SCOTT ROEDER SENTENCING: Convicted of killing Dr. George Tiller

check this out. this is the statement that scott roeder (he killed late-term abortionist george tiller) made at his sentencing hearing. now, roeder was wrong, as we all know, and he will rightly spend the rest of his life in prison.

but listen to roeder's horrific description of abortion procedures and then listen to the cnn newsmen's reactions to them. you'd think roeder was describing something as innocuous as a football play. Lord Jesus, come quickly.

youtube.com/watch?v=VhwHiFcRjP8

[quote="captainmike, post:1, topic:193105"]
check this out. this is the statement that scott roeder (he killed late-term abortionist george tiller) made at his sentencing hearing. now, roeder was wrong, as we all know, and he will rightly spend the rest of his life in prison.

but listen to roeder's horrific description of abortion procedures and then listen to the cnn newsmen's reactions to them. you'd think roeder was describing something as innocuous as a football play. Lord Jesus, come quickly.

youtube.com/watch?v=VhwHiFcRjP8

[/quote]

The judge should not have allowed Roeder to speak at the sentencing. Usually this is a time when the convicted and sentenced individual expresses regret for their actions and publicly apologizes to the victims family. By contrast, a regurgitation of Roeder's warped ideology is not required. Roeder has clearly earned the right to spend the rest of his natural life behind bars.

[quote="Christopher68, post:2, topic:193105"]
The judge should not have allowed Roeder to speak at the sentencing.

[/quote]

i couldn't disagree more. 40+ million innocent human beings have been butchered in this country since roe v. wade. that fact should be screamed from the rooftops on a daily basis. we should never tire of being reminded about it. the killing methods that roeder described were more horrfic than anything that hitler did to the jews. in the time it has taken me to type this message, several babies have been dismembered and ripped from their mothers' wombs in the u.s. you can't talk about it too much.

Yes, abortion is horrific. But ‘abortion’ was not on trial - ‘Roeder the murderer’ was on trial.

[quote="Christopher68, post:4, topic:193105"]
Yes, abortion is horrific. But 'abortion' was not on trial - 'Roeder the murderer' was on trial.

[/quote]

don't care. wish he'd been allowed to speak for a week.

[quote="captainmike, post:5, topic:193105"]
don't care. wish he'd been allowed to speak for a week.

[/quote]

Within his four-walled cell, Roeder can speak all he wants for the next 50 years. He'll have to be content with that.

Capt Mike and Christopher...

I agree with you both. For one thing abortion is a horrific crime against God. My fear is that if people are allowed to take the punitive process of law into their own hands...this will become a country that turns the clock back to the old west.

Rocky

Yes, abortion is a horrible thing. It should be shouted from the rooftops. We all should be in the streets demonstrating against such atrocities.
All of that however does not justify the murder of someone like Mr. Tiller.
He might have been responsible for thousands of deaths, but Mr. Roeder had not right to take the law into his own hands and kill him.

Scott Roeder set the pro-life movement back several steps...

The only way killing is justified is
a. as an unfortunate consequence of legitimate self-defense where the goal is not specifically to kill but to remove the threat, or
b. as part of a just war to defend your country and others.

Killing those who kill to show killing is wrong makes no sense. Furthermore, it is ineffective, as

  1. There are about a million other doctors women can go to, and
  2. It turns public opinion against the pro-life movement (there are many who are still undecided-if the first thing they hear about us is this nutzo, which side will they choose?)
  3. The doctor you just killed might have had a change of heart and become one of our allies later on-several former abortion doctors have (Remember Dr. Gunn, the guy who Paul Hill killed? Right before his death, he was beginning to question what he was doing-he had already stopped doing the late-term stuff! Maybe he coulda been one of our allies and a major name in the pro-life movement-of course, now we'll never know)

To sum it all up, SCOTT ROEDER IS NOT PRO-LIFE. He is anti-abortion, maybe even pro-unborn, but when you break down that evil ethic adopted, Roeder is essentially pro-choice.

EDIT: Just heard that there is a sedevacantist faction in Virginia which supports this ilk. They believe that when John Paul II condemned anti-abortion violence in Evangelium Vitae, that was the point where the See of Peter became vacant (ergo, they say Benedict XVI is invalid)...Also, they refer to the National Director of Priests for Life as "Frank Iscariot".

May God bless him, but we don't need any more John Browns. Brown didn't do any good, and neither did Roeder, and such behavior never will amount to much.

We don't need John Brown. We need Abraham Lincoln.

Now that’s just plain rationalization and is an absurd assertion. You disagree with the man over tactics.

[quote="Nec5, post:11, topic:193105"]
Now that's just plain rationalization and is an absurd assertion. You disagree with the man over tactics.

[/quote]

How is it absurd?

Pro-life means respect for ALL human life, from conception until natural death...Murderers obviously don't have respect for any life.

Pro-choice means you believe some life can go without regard...obviously, Roeder thought the same thing...

And your point is...?

[quote="DeaconsSon87, post:12, topic:193105"]
How is it absurd?

Pro-life means respect for ALL human life, from conception until natural death...Murderers obviously don't have respect for any life.

Pro-choice means you believe some life can go without regard...obviously, Roeder thought the same thing...

And your point is...?

[/quote]

His counter argument would refer you to the horrors of war, which are essentially conflicts writ large. Would you have killed the Nazis to liberate the concentration camps?

That's why your argument fails; your real argument is with his use of tactics.

War can be fought and still be acceptable to the Church. Look up the Church’s teaching on “just war”. WWII was definitely a “just war” on the part of the Allies.

But murder is never allowed. Scott Roeder is not pro-life.

For what if Dr. Tiller had continued to live, and realized his error? What if he had then become one of the greatest advocates of pro-life practices?

That will definitely not happen now. Christ wants people to have the chance of redemption. Tiller might have converted, might have gotten mercy, but it would have been better if he had been allowed to live and have a chance at becoming a force for life.

[quote="Nec5, post:13, topic:193105"]
His counter argument would refer you to the horrors of war, which are essentially conflicts writ large. Would you have killed the Nazis to liberate the concentration camps?

That's why your argument fails; your real argument is with his use of tactics.

[/quote]

I notice you're from Virginia...are you a part of that sedevacantist group tied with the "Army of God" by any chance?

[quote="DeaconsSon87, post:15, topic:193105"]
I notice you're from Virginia...are you a part of that sedevacantist group tied with the "Army of God" by any chance?

[/quote]

Never heard of it. It is sad that so many of you have no real understanding of evil.

[quote="captainmike, post:1, topic:193105"]
check this out. this is the statement that scott roeder (he killed late-term abortionist george tiller) made at his sentencing hearing. now, roeder was wrong, as we all know, and he will rightly spend the rest of his life in prison.

but listen to roeder's horrific description of abortion procedures and then listen to the cnn newsmen's reactions to them. you'd think roeder was describing something as innocuous as a football play. Lord Jesus, come quickly.

youtube.com/watch?v=VhwHiFcRjP8

[/quote]

That just made me cry. That was the saddest, most heartwrenching...no wonder they wouldnt let him speak and defend himself...People dont WANT to know..

Do you (general) think that if they'd let him speak the trial outcome would have been different?

[quote="takers, post:18, topic:193105"]
Do you (general) think that if they'd let him speak the trial outcome would have been different?

[/quote]

I think it very possibly could have..that little speech of his, if nothing else, was certainly an appeal to emotion...it got mine going!! I was beside myself over the baby that the doctor snapped his neck - MY GOD! if I was that Mom I would have screamed...thats just .. horrific..

Just thinking out loud- even if it WAS just an appeal to emotion, which I dont think it was- it was an account of events that led to obvious emotional distress, I think there COULD have been a different outcome because it shed light on WHY he did it...isnt that important??

Just like abused women, women who are abused for YEARS by their husbands, and then they turn around and kill them. The court KNOWS they killed their husband..yet they are allowed to speak their peace...tell of their abuse, what they suffered and went thru - everything that amounted to this, idk, I guess 'emotion' that led them to do it...and then sometimes theres understanding...IMHO to be fair, you gotta take EVERYTHING into consideration...If I'm not mistaken, I'm sure SOME lady somewhere has gotten off the hook for such a thing..not that murder isnt wrong, but because she felt there was no other option - and was able to convince the court through emotion that that was true..

This could have, and IMO should have happened in this case..yes, he murdered the guy. But he should have been allowed to speak is case. He's going to jail anyways...let the guy say his peace...

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.