Author: has written 5273 posts for this blog.

Jill has been blogging for Feministe since 2005.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

16 Responses

  1. Renee
    Renee June 8, 2009 at 12:10 pm |

    The hypocrisy of these so called “pro-life” people is disgusting. Of course they wanted harm or they would have redacted all of the personal information of the clinic staff from their flyers and communications. The way to promote life is not by promoting death or violence through passive aggressive means. What I am wondering is when the government is going to take this seriously and pass some laws that will ensure the safety of the doctors and staff that bravely work in these clinics.

  2. FashionablyEvil
    FashionablyEvil June 8, 2009 at 12:33 pm |

    The people who protested regularly outside George Tiller’s clinic are adrift! alone! after Tiller’s murder? Where did I pack that tiny violin…?

  3. mzbitca
    mzbitca June 8, 2009 at 12:36 pm |

    I was thinking, if Dr. Tiller’s clinic doesn’t reopen on Monday and there are still a ton of protestors out there it would be an excellant time to get out there with video cameras. I think it would be extremely powerful that less than two weeks after one of their own murdered a man they are still out screaming hate.

  4. Kathleen
    Kathleen June 8, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    Is any kind of big national march for choice being planned in the aftermath of this? I know it’s been done before, and Tiller was still shot dead by terrorists who are winked at by the U.S. government, but it seems like a good time to try again.

  5. Kathleen
    Kathleen June 8, 2009 at 12:48 pm |

    Possibly in Wichita instead of Washington? Hotel stays would be cheaper, it’s a shorter drive for people who can’t afford to fly and don’t live on the East Coast. Or is this already in the works and I just haven’t heard about it?

  6. Matt
    Matt June 8, 2009 at 2:16 pm |

    A great question from John Cole, via the Economist’s blog, “Democracy in America”:

    “So when do we get to start torturing this guy:
    The man charged with murdering a high-profile abortion doctor claimed from his jail cell Sunday that similar violence was planned around the nation for as long as the procedure remained legal, a threat that comes days after a federal investigation launched into his possible accomplices…

    Scott Roeder called The Associated Press from the Sedgwick County jail, where he’s being held on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller one week ago…

    ‘I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal,’ Roeder said.”

  7. Alexis
    Alexis June 8, 2009 at 2:51 pm |

    That Rolling Stone article is profoundly disturbing.

  8. lou
    lou June 8, 2009 at 4:36 pm |

    Perhaps stalking laws should be rewritten. What they are doing is harassment and stalking, clear and simple.

  9. Thomas
    Thomas June 8, 2009 at 4:56 pm |

    He is a terrorist. He admits knowledge of other pending terrorist operations. What will the administration do about this terrorist conspiracy?

  10. bluedancer
    bluedancer June 8, 2009 at 6:58 pm |

    I don’t understand how the behavior described in the Rolling Stone article can be legal. Isn’t that practically a textbook description of harassment and stalking? Are the laws that different in Kansas?

  11. William
    William June 8, 2009 at 7:17 pm |

    He is a terrorist. He admits knowledge of other pending terrorist operations. What will the administration do about this terrorist conspiracy?

    If recent history is any indication they’ll call for concilliation and dialog in order to find “common ground,” “heal the wounds of our nation,” and contribute to the recovery of the economy by stimulating the sagging Platitudes sector.

  12. Jaleesa
    Jaleesa June 8, 2009 at 8:01 pm |

    I’m wondering the same thing as bluedancer.

  13. Rebecca
    Rebecca June 9, 2009 at 11:50 am |

    Weirdly, I do think that Operation Rescue nutbar is sad that Tiller is gone. Because that clinic wasn’t just Dr. Tiller’s livelihood. It was Operation Rescue’s.

    Newman arranged his entire life around that clinic–he uprooted his family and his “business” to revolve around it.

    What a sad and pathetic waste of his time and energy, really. If he cared anything for the “unborn” he’d work tirelessly to prevent unwanted pregnancy and make adoption more affordable for the middle class. But that goes for the lot of the “pro-life” community, hypocrites all.

  14. Joan
    Joan June 9, 2009 at 2:06 pm |

    There are plenty of “pro-life” people who are not hypocrites, just as there are plenty of “pro-choice” people who consider abortion regrettable in most cases. The raving fringe of each group insists there is no moral issue at all here.

  15. Joan
    Joan June 9, 2009 at 2:07 pm |

    That is, that there is no need for further moral consideraton.

  16. William
    William June 9, 2009 at 3:19 pm |

    That is, that there is no need for further moral consideraton.

    Morality is between an individual and their god(s). I can’t really argue whether any abortion is moral or immoral. Painting the discussion as one of moral consideration is a red herring. This is a discussion about rights. SCOTUS held that Neo-Nazis had the legal right to march through the largest community of holocaust survivors in the country. I think few people would make the case that such behavior was morally right, but the fact of the matter is that it is legally protected because some rights cannot be abridged unless their exercise causes material harm to a real and discrete individual.

    Like it or not, the law doesn’t consider a fetus a person. Even if it did theres the competing right of the mother who might not want another person using her bodily resources and holing up in her abdomen for three quarters of a year. You couldn’t demand the use of my spare bedroom because you were homeless, regardless of your relation to me. If you tried to enter my home by force I’d be well within my rights to resist with violent (and lethal) force. The legal theory espoused by forced birth proponents essentially demands that women and a fetus have a legally unique relationship in which the needs or desires of the woman always (or almost always) come second.

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.