Tuesday, June 2, 2009

After Tiller

I wasn't originally going to discuss the whole Tiller murder, because the mainstream blogs seem to be doing a good job of it. It is a tragedy, as all murders are. The fallout has been as predicted, and that is what I'd like to discuss.

I was surprised when the US Marshalls were called out to protect high profile Abortion advocates. This after a murder of one person, who was caught fairly quickly and who seems to be a lone gunman. This is a bit extreme, says I. I wonder if a Catholic leader (a bishop, perhaps, or a high profile priest, maybe in California) were killed by, say, a radical gay rights extremist if such measures would be put in place to offer protection to the Bishops, for instance.

I read an article today from the wonderful Lifesite News, with some disturbing comments from a professor at a Catholic university. (emphasis mine)

Marquette University theology professor and former Jesuit priest Daniel Maguire published a statement on The Religious Consultation website lamenting the fact that Tiller was murdered "for honoring the law of the land."

"He is not the first doctor to so die and unless we get serious about this form of terrorism, he will not be the last," wrote Maguire. "Religious and political leaders who fan the flames of anti-choice, anti-woman fanaticism are not without guilt."

How, might I ask, is violating the laws, which Dr. Tiller allegedly had in a number of circumstances, honoring the law? How, even, is performing an action protected by law honoring it. Do I honor the smoking laws of the country each time I light up my pipe? Do I honor the alcohol laws of the country each time I drink some whiskey?

Just because an action is permitted by law does not mean it is good. Honoring a law means not violating it; I honor the smoking law when I take my pipe outside and away from building entrances, and I honor the drinking law when, for instance, I don't drink while driving, or while underage.

The article goes on to quote some other pro-life leaders who are claiming, for instance
"But I'd like to say on this day after a man was murdered in cold blood for performing abortions that I -- and the people I worked with in the religious right, the Republican Party, the pro-life movement and the Roman Catholic Church, all contributed to this killing by our foolish and incendiary words."
Essentially by saying "abortion is murder" we incite murders, even though we say "murder is evil". We cannot, therefore, say anything that indicates abortion is as evil as it actually is, it would seem. By making this concession, the pro-life movement would lose the language battle, which is essential to changing the hearts and minds of the public.

1 comment:

Christina said...

We cannot, therefore, say anything that indicates abortion is as evil as it actually is, it would seem.

Make no mistake - this is a deliberate attempt to silence us. We've already had a little taste of that here, where Domers opposed to Obama were accused of "hate-filled rhetoric" for protesting his commencement visit. How convenient that pro-life supporters can now be accused of inciting violence by speaking the plain truth about abortion. Somewhere, I can hear diabolical laughter...