Scott Roeder, guilty of premeditated, first-degree murder

[quote="Rich_Olszewski, post:17, topic:184912"]
Quite right....Nor will Roeder.

[/quote]

Unlike Tiller..I don't think Roeder had any more killing lined up..certainly not as a licensed physician anyway.

[quote="pismopal, post:16, topic:184912"]
You are absolutely wrong. The defendant did not admit to premeditated "first degree murder". He said that he killed the victim. There are many shades of homicide and some of them involve justification..not all are murder. No attorney would allow his client to define the act he committed as "first degree murder". It is not up to the defendant to define his act anyway. The jury convicted him of the only crime the judge allowed to be considered. We will see where the appeal goes..won't we? As to how many babies Tiller's death will bring back...none.. but he won't be responsible for any more deaths now will he?

[/quote]

You're argument doesn't hold water. You're totally splitting hairs. The defendant admitted that he killed the victim - which the jury perceived as an admission of first degree murder. Or are you somehow trying to justify Roeder's dispicable action?

Actually, the prosecutor said the opposite – that Roeder had additional victims in mind.

Who was he to usurp what is God’s perogative, and kill the man before he might have repented of what he did? A number of former abortionists did just that, most famously Bernard Nathanson, who has subsequently done much to fight the American pro-abortion movement. Suppose some madman had killed Nathanson?

While my first, visceral reaction to the death of Tiller was along the lines of “good riddance,” I really think what you say here would be a much more Christian way of thinking. Your point about Nathanson is well-taken.

I have to have faith that God will take merciful, loving care of all the infants that Tiller killed. They have no personal sin, so this doesn’t require much of a leap in my mind.

But Tiller was neck-deep in a morally grave situation, and then, boom - he’s dead. Part of me knows that we tend to reap what we sow, but another part of me keeps thinking that I would sure not appreciate being forcefully sent up to my Maker with no warning whatsoever. I think these thoughts might be the Holy Ghost quietly pointing out my own pride and need for grace. All of us Catholics would do well to continue praying for Dr. Tiller’s soul. Charity demands it.

We are commanded to love our enemies. I would like to think that should I be around when Antichrist comes, I will daily pray for his conversion. A lesser sinner such as Tiller needed, and others like him still need, the same prayers.

These violent fringes, at least the religious ones (I won’t even group them with genuine pro-lifers) need to understand that this is a war we are in. But it is not a physical war, and so knives and guns will not only not win the fight but will only hurt our cause. This is a spiritual conflict which we cannot win apart from constant prayer, calls to conversion and charity.

Wow - little comment turned into long rant. Sorry!

In short - good point Rich :thumbsup:

[quote="pismopal, post:18, topic:184912"]
You live in a totalitarian country which has been taken over by a political group which hates a certain ethnic minority. These ethnic monorities have been hauled away for execution but a small number of them are being hidden in your house by your family. The law of the land is that these minorities are fair game for arrest and death and so is anyone who attempts to prevent this by hiding them. An officer discovers them hiding in your home and you kill the officer to prevent the arrest of those you are hiding and to prevent the arrests and deaths of your family members and yourself.
What crime are you guilty of? Don't forget the law of the land which demands that you be punished for hiding innocents as well as for the death of an agent of this political group. Not so easy to be the judge is it?:shrug:

[/quote]

Well, the crime you are guilty of is murdering an officer of the Gestapo or Schutzstaffel. But I'm guessing you mean, of what sin are you guilty?

I learned moral theology class at my Jesuit high school (they take orthodoxy pretty seriously) that the moral status of a crime is to be entirely from the act in itself, not the intentions nor from the circumstances. It is, they would say, immoral to deliberately kill another human behing, according to catholic theology. Now, it is not quite as simple as this. Suppose you wake up in the middle of the night after hearing a noise, and retrieve your gun (assumed that you one one in this scenario). You go downstairs and see a burglar holding a gun, preparing to point it at a family member who happens to be in the room. Undoubtedly, the idea that would come into mind would be to shoot the burglar before he can aim his gun at the potential victim. Now, why would you shoot him? You shoot him to subdue him, to prevent him from killing another person. You may even shoot him in the head, because of course that is the most effective way to get someone to drop a weapon. Ultimately however, the Church (as I was tought) would not say that you deliberately killed him; you tried to subdue him as effectively as possible, though, because of the difficult circumstances, it is incredibly likely that he will die as an *unintended *result. A truly good (perhaps perfect) Catholic would hope that the burglar would ultimately survive the bullet wound, even if he shot him in the head, because he did not intend to kill him.

Roeder intentionally killed Tiller because he figured that buy doing so, he would prevent Tiller from killing others. He committed an abstractly immoral act in order to prevent the commission of equally immoral actions by another person. Simply put, he thought his ends justified his means. The Catholic Church opposes this belief. It espouses an absolute, inviolable moral code, in which some things (murder) are simply wrong, no matter what their secondary consequences.

However, if you are inclined to disagree with the Vatican on this issue, I would consider the other side of your hypothesis. The Nazis, the Jacobins, the Soviets, and the Maoists all committed mass atrocities, most of them fully aware of the fact that they were immoral (read some of Heinrich Himmler's speeches and writings; he was more morally conscious than most people give him credit for), that they were, in fact, atrocities. But they comitted them because they believed that, ultimately, these atrociteies would bear fruit of far greater worth than the losses resulting from the atrocities themselves. If only they could annihilate the Jews, the Monarchists, the Bourgoisie, etc., could they reach the utopia that was quite worth the sins commited to get them there. As we all know, of course, none of them ever got there.

On another note, the Roeders of the world are the greatest godsends of the pro-choice movement, Every such fanatic pushes the idea that abortion should be illegal further out of the realm of social acceptibility. In fact, some left-leaning college students I know (the extreme of the present, but all too often the mainstream of the future) who put murderers of abortionists in the same category as suicide bombers. Though they'd never admit it, many pro-choice activists (usually more inclined toward utilitarianism) would gladly sacrifice a hundred more abortionists for a hundred more Roeders.

[quote="Dionysus, post:25, topic:184912"]

I learned moral theology class at my Jesuit high school (they take orthodoxy pretty seriously) that the moral status of a crime is to be entirely from the act in itself, not the intentions nor from the circumstances.

[/quote]

I have nothing to add to your superb piece, just noting that I, too, attended Jesuit schools, Regis High School in NYC, and Fordham University in the Bronx. I don't think there's any finer Catholic education than that one can get in a Jesuit high school. College is problematic these days, but when I was at Fordham, it was a model of orthodoxy and of superb instruction.

[quote="curlycool89, post:11, topic:184912"]
How does it advance the culture of life we are trying to promote when we take the very principle we oppose and "use it" for our own means? The pro-abortion people say that unborn babies do not count and can be killed. We simply turn around cannot say that Tiller's life "does not count" and therefore can be taken. All that does is go down to their level.

I would love for all abortions to end, but this was murder plain and simple. The jury made the right choice. Thou shalt not kill is still a commandment, and we can't ignore that or support someone who does.

[/quote]

:sad_yes: All life belongs to God, not to us humans. We simply have no right to kill people, no matter how much we may hate what they stand for.

The trouble with us making these decisions, is exactly why we have so many abortions: Human beings trying to play God. Its not smart, & its not right.
As far as the mention of Hitler (probably:shrug: inevitable), the poster is probably correct, & many of us would kill him, given the chance. I think that I might, truthfully.But the difference between me and Hitler, is that I would never imagine that just because I did something, that makes it right.
Murder is murder; if I murder the murderer, what does that make me? Killing George Tiller is murder. Just as much murder as Tiller killing all those little babies was.
** I didn't make these rules:** God did.

[quote="Rich_Olszewski, post:26, topic:184912"]
I have nothing to add to your superb piece, just noting that I, too, attended Jesuit schools, Regis High School in NYC, and Fordham University in the Bronx. I don't think there's any finer Catholic education than that one can get in a Jesuit high school. College is problematic these days, but when I was at Fordham, it was a model of orthodoxy and of superb instruction.

[/quote]

I attended St. Ignatius College Prep. in Cleveland, OH, and thereafter went off to a renowned, secular private college, and, to be honest, the intellectual caliber at this college was a step down from my high school. It's actually quite ironic, because if you tell someone at at this college that you went to a catholic school, they suggest that "here we're more open-minded and we won't repress your blooming intellect." In reality, my perfectly orthodox high school theology teachers use to encourage me to read Nietzsche, Freud, and Marx when I went through a "philosophical phase" (of which i am now rather ashamed). Most of the professors, however, can hardly spell Nietzsche.

I certainly owe more to my Jesuit education than to my college education, at less than one third the expense. I think it would would baffle (even scare) many a college student to find (as I did) that a bunch of collar-wearing priests could be more philosophical and intellectually challenging than a bunch of professors.

Oh, and thanks, by the way, for the complement. Coincidentally enough, I had to write a research paper at St. Ignatius on moral philosophy, specifically utilitarianism. Another bit of Knowledge I owe to Ignatius and his predecessors.

[quote=DihydrogenOxide]It’s twisted logic to say that “Tiller’s life does not count” if it obviously does when he’s murdering, even illegally in the eyes of the law, which is saying a lot in our culture today.
[/quote]

Everyone’s life matters 100% of the time, no matter if they are in grace or in sin. What Tiller did is absolutely sick and wrong, but not even that gives someone the right to play God and decide when his life ends. That right is reserved to God alone.

Would Tiller have murdered again? Probably, but that still doesn’t mean we can kill him in the name of preventing (as Minority Report put it) “pre-crime”.

[quote="Dionysus, post:28, topic:184912"]
I certainly owe more to my Jesuit education than to my college education, at less than one third the expense. I think it would would baffle (even scare) many a college student to find (as I did) that a bunch of collar-wearing priests could be more philosophical and intellectually challenging than a bunch of professors.

[/quote]

At Fordham, we had some real giants. One of my philosophy professors was Fr. Quentin Lauer, S.J., considered then the foremost interpreter of Hegel in any university in America. A list of "collar-wearing priests" across the range of Catholic colleges and their credentials as intellects was breath-taking. Few secular professors were up to their level IMO.

And, high school, in comparison to NYC's public high schools, was no different. Sure, the nationally acclaimed Bronx High School of Science outdid the Catholics in that area, but as for producing a complete, thinking man out of the grammar school boy who showed up at the front door as a freshman, the public schools couldn't compete.

Oh, and thanks, by the way, for the complement. Coincidentally enough, I had to write a research paper at St. Ignatius on moral philosophy, specifically utilitarianism. Another bit of Knowledge I owe to Ignatius and his predecessors.

Superb! :tiphat:

[quote="Dionysus, post:25, topic:184912"]
Well, the crime you are guilty of is murdering an officer of the Gestapo or Schutzstaffel. But I'm guessing you mean, of what sin are you guilty?

I learned moral theology class at my Jesuit high school (they take orthodoxy pretty seriously) that the moral status of a crime is to be entirely from the act in itself, not the intentions nor from the circumstances. It is, they would say, immoral to deliberately kill another human behing, according to catholic theology. Now, it is not quite as simple as this. Suppose you wake up in the middle of the night after hearing a noise, and retrieve your gun (assumed that you one one in this scenario). You go downstairs and see a burglar holding a gun, preparing to point it at a family member who happens to be in the room. Undoubtedly, the idea that would come into mind would be to shoot the burglar before he can aim his gun at the potential victim. Now, why would you shoot him? You shoot him to subdue him, to prevent him from killing another person. You may even shoot him in the head, because of course that is the most effective way to get someone to drop a weapon. Ultimately however, the Church (as I was tought) would not say that you deliberately killed him; you tried to subdue him as effectively as possible, though, because of the difficult circumstances, it is incredibly likely that he will die as an *unintended *result. A truly good (perhaps perfect) Catholic would hope that the burglar would ultimately survive the bullet wound, even if he shot him in the head, because he did not intend to kill him.

Roeder intentionally killed Tiller because he figured that buy doing so, he would prevent Tiller from killing others. He committed an abstractly immoral act in order to prevent the commission of equally immoral actions by another person. Simply put, he thought his ends justified his means. The Catholic Church opposes this belief. It espouses an absolute, inviolable moral code, in which some things (murder) are simply wrong, no matter what their secondary consequences.

However, if you are inclined to disagree with the Vatican on this issue, I would consider the other side of your hypothesis. The Nazis, the Jacobins, the Soviets, and the Maoists all committed mass atrocities, most of them fully aware of the fact that they were immoral (read some of Heinrich Himmler's speeches and writings; he was more morally conscious than most people give him credit for), that they were, in fact, atrocities. But they comitted them because they believed that, ultimately, these atrociteies would bear fruit of far greater worth than the losses resulting from the atrocities themselves. If only they could annihilate the Jews, the Monarchists, the Bourgoisie, etc., could they reach the utopia that was quite worth the sins commited to get them there. As we all know, of course, none of them ever got there.

On another note, the Roeders of the world are the greatest godsends of the pro-choice movement, Every such fanatic pushes the idea that abortion should be illegal further out of the realm of social acceptibility. In fact, some left-leaning college students I know (the extreme of the present, but all too often the mainstream of the future) who put murderers of abortionists in the same category as suicide bombers. Though they'd never admit it, many pro-choice activists (usually more inclined toward utilitarianism) would gladly sacrifice a hundred more abortionists for a hundred more Roeders.

[/quote]

A nice examination of the moral issues. Regardless of my feeble attempts to be a decent Christian..the agent who is going to send my family to a death camp will have to go..I will explain my reasons to my confessor later when I am able. Your response is actually what I was after but it was missed by some. Taking the examination into final judgement..I am wondering who will have a better chance at heaven, Tiller or Roeder? :shrug:

[quote="Christopher68, post:22, topic:184912"]
You're argument doesn't hold water. You're totally splitting hairs. The defendant admitted that he killed the victim - which the jury perceived as an admission of first degree murder. Or are you somehow trying to justify Roeder's dispicable action?

[/quote]

I don't think you read my post as this is not responsive..no matter. Your agreement with me or understanding my point isn't important.
Now allow me to return the favor by asking YOU...are you somehow trying to justify Tiller's despicable action(s)? You seem to think that this is some run of the mill murder case where an innocent man walking home is shot down by a robber who empties the victims pockets and then goes looking for another victim. The case is not run of the mill..this is why it provokes discussion. If you miss the points..and see it as cut and dried fine..go in peace.

[quote="Rich_Olszewski, post:8, topic:184912"]
How did Roeder help even a single unborn person by committing the murder?

Who was he to usurp what is God's perogative, and kill the man before he might have repented of what he did? A number of former abortionists did just that, most famously Bernard Nathanson, who has subsequently done much to fight the American pro-abortion movement. Suppose some madman had killed Nathanson?

And, this doesn't even count the injury Roeder has done to the pro-life movement.

Let him rot in prison.

[/quote]

The clinic was effectively shutdown after the death. The Lord calls up christians to engage in just wars against sinners such as the case of David against Goliath, Samson against the heretics in the temple, Moses and the plagues, etc. Are you going to say to your maker that you stood by and did nothing to prevent a madman like tiller from killing innocent children?

[quote="Califman831, post:33, topic:184912"]
Are you going to say to your maker that you stood by and did nothing to prevent a madman like tiller from killing innocent children?

[/quote]

Justice is mine, sayeth the Lord.

Tiller was not the one on trial - Roeder was. And I applaud the jury was for reaching the correct (and obvious) verdict.

And compound what he was doing by committing the mortal sin of murder myself? I am not God. It is for Him to judge each of us and pass judgment.

God’s decision. Tiller may have, in his heart, actually thought what he was doing was morally neutral. Roeder thought he was doing the Lord’s work.

God will look into each man’s heart and know the man’s culpability, and judge him thereby.

[quote="Rich_Olszewski, post:15, topic:184912"]
Had he killed even your own parents or your wife, you don't have the right to take vengeance and kill him yourself in return. It is the State's duty to prosecute crimes and punish the guilty.

[/quote]

Nothing I have read about this case points to a motive of revenge or vengence. Roeder, it seems, was not seeking vengence but to prevent Tiller from continuing his killing spree. I do not defend Roeder in any way, shape or form but your comparison is invalid.

[quote="Califman831, post:7, topic:184912"]
God bless Scott Roeder for sticking up for the innocent and bringing a just punishment to a murderer. Unfortunately our country has become so depraved that it considers abortion nothing more than a medical procedure and not the genocide that it is. If given the chance who who wouldnt kill another adolf hitler?

[/quote]

When a young Pope JP11 was faced with the Nazis invading his city, he told others they should fight hate & violence with love, not hate. Roeder walked into a church & blew a man away with innocent bystanders all around them. I can't believe anyone would hold him up as a hero. He also hurt the pro-life cause.

*I agree with this. Tiller’s acts were deplorable, but gunning him down in cold blood, was not the answer. *

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.