Christian leaders have been quick to denounce the murder of George Tiller, a notorious abortionist. At one level, it’s understandable that they wish to distance the prolife movement from this incident. When, in a blue moon, something like this happens, liberals associate the crime with the prolife movement generally, so one can understand why Christian leaders are so quick to disassociate the prolife movement from these isolated attacks.
But this is a catch-22. On the one hand, they feel the need to get ahead of the story. If you don’t seize the first opportunity to define your own position, then your adversaries will define it for you and to your disadvantage.
On the other hand, it’s obviously premature to comment on the specifics when we don’t know the specifics. We know next to nothing about the background or motives of the suspect. That will trickle out over the next few days and weeks.
Ironically, the very act of disowning this individual carries with it the implication that he was motivated, primarily, or exclusively, by antiabortion sentiments. We then disown him as an authentic representative of the prolife cause.
And that’s undoubtedly correct. But, in so doing, it concedes something to the proabortion lobby which is quite premature at this juncture: a tacit concession regarding the motives of the suspect. We’re in no position to know that as of yet.
For example, the suspect could just as well be one of those rightwing anarchists–indistinguishable from leftwing anarchists–for whom murdering an abortionist is just a convenient expression of his seditious attitude towards government generally or the political establishment in general.
In addition, there’s no reason for the prolife movement to allow itself to be put on the defensive every time an isolated incident like this occurs.
You might as well denounce the auto industry every time you apprehend a drunk driver or hit-and-run assailant. Indeed, I daresay there’s a higher statistical correlation in those cases than in the case of violent acts against abortion clinics or their “providers.”
And if liberals are going to may hay of this, we should remind them that if they disapprove of murderous violence, they should extend their disapproval to abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia. Spare us the feigned indignation.
Steve,
ReplyDeleteI couldn't sleep until I wrote down these thoughts last night, and I felt like I was channeling your satirical spirit. Cheers.
To back up Steve's point a bit, two soliders were shot outside a recruiting station this morning. One died. Suspect is in custody.
ReplyDeleteI don't hear anyone from ANSWER or Code Pink saying, "We condemn this action." Why? Precisely because we don't yet know if it was an anti-war zealot who did this in the first place.
Although you can also be sure that even if it WAS an anti-war zealot, no one on the left is going to demand anti-war groups issue appologies, etc. After all, we had 19 Muslims kill 3,000 innocent Americans and we were constantly told over-and-over "It's just the hardliners, not the moderates. You can't judge all Muslims by those actions." Blah blah blah.
It's pretty much a given that whoever the media and Democrats (but I repeat myself) hate is on the correct side of the issue.
Well, we needn't mourn TOO much over the unborn Tiller murdered. Odds are that only a few of those were among the elect. In fact, he probably did us a favor by offing some future sodomites, heretics, unbelievers, mockers and scoffers and sent them straight to Hell instead.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, he probably did us a favor (with a possible limited number of exceptions). Those babies would have just grown up to annoy God's elect, anyhow.
Of course, Tiller's now joining them in Hell, even though he served as God's death squad by proxy.
ANITA B DAY SAID:
ReplyDelete"Well, we needn't mourn TOO much over the unborn Tiller murdered. Odds are that only a few of those were among the elect."
Odds are? Based on what? Where does Calvinism put percentages on the relative proportion of the elect to the reprobate?
"Of course, Tiller's now joining them in Hell, even though he served as God's death squad by proxy."
False analogy. God, as creator and judge, has the right to do certain things we don't–apart from divine authorization.
Likewise, human beings have certain social responsibilities to one other by virtue of our human constitution. We don't have a right to take human life unless certain conditions are met.