WICHITA, Kan. - The slaying of a Kansas abortion doctor put the anti-abortion movement on the defensive Monday with prominent leaders delicately distancing themselves from the accused killer while positioning their stand as one shared by a majority of Americans.I'm not on the defensive, not in ANY way, and anyone that is needs to rethink their stance and beliefs. I don’t condone ANY act of murder, but I do NOT mourn the death of those that have willfully murdered thousands upon thousands of unborn babies!
Already reeling from the failure to dominate last year's election and worried their cause won't be at the center of the hearings on President Obama's first Supreme Court nominee, anti-abortion leaders feared that backlash from George Tiller's death could temporarily silence the abortion debate.
"In the immediate future, it makes it difficult to even speak about an issue we've been speaking about for 365 days a year," said Mary Kay Culp, executive director of Kansans for Life. "Anything you say — somebody is going to pounce on us."
Abortion opponents were swift to condemn Tiller's shooting death Sunday during church services in Wichita. Kansans for Life and Operation Rescue, which is also based in Kansas, said 51-year-old Scott Roeder, who is being held without bail one count of first-degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault, did not belong or donate to either group.
Full Story Here:
Shooting puts abortion foes on defense
Tiller the Killer was a mass murderer, he performed many thousands abortions. Scott Roeder, the man accused of killing Tiller, he too is a murderer, and now he must accept the consequences of his actions. Does it make Roeder's action any more or less vile simply because he only killed once? That is a question that I just can't answer. Murder is wrong, no matter who does it, or how many times they do it.
There is, in MY opinion, a major difference between committing an act of murder and killing someone that is a threat to the safety of you and/or your family. It is NOT wrong, in MY opinion, to KILL an invader, to KILL a burglar or a robber, to KILL someone that is intent on doing YOU and yours bodily harm or perhaps causing your death.
I do NOT believe it is wrong for a soldier to KILL in war, to KILL in defense of their country.
I suppose there are those among us that can equate the birth of a baby to an invasion, and thus rationalize the death of that baby as an action of war, that would be the mindset of anyone callous enough to murder an innocent baby.
Personally, I don't care if I gain readers or lose readers for this statement, abortion on demand is WRONG.
Certainly there are extenuating circumstances that can make abortion an acceptable practice, but those circumstances need to well defined. Acts of rape or incest, the life of the mother and possibly an absolute guarantee that the child will be massively deformed or mentally challenged, those may be acceptable applications of abortion, but even then, that decision should be carefully weighed.
Abortion on demand should not be an option. If a woman hasn't been the victim of rape or incest then she needs to accept the consequences of HER actions. The use of birth control by those with loose morals would be much better than murdering the innocent life that springs from those indiscretions.
And yes, the father should assume responsibility too, but we all know, in many cases, that just isn't going to happen. In some cases it's because the woman doesn't even know who the father is.
Personal responsibility folks, look into it. Abortion is NOT a viable option and shouldn't be used as an easy OUT simply because someone didn't assume any!