Christian Fundamentalist Terrorism? Abortion Doctor Murdered

Remove all ads!

Posting a business phone number is no problem, in my book. Posting a business address is fishy, but only raises some flags. Posting any home, family, or personal information is a huge red flag, and I would argue that, given the history, such an act, followed by an attempt on the person's life, should be interpreted as 'putting out a hit'. I.e. criminal. The only defense I could see from them is if they've actually put out hundreds and hundreds of these, and only 3-4 have been associated with actual murder attempts. I have no idea how many actually have been put out.

 

So it's OK if only a small fraction result in murder attempts? I would think the percentage I'd be shooting for (no pun intended) is zero.

 

Doh. And if it is not murder attempts, what about the inevitable death threats and the harassment?

 

How many political adds are followed by murder attempts or death threats on the targets? I guarantee you it's not zero, and those that are aren't necessarily coded signals to kill the person, or even in any way to blame for it. Some nut-jobs take perfectly reasonable criticism and turn them into hit-orders. You can't blame the critic in such cases. If a sizable proportion of the critic's statements lead to death attempts, then you start to question if, at the least, the critic shouldn't recognize that there's some wacko out there taking his comments too far.

You have to balance those against legitimate criticism and public discourse.

 

No, not at all - death threats and harassment are per se not pat of the of the public discourse, but borderline or outright criminal acts. And making it possible by posting addresses is an enabling act for such unacceptable behaviour.

That is what I meant with 'built the gun'.

The people who post these details are responsible for making it possible for the fruitcakes to harass, threaten and ultimately, as in the case of Dr. Tiller, murder. They are responsible because, unlike the gun shop owner who sold Roeder the gun, or the phone provider who enables a threatening phone call, they call these people out for a clear reason - to stop them from providing abortions, one way or the other. The letters are written in ambiguous double speak precisely because of that.

After Dr. Tiller, and previous murders or the odd abortion clinic bombing, even the dimmest bulb in the anti abortion movement, with a really short memory, can no longer deny that for some in the movement violence and murder is a legitimate means to achieve that end. As I said, they put out their fatwa - and then are shocked, just shocked that gambling is going on (to stay in metaphor). As disingenuous as it is hypocritical.

The Christian clerics behind these posters bear the same responsibility for acts of violence that Muslim clerics bear for the violence, threat or harassment following their fatwas, say against Danish cartoon artists or the like. But then, the latter usually don't bother making public personal and private details.

 

Sorry, I may have misinterpreted your question. I thought you were citing such things as reason to stop people from posting, say, a business phone number for someone they object to. That is public discourse, and you can't bar freedom of speech because of what some wackos would do with it. At least, here you can't.

You see it, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's there. Again, I ask, how many of these posters have been put out, on how many different people, and how many have been acted on? If they've only put out 5, and 4 have been acted on, then I agree with you entirely. But if they've put out hundreds, and only 4 have been acted on, then I think you're wrong.

 

It is one thing to say: Hey folks, GE makes crappy products or whatever - call the CEO and complain under this number ...

It is another thing to say: Hey, this guy is wanted (death or alive/ by Jesus) and he is a brutal, unrepentant murderer and baby killer (God curse him!) and by the way he lives here and that's his phone number, this is how he looks like, here's a pic of his house, here is his car and license plate, after work he picks up his kids in kindergarten B, his older kids go to school C and he goes to church X on Sundays (and make no mistake, that is the sort of information anti abortion activists in the past have published about such doctors, their staff and at times patients. They literally have files on them.). That's pretty much a personal profile - the sort of information people use to find creepy when stalkers collect it (to wit: no need to guess how anti abortion activists collect these information). Part of the public discourse, my a**.

It goes, in particular in this context, well beyond what counts as public discourse in my book. You do have a right to and a reasonable expectation of privacy even in public discourse, in the sense that personal details have no reasonable role in the question about whether abortion is right or not.

Adding all these private data adds nothing to the debate but a potential for escalation, and the rancorous debate about abortion in the US pretty much guarantees it. The murder of three 'wanted' doctors, and the attempted murder of also 'wanted' Dr. Tiller back in the 1990s are a point in case.

 

Exactly Ragusa. Comparing what the people profiling doctors who perform abortions are doing with public discourse against the actions of a company or a politician is completely an apples or oranges comparison.

The difference is that politicians - by definition - are public figures.

NOG, according to your profile, you live in Virginia. I think it's fair to say that you know who Jim Webb and Mark Warner are, and you probably even know what they look like. Or you could easily find out if you didn't. (I concede I got lucy in that Virginia was one of the few states that did NOT have a senatorial candidate up for re-election yesterday, so I didn't have to look up who won.) They are public figures. They have websites where you can contact their offices, and they give locations of where their offices are. Chances are, you do not know the names of any local abortion doctors, where they work, or how to contact them, because they are not public figures.

 

What I am seeing here is a gap between legalism and common sense. Legally speaking, if a person's name and telephone number is in the directory, then it is public knowledge and therefore to reveal it or publicize it is not a crime. Morally speaking, though, if you are doing so for the express purpose of causing them harm, it's a disgusting act. I suppose that some laws may exist in some places that say if you're act can be reasonably construed as an effort to have the target harmed, then you have violated a law. Certainly such laws should be in place.

As I said, though, it's a legal fine line -- like the people who measure exactly 300 metres away from a clinic or business because they have had restraining orders placed against them, and then proceed being jerks.

 

Like I said at the top of the page:

In other words, you have no disagreement on this point.

Which is why, if someone wanted to complain to them, posting a business phone number would be perfectly legitimate.

 

Speaking of which: North Carolina's Flip Benham, director of Operation Save America, responsible for the latest 'wanted posters', has just been sentenced to two years probation for stalking abortion doctors:

Anti abortion violence has been coming from that small pack of 'lone wolfs' in the larger anti-abortion movement. And indeed, isn't it striking how many of these supposedly 'isolated incidents' have there been over the last two decades in the US? Theirs is single issue terrorism in the shape of a leaderless, open source insurgency. The ideology is out there, ready for the taking; it resonates in the anti-abortion movement proper, and those among them inclined to enforce God's laws with violence become those supposedly inexplicable 'lone wolfs' and pick up the ball where the folks like Benham and their posters leave it - at the doorstep of a doctor.

The Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department can be forgiven in light of past comparable incidents to assume that that is just the point of these posters.

​

To wit: On the site that published the so-called Nuremburg Files in the 1990s (and the first wave of 'wanted posters' that resulted in several murders and the first shooting of Dr. Tiller), one name of a doctor was stricken on the wanted list, just hours after he was murdered. The message couldn't be much clearer.

PS: § 2339A US Code penalises material support to terrorists. It would be fun to try folks like Benham under that (probably unconstitutional because excessively broad and vaguely written) law. It would see Republican support for that part of the PATRIOT act vaporize before you can say 'Muslim'.