The Nation's Pulse
Pruning the Narrative of Murder
Is the murdered Dr. Tiller a religious martyr?
The Pentecost Sunday murder of Dr. George Tiller by a man who shot him to death in the foyer of Reformation Lutheran Church in Wichita, Kansas, sparked a lot of commentary. Tiller was in a controversial line of work, and known for “pushing the envelope” even there.
I do not write to speak ill of the dead. My argument here is with the living.
More specifically, I have a quarrel with Rev. Katherine Ragsdale and those others who imply that anyone killed on church property automatically becomes a martyr. It presumes too much to hint that the crime scene tape used by police officers has sanctifying power, yet this muddle-headed version of “murder in the cathedral” seems to be the prevailing view in places where the memory of people like Thomas Becket and Oscar Romero faded long ago. You’d think the president of the Episcopal Divinity School would know better than to suggest such a thing, but Ragsdale had already called abortion a “blessing,” so perhaps foolish consistency really is the hobgoblin of little minds.
Sadly, Ragsdale shares her peculiar definition of martyrdom with other progressive religious leaders. A rabbi named Arthur Waskow echoed her in telling a reporter that Tiller was “a religious martyr in the fullest classical sense, killed for acting in accord with his religious commitments.”
That is a stunning assertion. People who think the Constitution tolerates abortion usually follow the late Justice Harry Blackmun in locating that tolerance among the so-called “penumbras and emanations” of a right to privacy implied by the 14th Amendment. As a result, even sympathetic readings of case law leave abortion two steps removed from the actual text of the Constitution. Rabbi Waskow’s assertion eliminates one of those steps. By describing Tiller’s career in terms of “religious commitment,” the rabbi zips past the usual 14th Amendment “due process” jurisprudence to place abortion (Waskow calls it “healing with compassion”) under the protection of the First Amendment’s “free exercise of religion” clause.
If Waskow had made his statement in a comic strip, you would have seen the thought bubble over his head: Why defend the career of a man like Tiller by appealing to an Amendment that only lawyers care about, when enterprising re-definition can find sanction for abortion at the heart of the first and best-known Amendment in the Bill of Rights? The bonus from a progressive point of view is that if abortion can be called a religious commitment, then rhetoric like “if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament,” is no longer necessary. In the unlikely event that non-theologians compare the involved terms, any difference between “religious commitment” and “sacrament” will seem trivial at best.
Some pundits used Tiller’s murder to revisit the risks of child-bearing and scorn opposition to abortion as “reproductive ignorance.” One writer with whom I am friendly described the killing as a consequence of willingness to take a stand against a powerful “patriarchal” mind-set. “Because the shooter and all those who believe as he does are incapable of acknowledging that women have the same moral authority and autonomy as men do, Dr. Tiller had to die,” she wrote, thus confusing abortion with empowerment and ignoring mountains of evidence about what Christians actually think.
Speaking more accurately about Christian ethics, Phil Lawler and others noted that the wrongness of taking human life is not taught by wrongfully taking human life. Sudden death robbed Dr. Tiller of the chance to repent and reform. The blame for that rests with his killer, whose judgment has been condemned by every pro-life group.
Attempts to add this murder to the rap sheet of anti-feminine forces do not match the facts as we know them. Moreover, the alternative to patriarchy is matriarchy, and — human nature being what it is — that social arrangement also has dirty hands. In a column for Canada’s National Post, George Jonas put it this way: “Living in an epoch that is selfish as well as matriarchal, our lifeboats are no longer marked ‘women and children first,’ only ‘women first.’ We invent euphemisms, such as ‘choice’ for killing, and sophomoric dilemmas, such as pretending not to know when life begins, to ensure that nothing hinders Virginia’s quest for Santa Claus.”
Jonas probably yells more than he should, but his argument answers anyone who would drape abortion providers in the mantle of heroism, or paint the gunman who shot Tiller as an agent of some vast conspiracy against women.
How then do we end the standoff that cheapens words by yanking them from their historic moorings to use them as shields in jousts with ideological opponents? Perhaps the rabbi, the divinity school president, and their fellow travelers could visit the Shrine of the North American Martyrs in Auriesville, NY. While there, they might get an inkling of real martyrdom by walking the ground where Jesuit missionary René Goupil and his companions were tortured and killed by Iroquois warriors in 1642. Goupil was felled by a hatchet blow for tracing the sign of the cross on a child’s forehead.
Another possible remedy for the confused involves re-reading Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger’s classic Introduction to Christianity. Not for nothing did Ratzinger go on to become pope. Without mentioning abortion as such, he explained why it is gravely wrong by tracing the idea of human dignity back to its historic and theological roots. “Greek thought always regarded the many individual creatures, including the many individual human beings, only as individuals, arising out of the splitting up of the idea in matter. The reproductions are thus always secondary; the real thing is the one and universal,” he wrote. In other words, it did not matter whether you were an ex-fetus in Athens or an ex-fetus in Sparta: when push came to shove, you were interchangeable with every other ex-fetus. But then came the radical change in outlook inspired by Jesus.
One reads the following summary feeling certain that Katherine Ragsdale slept through a few classes that Joseph Ratzinger did not: “The Christian sees in man, not an individual, but a person; and it seems to me that this passage from individual to person contains the whole span of the transition from antiquity to Christianity, from Platonism to faith,” Ratzinger wrote. “This definite being is not at all something secondary, giving us a fragmentary glimpse of the universal, which is the real. As the minimum it is a maximum; as the unique and unrepeatable, it is something supreme and real.”
Neither those paradoxes nor the implications of what God says in Jeremiah 1:5 lend themselves to sound bites, but they are worth pondering.
Against such wisdom, Ragsdale and Waskow bring only the sentiment they share with their progressive peers. The collective experience of every group from the Baker Street Irregulars to the Riders of Rohan and the Teamsters seems not to have taught them about the limits of acclamation, which is a pity. Had they paid attention, they might have learned that treating murder as a chance to whack at a piñata stuffed with praises is a risky business that demands more than sympathy for what the deceased did to earn a living.
Christianity holds that all human life is precious, and because God became man in Jesus, holy. But to jump from that to the conclusion that anyone who dies in church has lead a life of heroic virtue is to tumble down a rabbit hole into a wonderland where the meanings of words like “martyr” and “saint” fade faster than the body of Lewis Carroll’s Cheshire Cat.
About the Author
Patrick O’Hannigan is a writer in North Carolina.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (75) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Patrick O'Hannigan
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/08/pruning-the-narrative-of-murde
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Merlin| 6.8.09 @ 7:06AM
Many supporters of abortion are opposed to capital punishment. This seem completely irrational to me. And, I would think that even those who are pro-abortion would see every abortion as an unfortunate necessity in any case. To call it a "blessing" and "healing with compassion" is bizarre.
Ryan| 6.8.09 @ 8:32AM
First off, Tiller's murder was an egregious sin, and is soundly condemned not just for being murder, but for taking the role of the Biblical authority of the government in enacting and enforcing its laws (or lack thereof) - something the apostle Paul was adamant about.
I may have to look for it, but for Ragsdale to make such comments of abortion being a "blessing," and still call herself a Christian, she HAS to provide Biblical proof for such a stance. At minimum, scripture promotes the idea that life begins in the womb. It smacks of her starting NOT with scripture, but with personal ideas of our "rights" superceding Biblical mandates.
To Ragsdale, humanity (and women in particular) are more important than God and orthodoxy and orthopraxy.
The other part of it is placing a higher value on what Jesus DID over what Jesus SAID. If the two are not used in conjunction, you get non-Biblical theology which is prevalent in the left-leaning churches.
JP| 6.8.09 @ 8:52AM
Not to be picky, but Martyrdom theologically assumes the existence of Purgatory. In Catholic theology, a soul that is destined for Heaven but still has attachment to Sin, must be purged of those attachments before it can enter Heaven. There are exceptions for those who die for the Faith, or those who have perfect contrition at death, and or live thier Purgatory on earth. One of the biggest disagreements Martin Luther had with Rome, was the Doctrine of Purgatory. Beginning with Luther, the Protestant confessions removed Purgatory from thier list of dogmas. As far as I know, they never re-visited it. Luther began the Justification By Faith doctrine, which continues through most Protestant denominations today. A Saved Soul who dies for his Faith is treated no different than a Saved Soul who dies peacefully in his bed, for Christ's Death redeems everyone equally. That is, no one can merit heaven (or so the theory goes).
Therefore, Dr Tiller, a Lutheran, is not a martyr (at least not in the mystical sense), for Martyrdom as defined by Catholics, is impossible for Luterans.
So, I am not sure what Ragsdale means. What did he die for? His Faith? And what did the murderer kill him over? His belief in Consubstantiation? No, from what we know, the murderer killed him in cold blood because he was one of the more famous abortionists in the world. So, is Dr Tiller a Martyr? Is Lutheranism now defined by its support for abortion on demand?
Linen Lutheran| 6.8.09 @ 9:35AM
I always wondered how a man such as Tiller, with blood on his hands, could have any position of responsibility at any church in America. Now I know. I wonder if Rev. Ragsdale would allow his killer to pass the collection plate.
BTW, isn't the word martyr taboo on the religious Left? Or is it now cool for Lefties to be martyrs just like you can now be patriotic because Obama is President?
Neocon| 6.8.09 @ 9:51AM
The man who killed George Tiller is a hero. Would we condemn a man who killed a child serial killer while everyone else sat complacently and watched? One of the most prolific child serial killers in history? Would we condemn a man who thereby prevented thousands of more murders by killing said serial killer?
Because that's basically what happened.
Eddie V.| 12.11.09 @ 1:59PM
Certainly you must be kidding. We live in a land of laws. What Dr. Tiller did was lawful.
Tim| 6.8.09 @ 10:05AM
The man who killed george Tiller is a murderer.
JG| 6.8.09 @ 10:14AM
The man that shot Tiller is a very disturbed individual. Having gone throught the process of having to witness my daughter give up her baby for adoption, I can wholly disagree that abortion is an answer for anything other than certain death for the mother.
That man had no right from God, society or any
other authority to take Tiller life.
If one is a true Christian, then one believes God when he says that each of us will stand to account for our own sins on Judgement Day.
The man that shot Tiller is in no way a Christian and should not be treated like one.
Dustoff| 6.8.09 @ 10:15AM
tim
The man who killed george Tiller is a murderer.
++++++++++++
Bingo.
Neither person was a good man.
Eric Damon| 6.8.09 @ 10:16AM
Re: Neocon
While I have no tears to shed for the death of Dr. Tiller, I will not pretend that his murderer is some kind of hero. He is no less a murderer than I consider Dr. Tiller to have been, and if I condemn Tiller for his actions then I also condemn his muderer for his action.
And yes, we would condemn a man who stalked a child serial killer and murdered him especially if he killed him when no crime was being committed, and when he had a chance to inform the proper authorities and have him stopped that way. We would not condemn him if he saw said child murderer in the commission of a murder and killed him then; that would be justified as it saved a life in imminent danger. What happened here and what you describe is vigilantism, and that has no place in our society. We cannot condone murders simply because the victim holds positions or commits legal acts that we find morally abhorrent. If it comes to that we devolve to a society that has no law, is governed by our individual passions, and would lead to a state of anarchy where murder is an accepted way of eliminating our political/ideological enemies. I wonder if you would have that same attitude someone who strongly disagreed with something Ann Coulter wrote or said decided to murder her and used her opposition to abortion as a justification. I seriously doubt it!
We are not and cannot become a society that uses murder to prevent what we may consider a murder. Some consider state sanctioned executions of criminals to be muder; should those who oppose executions begin to murder prosecutors, judges, or jurors who hand down death sentences? Because using your logic they would be totally justified. Is that truly what you advocate? I would sincerely hope not.
Gill O'Teen| 6.8.09 @ 10:25AM
Merlin, how can anyone opposed to capital punishment favor baby butchery? I despise abortion and lost absolutely no sleep over the Baby Killer's execution. Abortion kills innocent children. Capital Punishment kills guilty criminals who if allowed to live could harm more people. I am upset that the Muslim terrorist who shot the American soldiers in Arkansas is not being vilified in the SRM (state run media) for the scum he is.
Tim| 6.8.09 @ 10:25AM
John 11:25-26 (New International Version)
Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john 11:25-26&version=31;
Ryan| 6.8.09 @ 10:32AM
Protestant martyrdom theology has nothing to do with purgatory. It's simply being murdered for your faith in Christ. Reward doesn't factor into whether or not someone is a martyr.
There IS theological room for a certain higher reward in Heaven, or deeper punishment in Hell for certain acts, but no real Biblical justification for purgatory if you're not including the Apocrypha. Justification is still by faith alone.
Roy| 6.8.09 @ 10:32AM
"Neocon" is, I would estimate with at least 75% probability, a leftist agent provocateur.
TAS has a wide open comment section, and leftist liars have absolutely no scruples about engaging in such behavior, following in the footsteps of their mentor, VI Lenin. Just as Lenin and his heir Stalin ginned up endless imaginary "White Guard" conspiracies to cement power, today leftist scum invade their opponents' discussion groups and post nonsense in order to, hopefully, make them look bad.
"Neocon" is, these days, mostly a term of abuse by the ignoramus liberal media. In some conservative circles it can be a term of abuse by "paleoconservatives"(who have a bit better of a clue what they are talking about than the media). It is rarely used as a self-identifier, and if it is, it's usually a person whose primary orientation is foreign policy. So I'm guessing that the above poster is a libofool who just uses "Neocon" as an all-purpose of abuse at his day job posting worthless rants at the Daily Kos.
I'm not going to bother with the "substance".
Roy| 6.8.09 @ 10:35AM
The media is not "state-run", but "Left-run". Right now the left runs the state too of course.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 6.8.09 @ 10:45AM
George Soros owns our government making him the de facto head of state. He also controls most major media outlets. This makes it a state run media. Follow the money.
Roy| 6.8.09 @ 10:46AM
OK - how about "Soros run media"? :)
James Pawlak | 6.8.09 @ 11:47AM
Investing in the "culture of death" yields large dividends---Paid in death. Dr. George Tiller (aka "Tiller The Baby Killer") discovered that when he was gunned down on 31 May 2009.
The followers of Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo likewise received such and large dividends for their investment in those leaders' Nazism, Fascism and "Imperial Way" cultures of death. Some such persons were paid off in non-judicial executions of SS troops in the field or by the teaching experience of the Nuremberg, and legally unprecedented, trials and hangings OR the non-judicial and justified execution of Bonito Mussolini.
I will skip over the death-investment and death-worship of one of the world's major "religions" and of a certain sub-culture in the USA. BUT, I point out the parallels noted above and the lessons which should be learned by all such investors!
Justitia fiat, ruat coelum
Bill Pearce| 6.8.09 @ 1:20PM
Dr Tiller ------------- 60,00 plus Dead
Dr Tiller's killer ---- 1 Dead
One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.
Joseph Stalin
The Left is all about the glitter of Ideals not people, so it does not matter to the Left how many people die.
The only thing of importance to the Left is the Lefty Ideas live.
Sean| 6.8.09 @ 2:13PM
I guess evil religions and evil people can have their martyrs as well.
JmsA| 6.8.09 @ 3:21PM
"Neither person is good man." That may be so. However, there is one irrefutable fact: There will not be anymore ("viable") dead babies, yes, babies, by the hand of Tiller. And that in itself is no small miracle.
Marc Jeric| 6.8.09 @ 3:25PM
Dr. Tiller was no protector of women's rights nor a killer of babies - he just found a way to become a multi-millionnaire. Average cost of an early abortion is now $500, whereas the cost of a late-term one is $5,000. With 60,000 abortions (mainly late-term ones) performed over his 30-year practice Dr. Tiller cleared about $200 milion after costs and before taxes. He could well afford to support his kind of politicians by millions - all Democrats of course.
Angel| 6.8.09 @ 4:03PM
Bingo! You hit the nail on the head, Mr. Jeric--Tiller died a VERY wealthy man.
Too bad he couldn't take any of it with him; especially where he went.
Rush has always said that abortion is the primary Sacrament in the religion of Liberalism--I guess this story proves it. Too sick and twisted for words.
Frank Natoli| 6.8.09 @ 5:09PM
Ragsdale and Waskow appear to believe that they own the English language. They don't. If we're going to use the language as a mechanism for reliable communication, we have to be using the same words to mean the same things. That means a common standard. How about the Oxford English Dictionary. After all, it is the English language, right?
The OED defines "martyr" as follows:
1 a person who is killed because of their religious or other beliefs. 2 a person who exaggerates their difficulties in order to obtain sympathy or admiration.
At least as far as the OED is concerned, for Tiller to be a religious martyr, he would have had to die for his religious beliefs. But did Tiller ever declare himself driven by Jesus, or whoever he worshipped at the Lutheran church he attended, to abort full term babies? Did he ever say or write that? Where is the evidence that he said or wrote that? I see none. I suggest that is entirely in the fertile imagination of Ragsdale and Waskow.
It might be useful to take a closer look at the secondary OED meaning of "martyr", i.e., "a person who exaggerates their difficulties in order to obtain sympathy or admiration". Now here is a legitimate opportunity to support Ragsdale's and Waskow's position. Tiller certainly exaggerated his clients' difficulties, there never being a medical reason to so despicably violate the Hippocratic Oath. And Tiller certainly gained sympathy and admiration, albeit from those who close their eyes and their consciences to the slaughter that Tiller so antiseptically performed.
So yes, Tiller was a martyr, in the secondary OED sense of the word.
Post Script on the Hippocratic Oath: the same OED defines that as "a former oath taken by those beginning medical practice to observe a code of professional behaviour (parts of which are still used in some medical schools)." How's that for winking at the ethical duplicity of our medical schools today? "Former" and "some". After all, can't swear to "not administer an abortifacient", and can't swear to "do no harm" and still be George Tiller, can you?
Nick| 6.8.09 @ 6:23PM
The word "martyr" comes from the Greek "mártyros" : witness. Christians who have died for the Faith are PERFECT "witnesses" of Christ.
To what exactly did Mr. Tiller "witness"? Besides executing thousands of partial-birth abortions. He certainly didn't witness for the Christain Faith.
The "abode of the dead" is called Sheol in Hebrew and Hades in Greek. Sheol separated the good (the Saints) from the damned before Christ's Ascension (see Luke 16: 19-31). After Christ ascended to Paradise, He took the Saints with Him, i.e. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, etc.
The "abode of the dead" then became the state of being after death in which one is purged and purified before entering the Heavenly Jerusalem, Purgatorium in Latin (see 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 and 1 Peter 1:7).
The damned stayed in the Lake of Fire (Revelation 19:20), Gehenna in Hebrew, Infernus in Latin.
If you have ever prayed for a loved one who has passed away or said, "May they rest in peace", you have assented to the Apostolic Truth of Purgatory.
Patrick| 6.8.09 @ 6:28PM
My dad always said, "Two wrongs don't make a right." That much is all that needs to be said.
Violett| 6.8.09 @ 6:32PM
True, Patrick--but Tiller is responsible for 60,000 'wrongs'. Wrap your brain around that little nugget.
Richard Baker| 6.8.09 @ 8:14PM
The question I have sounds like a question asked in a college level Philosophy class. If a murderer is killed to stop his murdering, has the person stopping the murderer committed murder or a justifiable act? Remember, Dr. King discussed what is legal and what is moral in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail". Curious.
J.C.Eaton| 6.8.09 @ 9:20PM
A student of mine in a final exam stated that the Constitution insured "her God-given right to an abortion." I thought her statement was at best moronic and at worst, blasphemous.Now I learn that by Sister Ragsdale's lights, it's enlightened.
Nick| 6.8.09 @ 9:27PM
Mr. Baker,
I can only give you the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.
Taking human life is only justified under very specific conditions:
-A soldier can kill other combants during war, to defend himself and his country, and not be guilty of murder.
-A state can put those found guilty of capital offenses to death, to protect society, and not be guilty of murder.
-A state can also form a police force and authorize it to use deadly force to protect life, and not be guilty of murder. A state has the right to defend itself.
-And an individual has the right to defend himself and others with deadly force to stop a perpetrator in the act of threatening to take a human life, and is not guilty of murder. He must not use more violence than is necessary to stop the threat to the victim, though.
The man who shot and killed Mr. Tiller is guilty of murder. Mr. Tiller was not in the process of killing a baby, nor was he threatening to. There is no justification to stop hypothetical, future killings with deadly force.
To be justified, one would have to bust in on an abortionist just as he was starting, demand he stop, and if he did not cease, use the appropriate force to stop him. It is more than likely he would call the police, rather than trying to continue or fight, and the person trying to defend the baby would be arrested.
Since the acts of abortionists are not illegal in our sick society, it would be a futile attempt to try to stop them with force. Hope that helped.
Angel| 6.8.09 @ 10:34PM
Oh, I hadn't heard that one, Judge. I thought it was a woman's uterus that conferred the right to kill; I mean that's what I've heard from various, assorted demented lib women.
I see the crazy hosebeasts have stepped it up a notch--the Lord Almighty God smiles on abortion now.
And all this time I thought that my Lord and Savior, the Creator of Heaven and Earth loved all of us equally, none above the other.
God is the essence of love--and would never ever countenance the destruction of innocent human life. Shame on these women--I'm ashamed to call them my sisters.
Abortion: 1 dead, 1 wounded.
Liam| 6.8.09 @ 11:24PM
The shooter of Dr. Tiller has been called a terrorist, and he has indeed caused great fear, even terror. What about the case for the shooter as a demented martyr? Only God can know what his true motivation was, terror or savings life or both.
CC Ryder| 6.9.09 @ 12:16AM
If anyone's a martyr, it's Tiller's shooter. It sure as hell ain't Tiller the baby killer.
Try as I might, I just can't manufacture much sympathy for Tiller--too many mental images of savaged babies get in the way.
Such a sad saga for everyone.
Frank Natoli| 6.9.09 @ 8:08AM
Further comment to Richard Baker: MLK did choose to break the law, but he did so non-violently. I do not excuse non-violent "civil disobedience", but I also do not draw an equivalence between it and the actions of Tiller's killer. MLK also wrote that he expected and accepted the punishment of the state for his choosing to break the law. He never said that he was unlawfully or even unjustifiably prosecuted.
The Neocon Returns| 6.9.09 @ 12:53PM
No, sorry. I don't work for Daily Kos. But you guys seem to be engaging in the same type of despicable moral equivalency which is so prevalent on websites like Daily Kos, Move On.org, etc.
Basically what my detractors are saying is that the coalition forces who killed Saddam Hussein and his cronies are as bad as a genocidal maniac who killed hundreds of thousands of people with biological weapons. The person who pulled the switch on John Wayne Gacy is as bad as Gacy himself. General Patton will be judged the same as Adolf Hitler, etc.
Look, the man who murdered George Tiller will probably have to pay for his crime. But that doesn't change the fact that he killed a serial killer who a.) profited from his murderous activity, b.) justified killing babies through political subterfuge, c.) profited extravagantly from what he was doing.
Sorry, the guy who killed "Dr." Tiller is not even close to Tiller himself. I am disappointed to see "conservatives" engaging in sophistry and moral equivalency.
Neocon | 6.9.09 @ 12:54PM
I guess I made the same point twice when I said "a.) profited from his murderous activity, b.) justified killing babies through political subterfuge, c.) profited extravagantly from what he was doing."
Sorry. I am typing in a hurry.
Nick| 6.9.09 @ 1:29PM
Neocon,
Scott Roeder, the man who shot Tiller, took upon himself an act that is justly the right of the state to implement, after due process of law. What Roeder did violated the natural law.
This is not moral equivalency. It is what separates civil society from anarchy.
Daisy| 6.9.09 @ 1:41PM
Neocon--it's not personal, we're just cautious about libtrolls. Often they post comments to make Conservatives look bad.
You're entitled to your opinion; others have posted similar arguments, but Tiller was just a symptom of a very sick society. We're all responsible to a degree.
I believe God will punish all of us for the abortion Holocaust in our country.
KyMouse| 6.9.09 @ 2:19PM
The pro-life ministry in which I help part-time has been sprayed with obscene graffiti and has had its front windows shot out. Folks on the other side of the issue couldn't care less -- such acts are, they insist, carried out by only a few people on the fringe.
When someone such as "Tiller the Killer" is shot, all of a sudden every pro-life person must share in the blame.
At times such as these, I like to say, "I'm against any violence that goes on outside the abortion mills, but I'm also against the violence that goes on INSIDE them. How about you?"
Sometimes, it makes them think.
Patriot| 6.9.09 @ 4:18PM
KyMouse, I've worked at a pro-life center and the ugliness I saw from pro-aborters was shocking. Human life means nothing to many of these people. Watch yourself, okay? Take care.
Pingback| 6.9.09 @ 5:19PM
The Anchoress — A First Things Blog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Liam| 6.10.09 @ 12:31AM
Dr. Tiller has gone on, let's respect his title and motivation, much as we might disagree with it, he is human. The poor man who fired the gun is still in the realm of the criminal law, the ultimate judgement is beyond our civil society. God help us all.
Sidhe| 6.10.09 @ 12:36AM
Ah, but the ultimate judgment is NOT beyond our civil society, Liam, if it is civil at all. The death penalty it shall be, I hope. Fry his ass up.
Solomani| 6.10.09 @ 4:20AM
"a religious martyr in the fullest classical sense, killed for acting in accord with his religious commitments."
I don't think the good rabbi is wrong. He did die for his religion, but that religion was not Christianity.
Why are Christians dancing around the elephant in the room on this case? No one versed in the Bible should shed a tear for this "man".
I personally have zero sympathy for the him. His judgment was long overdue in my opinion.
"Speaking more accurately about Christian ethics, Phil Lawler and others noted that the wrongness of taking human life is not taught by wrongfully taking human life. Sudden death robbed Dr. Tiller of the chance to repent and reform. The blame for that rests with his killer, whose judgment has been condemned by every pro-life group. "
Taking of human life has legally been allotted to humanity by God. If someone murders we are well within our right, Bibilically, to take that persons life. This isn't always the best course but it is Biblical. The man killed 60,000 babies. SIXTY THOUSAND. Something to pray about.
I don't mean to come across as contrary but there is way too much sympathy for this man. I don't know the motivations of the killer and he was certainly outside the jurisdiction of the law. However Christians are not bound by laws that contravene God's law. I do, however, agree that killing is not the proper form of protest.
Nick| 6.10.09 @ 12:48PM
Solomani,
How does it "contravene God's law" to make it illegal for average citizens to go around and execute people, even if they are guilty of violating God's law?
Your biblical theology is very flawed, and I think you know it. That is why you state at the end "killing is not the proper form of protest."
Neocon| 6.10.09 @ 2:24PM
"We're all responsible to a degree.
I believe God will punish all of us for the abortion Holocaust in our country."
That view is a little to "new-agey" for my tastes. God will punish people who had and performed abortions for abortion.
solomani| 6.11.09 @ 1:17AM
Hi Nick,
I was rushing my answer a bit. Apologies for that.
In the Old Testament murder was punishable by death. That is, God gave authority to humanity to kill those who willfully took life. There are safe guards attached to this but that's the bottom line - you murder someone there is legal and Biblical grounds for your life being taken away as punishment.
If you believe that abortion is murder then Tiller is a murderer of stupendous scope. He also has gone unpunished until the day he was shot.
Thus I shed no tear for him nor do I agree with the argument that he should have been given time to repent and be saved. His actions demonstrated a gross disregard for God's law.
"How does it "contravene God's law" to make it illegal for average citizens to go around and execute people, even if they are guilty of violating God's law? "
My point is that I could see a Biblical argument here for the execution of Tiller as a murderer. Not that we should be killing people willy nilly.
Hope that is clearer.
solomani| 6.11.09 @ 1:49AM
"Neocon| 6.8.09 @ 9:51AM"
I tend to agree... his punishment was long overdue. And with the current legal system in the USA he would have never been given the death sentence which he earned so well.
"Dustoff| 6.8.09 @ 10:15AM. Bingo. Neither person was a good man."
But neither are you or me. We are all sinners.
"Eric Damon| 6.8.09 @ 10:16AM"
Your Coulter comparison is apples and oranges. A child murderer was killed (not murdered IMO). We are not talking about ideological or political enemies. Someone who use to stab babies in the back of the neck and gut them while their head was still in the vaginal passage. This is what was killed. There is Biblical justification for this - but it must go through the judicial system. But what if that system fails? Does that give us mandate to seek justice as vigilantes?
My gut says no. But I also find it hard to fault the killer for his actions... assuming his motivation was one of justice as opposed to something else.
"We cannot condone murders simply because the victim holds positions or commits legal acts that we find morally abhorrent."
What about when Jesus says it is abhorrent? Better to have NEVER LIVED than to lead a child away from Christ. Because the scripture is the yard-stick all this should be measured by.
"Nick| 6.8.09 @ 9:27PM The man who shot and killed Mr. Tiller is guilty of murder. Mr. Tiller was not in the process of killing a baby, nor was he threatening to. There is no justification to stop hypothetical, future killings with deadly force. To be justified, one would have to bust in on an abortionist just as he was starting, demand he stop, and if he did not cease, use the appropriate force to stop him. It is more than likely he would call the police, rather than trying to continue or fight, and the person trying to defend the baby would be arrested. "
Isn't that hair splitting? What does the scripture say about murderers? Do they have to be "caught in the act" to be sentenced to death? Not at all. There just as to be proof that they murdered.
"Since the acts of abortionists are not illegal in our sick society, it would be a futile attempt to try to stop them with force. Hope that helped. "
Do we not, as Christians, have Biblical mandate to resist laws that contravene God's laws? If yes then what is acceptable resistance? Peaceful only? Violent? Peaceful resistance for 35 years didn't stop the man. Should we then escalate to violence or let it go? I am curious. I don't have an answer myself to be frank. I have not thought about it indpeth.
"Nick| 6.9.09 @ 1:29PM Scott Roeder, the man who shot Tiller, took upon himself an act that is justly the right of the state to implement, after due process of law. What Roeder did violated the natural law. "
And if the law never executes God's judgement? Which is the whole purpose of the law. If he was prosecuted the worse that would have happened is his clinic would have closed. He would not have paid the penalty he should pay - death.
Efrosinich | 6.11.09 @ 5:02AM
If the two are not used in conjunction, you get non-Biblical theology which is prevalent in the left-leaning churches
Nick| 6.11.09 @ 8:30AM
Solomani,
Thanks for the clarification.
You asked: "Do they have to be "caught in the act" to be sentenced to death?"
As a matter of fact, they do. God demands the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses to sentence someone to death. The procedure for sentencing people to death in this country is certainly not Biblical, by any means. What legal authority SENTENCED Tiller to death, by the way?
"Do we not, as Christians, have Biblical mandate to resist laws that contravene God's laws?"
I'm not sure to what you are referring. Christians must not obey laws that would COMPEL them to commit immoral acts. But if the law allows people to do immoral things, Christians have no mandate to exact justice upon those guilty of breaking God's Law.
In the first century A.D. abortion was legal. A Roman man could kill his wife. Christains didn't go around killing guilty Romans. They worked to change the law. Christ said, "Render unto Ceasar, the things that are Ceasar's."
Remember, the death penalty, like all laws, is for protecting the innocent and society as a whole. Death should be imposed, by the state, if it is the ONLY way to protect the community. Christ never promised justice in this world.
And only the state has the God-given right to execute the guilty. The average citizen can only use deadly force to stop someone who is in the act of threatening or trying to kill somone else.
Richard Baker| 6.11.09 @ 1:22PM
Mr. Natoli:
So when the state creates a class of killings that are legally acceptable and without due process while being morally unacceptable the response is What? I brought up Dr. King because he drew a distinction that needed to be mentioned between legalism and morality. This kind of moral relativism does have it's consequences, doesn't it? I disagree with the shooters' action but understand his motivations. Sometimes Dirty Harry applies when he said "Nothing wrong with people getting shot as long as the right people get shot". If the people being murdered were blacks or Latinos, would there be such a hue and cry against the shooter? Just wondering.
Richard Baker| 6.11.09 @ 1:55PM
One more thing. When the state engages in Tyranny, Mr. Jefferson said to do what? Tyrannical actions engender violent reactions, regardless. Otherwise, tyrannical slavery would still be practiced in the Confederate States of America and I say this as a Virginian. Liberty and Freedom are not always Bloodless past-times, otherwise the Revolution and Civil War make absolutely no sense.
State sanctioned abortion is seen by many as Tyranny against Life. Remember, Ann Coulter has said that since Roe v. Wade the tally is 49 million abortions to 5 abortionists. And a Holocaust exists where?
Prayers needed| 6.15.09 @ 1:14AM
I pray for the Tiller family and also for Scott Roeder who must be feeling quite alone and lonely.It is a sad irony that both he and Dr Tikker gave way to the same temptation seeing violence as a sloution to a problem.
Trackback| 7.7.09 @ 2:01PM
Magnetic Wraps, on Magnetic Wraps, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt: