demonizing" them is pointless and childish. If you can not argue your position from the standpoint of your beliefs - then you will be called to account.

The same goes for the members of the radical left who made similar comments about those on the right.

No one is immune from this.