• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

You are a speed reader then.
de burgh, there are some quality posters here on both sides, with entreched views, the rhetoric of some, about this emotive topic really does not offend or shock me in the cloister of this fantasy world.
 
Only the first two really are much in the way of proof for your point. The others are way too ambiguous.

But they are silly remarks, you are correct there.

There's NO ambiguity at all where those people stand on the murder of Dr. Tiller.

Also, I left out a handful where people said, "I condemn the shooting, but Tiller got what he deserved.", which is a self-contradictory statement, you can't condemn an act but then be glad it was committed or believe that it was well-deserved.
 
That you choose to ignore the fact that an unborn infant's body produces a chemical that keeps the air sacs of the lungs open (necessary for gas exchange within the lungs to oxygenate the blood, which allows the child to survive independent of its mother), plus makes breathing motions while still within the womb (an indication that, if outside the womb, it would still make those same breathing motions, only the baby would be inhaling air instead of amniotic fluid) allows me to believe that you prefer to live in denial.

What you believe about me is not very important, and the notion that the fetus is getting ready to be an air breather, is not such a big shock, to me or anyone else. Its still a fetus.
 
There's NO ambiguity at all where those people stand on the murder of Dr. Tiller.
It looks like that to me. Only a couple of those were reasonably clear.

Also, I left out a handful where people said, "I condemn the shooting, but Tiller got what he deserved.", which is a self-contradictory statement, you can't condemn an act but then be glad it was committed or believe that it was well-deserved.
Actually it isn't contradictory. They're saying he was an evil man who got his dues but they cannot support murder. I consider many such but I don't want them murdered.
 
you can't condemn an act but then be glad it was committed or believe that it was well-deserved.


....and why not???? I condemn the murder...but I also condem the MURDERS Tiller committed.

as far as getting what he deserved....thats for G-D to decide.
(of which neither you or I are)
 
....and why not???? I condemn the murder...but I also condem the MURDERS Tiller committed.

as far as getting what he deserved....thats for G-D to decide.
(of which neither you or I are)

Tiller didn't commit any murders. That's the point. You may not be comfortable (I am not) with the way he pushed the legal, ethical boundary. But in this country, and more importantly, in his state, Tiller did nothing illegal.

It's a slippery slope when we start making up mental lists of people we think deserve to die.
 
And how does Scott Roeder keep getting statements to the press? Will someone put a gag order on that jerk already!

No one cares what he has to say. If he's got info about other crimes in the works, tell it to the FBI. But ST*U about your 'victory'.
 
And how does Scott Roeder keep getting statements to the press? Will someone put a gag order on that jerk already!

No one cares what he has to say. If he's got info about other crimes in the works, tell it to the FBI. But ST*U about your 'victory'.

Anything to make Pro-Life look bad.
 
It's a slippery slope when we start making up mental lists of people we think deserve to die.
Maybe for you.

For most of us, I dare say it's a hobby.
 
Tiller didn't commit any murders. That's the point. You may not be comfortable (I am not) with the way he pushed the legal, ethical boundary. But in this country, and more importantly, in his state, Tiller did nothing illegal.
.
So? that does not mean he wasn't a monster.

Do you support late-term abortions when the mother is not in serious danger?

I cannot see how they could be anything but monstrous. This does not excuse his murder but it does mean he was a monster if he was doing this.
 
Anything to make Pro-Life look bad.

So does that mean if a PETA member killed a worker at a Slaughter house that killed animals you would be supportive?

Or is it YOUR morals tell you that killing animals is ok?

Both a SLAUGHTER HOUSE and ABORTION CLINIC are LEGAL.

Yet you claim that legal doesn't mean it is moral or right.

So what makes a PETA member wrong for killing a worker at a slaughter house wrong, and killing an abortion doctor right? Could it be your MORALS?

What makes your MORALS right to do such a thing?
 
So does that mean if a PETA member killed a worker at a Slaughter house that killed animals you would be supportive?

Or is it YOUR morals tell you that killing animals is ok?

Both a SLAUGHTER HOUSE and ABORTION CLINIC are LEGAL.

Yet you claim that legal doesn't mean it is moral or right.

So what makes a PETA member wrong for killing a worker at a slaughter house wrong, and killing an abortion doctor right? Could it be your MORALS?

What makes your MORALS right to do such a thing?
However an animal is not a human.

Have you ever had a human fetus with potatoes?
 
We have our crazies, too, I confess.

I might be one of them seeing as I would not ban abortion until the second trimester, although I'd probably keep the restrictions that we have in Britain such as a doctor's permission and such, even if my mentality is pro-life.
 
Last edited:
I don't give a hoot that someones wanton killing happens to be sanctioned by the government. Evil is evil; legal or not.
 
Anything to make Pro-Life look bad.

But Roeder's the one making the statements. No one's got a mic planted in his cell. My question was how are these statements getting out there? It's like Manson's ramblings... enough already.
 
However an animal is not a human.

Have you ever had a human fetus with potatoes?

Again, what makes an animal less than a human. I'm not arguing on the side of PETA only saying that they believe the animal has a right to life as well.

You don't agree with that, but again, legal doesn't mean right or moral.

You think the animal less than human.

Pro-choice thinks the rights of the woman > fetus.

These are choices that we make. What makes your choice right and theirs wrong?
 
I don't give a hoot that someones wanton killing happens to be sanctioned by the government. Evil is evil; legal or not.

Much like PETA thinks the killing of animals is Evil. What makes them wrong and you right?
 
I might be one of them seeing as I would not ban abortion until the second trimester, although I'd probably keep the restrictions that we have in Britain such as a doctor's permission and such, even if my mentality is pro-life.

I would let it go to 18 weeks without questioning the woman at all. After that, I would make it a capital offense if it were not done with a doctor's orders and matching orders from a doctor completely unaffiliated with the first.
 
Back
Top Bottom