It took a Kansas jury on Friday just 37 minutes to find Scott Roeder guilty of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller.
The prosecution said all along that this was a clear-cut murder case, and the defendant even admitted the crime. The defense wanted the jury to consider a voluntary manslaughter charge, which carries a much lighter sentence than murder. But the judge ruled against that.
Roeder testified that he believed abortion was murder and said he needed to stop it by killing Tiller, one of the few doctors who provided abortions later in pregnancy. Roeder did not deny any of the facts surrounding the May 31 shooting.
Kim Parker, one of the prosecutors, says she hoped the judge’s decision to not allow the jury to consider second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter resonated.
“Hopefully it sends a clear message that this type of conduct is clearly not justified under the law,” Parker said. “There is no place for this. There are no medals to be given for those who violate the rules.”
If men had the capability to have the same circumstances happen to them, a safe, simple, discreet method of getting out of it would have been developed a long time ago. George Carlin said it best when he told you mental midgets, “you’re not pro-life, you’re anti-woman”.
#40
A period of gestation for which the precise length of time is in dispute.
If conservatives REALLY believed that life began at conception, they would do something to prevent the one million+ spontaneous abortions in America every year.
Instead, the pro-lifers let out a collective yawn when a million, maybe a million and a quarter, human babies die every year.
When I see pro-lifers advocating for massive funding of pre-natal care and research programs, I’ll believe their claims about their supposed reverence for the fetus.
#26:
“The fundamental issue with which you are grappling is that your opinion about what is considered a life, even a potential life, is far from universal.”
There’s no opinion in my argument at all.
It is a fact that at some point between fertilization and birth, the fetus becomes a human.
It’s also a fact that no one can point to the exact time that it happens.
As a logical consequence, some abortions are murders, and we really don’t know which ones.
You can’t argue against this, without injecting into the argument an opinion as to when a fetus becomes human.
I’m acknowledging that we don’t know. The desire to err on the side of caution is, I guess, an opinion. But it’s not an opinion about when life begins.
for those of you with the little dangly pieces and making grand statements against abortion….go play with those dangly things and amuse yourselves. You have no business trying to tell anyone it’s “murder”. You kill more sperm in your sock — so, stuff it.
This man should be put to death for killing another man, especially for killing him IN HIS F*CKING church, with kids, elders, and other people present.
The man is deranged and, he was spurred on by all you little dangly parts people saying “good work” and egging him on in this insane thinking. There is no god in any religion that condones this type of thing. Murder is something that religions try and repress.
A medical procedure to evacuate a uterus of a foreign growth — be it a tumour or a zygote is not murder. Pregnancy is a choice, not a sentence.
Oh forget it, go play with your dangles, it keeps your mind occupied.
#44
As a logical consequence, some abortions are murders, and we really don’t know which ones.
We are in agreement right up until this statement. In your opinion, some abortions are murders because of your personal belief of when life begins. If you believed that a fetus is not a human life until it leaves the birth canal for example, then no abortion is murder. If you believed that the destruction of a fertilized egg is murder, then all abortions are murder.
#46
Pardon, I agree with most everything up to the statement I mention in #46 except for this one:
There’s no opinion in my argument at all.
This man is another religious terrorist, like the ones involved in 9/11. He couldn’t get the country to adopt his religious views. The country has rejected his religious views on that particular subject. And rather than accept the democratic process, he has taken the law into his own hands.
And who knows, the religious fanatics may succeed. If they’re willing to sacrifice their lives, like the men who sacrificed their lives taking down the WTC towers, they may create a climate of terror in the U.S. so that no doctor will perform abortions.
As long as one side has people willing to sacrifice their lives, they’ll be tough to stop.
So all you wingnuts who say “Islam is bad, they kill people in the name of god and Christians don’t”. Time to STFU. All you can say is that Christian terrorists haven’t killed as many people as Islamic terrorists. Yet.
And yes, I know there are a few anti-abortion people who aren’t religious fundamentalists.
Thomas, #42.
I consider that a non-responsive answer.
Scientifically there’s really no discussion on this. Elephant life begins at conception. Monkey life begins at conception. Turtle life begins at conception.
And human life begins at conception. Biologically there is no argument.
Whether or not you consider the baby in the womb a human being worthy of protection, you cannot deny that it is human life and it is being terminated by someone’s choice other than his/her own.
Period.
>> Carrie said, on January 30th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
>> Scientifically there’s really no discussion on this.
You wish!
I would guess that A LOT of scientists, doctors, biologists etc differ in their opinion whether full human rights should be given to a blastocyst.
Um, I said scientifically and biologically there is no argument that it is human life after conception.
Whether or not it is a person worthy of rights is not the realm of science. That’s the realm of morality.
Carrie
#49
You simply did not like my answer but my answer was quite accurate. If life begins at conception, then we can take a fertilized egg, drop into a mason jar and life will be created on its own, right?
Frankly, there is a great deal of disagreement and discussion both philosophically and scientifically and it starts with the definition of what exactly is meant by “life”.
Whether or not you consider the baby in the womb a human being worthy of protection, you cannot deny that it is human life and it is being terminated by someone’s choice other than his/her own.
That is your opinion. I, along with the majority of the scientific community, disagree and that is the fundamental issue: we disagree. Whether you care to admit it, not everyone agrees with your point of view.
#51
Um, I said scientifically and biologically there is no argument that it is human life after conception.
And you would be wrong. There are numerous people that disagree with this point of view. That is the point.
#51 Carrie
“Um, I said scientifically and biologically there is no argument that it is human life after conception.”
You sure did and you are absolutely wrong!
I won’t bother to argue with you because you are already convinced that you are right. Come back when you have an education in Molecular Biology.
Scientifically and biologically a fertilized egg is human life. So is an unfertilized egg. So is a lump of cancer cells. So is a man’s hair root. All have human DNA.
A fetus is not a baby. The proper term is fetus right up until the umbilical cord is cut. Once the umbilical cord is cut the baby is no longer dependent upon the mother and thus is a person.
While premature babies usually survive, it is extremely rare that fetuses with even a small chance are aborted. Such cases are reserved for the most dire cases where the continued pregnancy will seriously harm the mother.
As Thomas points out, putting a fertilized egg in a jar to develop is no more murder than is an abortion.
This was not a Capitol indictment so he is not facing the death penalty. He will receive Life. The question is if he would ever be eligible for parole. Doubtful but possible.
So the baby in the womb is not a person until after it is fully born and the cord is cut. Is that your argument?
I wonder then, would you do away with all laws on the books today that prosecute certain killers with an extra murder if they kill a pregnant woman?
If you’re being consistent, you should.
But one more thing: A baby certainly is dependent on others for its survival after it is born. How else does it get its food, etc.?
So the baby in the womb is not a person until after it is fully born and the cord is cut
You mean that a fetus in the womb is not a person (or baby) until after the cord is cut. I do not personally believe that but some do. However, I also do not believe that a fertilized egg is a person. The whole point of choice is that there is great dissent of opinion about when exactly life begins.
I wonder then, would you do away with all laws on the books today prosecute certain killers with an extra murder if they kill a pregnant woman?
I cannot speak for Mr. Fusion, however, I would. Let’s make sure we prosecute people that murder beings we know to be human instead of playing around with double murder for pregnant women. If a someone kills a single person, the punishment should sufficiently severe that tacking on the fact that they killed more than one person (or potential person) would be superfluous.
A baby certainly is dependent on others for its survival after it is born. How else does it get its food, etc.?
Yep. However, exit from the birth canal and having the umbilical cord cut represent clear lines of delineation on which everyone can agree. It has nothing to do with degrees of dependency per se. It has to do with consensus.
My values tells me that murder is wrong, regardless of the outcome being someone that is guilty or innocent. However this seems to be a case of judging someone for making a choice to kill someone, and because it’s a legal definition of what he did was illegal, he should pay the price for his actions. Just because we “legally” allow someone to terminate a life, doesn’t make it right. Just because a court says you can, doesn’t me you aren’t a murderer.