Arimathea | Philosophy | Coulter on Tiller | Permalink
Page views: 2091965
Total entries: 1452
Total comments: 221



Wednesday, June 3, A.D. 2009
Coulter on Tiller

On Sunday, I wrote about the abortionist and Lutheran usher, George Tiller. Today, the lovely Lady Ann makes Tiller the subject of her weekly column, “49 Million to Five.” Her opening point never occurred to me:

In the wake of the shooting of late-term abortionist George Tiller, President Barack Obama sent out a welcome message that this nation would not tolerate attacks on pro-lifers or any other Americans because of their religion or beliefs.

Ha ha! Just kidding. That was the lead sentence—with minor edits—of a New York Times editorial warning about theoretical hate crimes against Muslims published eight months after 9/11. Can pro-lifers get a hate crimes bill passed and oceans of ink devoted to assuring Americans that “most pro-lifers are peaceful”?

As Auster frequently states, the Left is not concerned about equity, human rights, tolerance, or compassion but about overthrowing the West’s traditional civilization. That is why, for all their self-righteous posturing at home, they give passes to non- and anti-Western violence and persecution against women, homosexuals, journalists, Jews, prisoners, ethnic minorities, and all their pet oppressed groups. The only sinner in the Leftist book of the damned is Western man—you know, the fair skinned, blue eyed devil who created the modern world and who spawned, to his eternal infamy, these same ungrateful, self-loathing Leftists.

Coulter’s closing comments are delightfully on target, as well:

The official Web page of the ELCA [Evangelical Lutheran Church in America] instructs: “A developing life in the womb does not have an absolute right to be born.” As long as we’re deciding who does and doesn’t have an “absolute right to be born,” who’s to say late-term abortionists have an “absolute right” to live?

I wouldn’t kill an abortionist myself, but I wouldn’t want to impose my moral values on others. No one is for shooting abortionists. But how will criminalizing men making difficult, often tragic, decisions be an effective means of achieving the goal of reducing the shootings of abortionists?

Following the moral precepts of liberals, I believe the correct position is: If you don’t believe in shooting abortionists, then don’t shoot one.

Ah, but Ann, consistency is not a human, much less a Leftist, strength.

Posted by Joseph on Wednesday, June 3, Anno Domini 2009
Philosophy | PoliticsComments
Previous entry (all realms): Michael Vick and the Importance of Qua
Next entry (all realms): Foggy Mountain Breakdown

Previous entry (Philosophy): Michael Vick and the Importance of Qua
Next entry (Philosophy): Aesthetes among the Totalitarians