The Atlantic - Latest Comments in Not To Push The Point...

Re: Not To Push The Point...

torourke — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:23:24 -0000

Maybe so eltoro,

But there is quite a bit of evidence that many, if not most of the partial-birth abortions performed by Tiller were done on healthy women. See here:

http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/abortion_sum/99itop1.pdf

Scroll down to the bottom of the report, and you find that of the 182 or so partial birth abortions performed in 1999, none were performed to save the patient's life, or to reduce the chance of some sort of physical malady. They were performed to reduce some sort of mental problem, possibly the anguish over physical and mental deformities as you suggest. But possibly not. You yourself suggest that even the complicating factors occurred in "some cases", suggesting that there were partial-birth abortions that were performed on demand. In those instances at least, my characterization of his actions is on target.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Marisa — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:47:18 -0000

This is all such a tragic waste. Hasan could have gotten out of his deployment. Without hurting anyone. Easily. All he had to do was say that he was gay. He would have been out just like that. But I guess murdering a bunch of unarmed people is less humiliating or less of a sin than being gay.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Marisa — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:21:45 -0000

Eltoro:

The Catholic Church is guilty of hypocrisy by pushing to outlaw abortion which would put doctors who perform abortions and/or women that seek them in jail. The way the Church handles the mortal sins of pedophilic clergy is to council them, retrain them, relocate them and do everything within their power to shield them from prosecution. In the case of Bernard Law, the Pope went so far as to bring him to Italy in order to avoid the American justice system. (And this guy is much worse than Polanski.)The Church demands the authority to police themselves, as if they are not subject to our laws. When one of their own commits a crime they try to convince their clergy to do the right thing, but for anyone outside of their walls, the Church lobbies for prison time.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:49:51 -0000

Torouke,

Dr Tiller was performing a medical service (ending a late-term pregnancy) for the sake of his patients, people whose long-term health could have been jeopardized by their pregnancy; in some cases, Dr. Tiller's performance of an abortion might have saved the life of his patient. In some cases even, Dr. Tiller's actions might have amounted to a mercy killing, since late-term abortions are sometimes performed because an unborn child might have severe physical and/or mental deformities. So when you reduce Dr Tiller to someone who killed innocent defenseless human beings in a gruesome manner,without considering the context in which his actions occurred, you are as guilty of making simplistic moral judgements as many of those who conflate the collateral yet unintentional killing of civilians via military actions with acts of murder.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

torourke — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:04:37 -0000

I think this analogy fails on two levels:

No we can't equate the murders at Ft. Hood with the collateral damage we inflict "at will" in trying to kill terrorists. The thirteen people murdered at Fort Hood were intentionally killed, their deaths were willed, whereas those killed as collateral damage in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, etc. were not intentionally killed--their deaths were not willed. Are you suggesting that the American military is deliberately targeting civilians?

Furthermore, George Tiller himself deliberately killed many innocent, defenseless human beings in very gruesome manners (cracking open a baby's skull and sucking out its brain is torture and murder, plain and simple), whereas there is no evidence that the twelve soldiers and one civilian murdered at Ft. Hood had ever deliberately killed an innocent person. So it makes sense to condemn both the violence that Dr. Tiller performed routinely along with the violence that ended his life. Not so with the Fort Hood tragedy.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Gingergene — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:20:04 -0000

Also: if a guy like Hasan with multiple red flags couldn't be isolated and addressed, how much harder will it be to locate the real threats if we throw a much wider net? Does the military really have the resources right now to thoroughly investigate every soldier who is Muslim, or of middle-eastern descent? Or do we further cripple our military by dismissing all those soldiers?

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:44:43 -0000

"Regarding Hezbollah, since the 2006 Israeli incursion into Lebanon, there have been less than a dozen rockets fired into northern Israel. This is in contrast to the approx. 4,000 that were fired at Israel during the war."

Why was Hezbollah able to fire so many rockets during the war, despite the widespread bombings that occurred during the war? If the bombing was so effective, Hezbollah would never have been able to fire off 4,000 rockets during the course of the war. They would have only been able to fire a couple of hundred at the most.

No, what succeeded in reducing the rocket attacks on northern Israel was the CEASEFIRE negotiated between Israel and Lebanon, not the IDF's bombings during the war.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Guest — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:51:33 -0000

@Eltoro.

The point of any military action by the IDF has been and will be the protection of Israeli citizens. It is not the responsibility of the IDF to protect Palestinian civilians any more than is expected on the battlefield to avoid collateral damage.

Regarding Hezbollah, since the 2006 Israeli incursion into Lebanon, there have been less than a dozen rockets fired into northern Israel. This is in contrast to the approx. 4,000 that were fired at Israel during the war. I don't see how your argument that Israeli military actions have been ineffective holds water. In both cases, the IDF's swift and overwhelming attacks destroyed terrorist infrastructure, and mitigated subsequent terrorist attacks.

When engaging in urban warfare with terrorists hiding amongst civilians, civilian casualties are unavoidable. The IDF has made a good faith and largely effective effort to minimize civilian casualties. This is in marked contrast to either Hamas or Hezbollah.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:37:56 -0000

"It is not wrong for Israel to defend itself from terrorists, and collateral damage is sometimes unavoidable when cowards choose to hide amongst civilians."

Avoiding the killing of Palestinian civilians should be the very point of any military exercise performed by the IDF, since Hamas's very reason for provoking Israeli attacks that hit Palestian civilian areas is to cause the death of Palestinian civilians at Israeli hands. The more Palestianian civilians that die as a result of IDF attacks, the more Palestianians that can be recruited to Hamas.

"In 2008, Hamas fired over 3,000 rockets into Israel. In the eleven months since Operation Cast Lead, they have fired only 100."

How much of this achieved by bombing of civilian areas that resulted in widespread civilian casualties versus a more targeted approach? Don't forgot how the bombing of Lebanon did little to stop Hezbollah's rocket attacks in northern Israel, but did a lot to kill Lebanese civilians.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:21:59 -0000

Eva,

I did mention in my post that this failure occurred despite the reporting of these crimes by the victims to the bishops, so I am not letting the Church's leadership off the hook (They can't feign ignorance.) They were told about these crimes, and they failed to take the steps necessary to stop these crimes (removing the offending priests from their positions as pastors, kicking the offending priests out of the priesthood, and reporting those crimes to law enforcement officials) because they couldn't even acknowledge to themselves that there was a problem to deal with. (The Church made a mistake in who it accepted into the priesthood? That's impossible!)

Even when they recognized that there was a problem, too many of the Church's bishops refused to hold themselves accountable. They covered up the acts of those offending priests, and even when they actually removed those priests from their positions as pastors, they still kept them on the payroll as you mentioned. All despicable and dishonorable actions to be sure, but that still doesn't qualify as funneling money to child rapitsts.

I do agree with you though that the Catholic Church deserves to have its sin held against it just as much as any other organization, including CAIR.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Guest — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:45:27 -0000

@Eltoro

I guess it depends on your definition of effective. I think Operation Cast Lead was extremely effective, in that it accomplished its mission of stopping terrorist rocket attacks against southern Israel and destroying military supplies and infastructure for Hamas. In 2008, Hamas fired over 3,000 rockets into Israel. In the eleven months since Operation Cast Lead, they have fired only 100. It is not wrong for Israel to defend itself from terrorists, and collateral damage is sometimes unavoidable when cowards choose to hide amongst civilians.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Eva14 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:35:58 -0000

Not a cheap shot and entirely relevant to your point - as I said below, I was trying to suggest that it's not so crazy to list an organization that's known to protect child rapists alongside an organization that is alleged to have provided funds to terrorists. Some might even call the former the more heinous offense.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Jennifer D. — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:34:09 -0000

The Catholic Church has a lot to answer for, and how they have handled the pervert priest is disgusting.

The one thing I will give them in regards to abortion is that at least their pro-life stance extends to capital punishment as well. I have much more disdain for the religions that are militantly anti-abortion on the one hand, and pro death penalty on the other. Also, I don't think it's fair to say that the Catholic Church does not care about children after they are born. They provide one of the most accessible educational systems for poor children in the country, and perform extensive charitable activities.

This is all from a pretty militant pro-choicer, here. Just adding a little of my own perspective about the church.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Eva14 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:33:25 -0000

eltoro,

And you know very well that it wasn't a passive matter of "failure to protect" so much as an active and deliberate cover-up and protection of the criminal priests in question. Keeping them on salary for decades seems close enough to "funneling money" to me. It's also worth noting that this matter is hardly in the past - a Canadian bishop was just arrested within the last month or two, and it appears his protection from the law had been ongoing until a chance screening at airport security found child porn on his laptop.

Regardless, I'm not aiming to re-hash the church scandal - I was merely trying to point out to amichel that the Catholic Church is not some sin-free organization that no one should dare to mention in the same sentence as CAIR. The church's history in recent years is ugly enough that it's no enormous insult to mention them in the same breath as alleged funders of terrorists.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:21:24 -0000

Amichel,

While the goal of the IDF's attack is to kill the terrorists launching attacks on Israeli civilians, the actual effect of the IDF's actions is to kill lots of Palestianian civilians, while failing to kill the actual terrorists. One could argue that Hamas succeeds at playing the IDF like a fiddle. Hamas launches civilian rocket attacks on Israel, the IDF shoots back and kills Palestianian civilians while missing the terrorists, enabling Hamas to recruit more Palestianians to engage in terrorism.

So all this talk about legitimacy is irrelevant to judging Israel's actions in this context. Israel's methods of defending itself results in the deaths of a lot more Palestianian civilians compared the to the deaths of Israeli civilians resulting from Hamas's despicable terrorist attacks, and the deaths of those Palestian civilians are not only unnecessary, they are also INEFFECTIVE.

Causing so many unnecesary deaths among civilians, especially when these deaths fail to advance the end of the war between Israel and Hamas, is simply wrong. It is not as wrong as the terrorist activities of Hamas, but they are wrong nevertheless.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:02:55 -0000

Lebecka,

I did not comment on the moral authority of the clerical leadership of the Catholic Church (which I agree has been fatally compromised by the Church's failure as an institution to protect children from child predators among the clargy) because that was not issue at hand. The issue at hand was the appropriateness of equating the act of abortion to the act of murder in the statement issued by the bishops.

BTW, child molestation is a sin even when it is committed by priests, and the Church does condemn it as a mortal sin regardless of who commits the sin. So the Church is not guilty of hypocrisy when it condemns abortion. The Church's leadership is guilty though of extreme arrogance and callousness when it focuses so much attention on abortion when it did such a piss-poor job of policing its priesthood, despite the fact that so many victims of child molestation by priests reported these crimes to the Church's leadership.

The Church would be guilty of hypocrisy on the issue of abortion, however, if we discovered that there were widespead cases of nuns getting abortions for themselves, or of priests securing abortions for women the priests had sexual relations with, and if the Church leadership engaged in the same sort of denial and coverups that characterized its handling of child sexual abuse by membes of the clergy.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Guest — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:57:01 -0000

@eltoro

You're attributing to me an argument I'm not making. What I am saying is that Israel is a legitimate government that is justified in using the IDF to respond to terrorists. Hamas is an organization of terrorists, that does not have the same legitimacy as the IDF. Of course war crimes by one side do not justify war crimes by another. I just don't consider the vast majority of the IDF's actions to be war crimes. Hamas provokes Israel by commiting war crimes in launching rockets at civilians. The IDF responds by attacking militants that are hiding amongst civilians, but taking steps to limit collateral damage such as calling buildings that are going to be bombed. I am sure some individual members of the IDF have commited war crimes, and if they can be proven and prosecuted should be. However, the entire organization of Hamas exists to commit war crimes against Israel. I do no think this is morally equivalent.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

witlesschum — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:48:14 -0000

Again, Goldberg's responses is vague as all hell. "Take seriously" how? Who should do the taking seriously?

It means nothing. I guess he wants some sort of national clucking session over 'the extent to with jihadist ideas have penetrated.' Maybe it could be similar to the ones from my formative years about violent video games and gangsta rap, possibly with himself in the role of C. Delores Tucker. Sen. Joe Lieberman is still available to play Sen. Joe Lieberman, unfortunately. Are some senate hearings worth their weight in manure are what he wants? Does anyone think such an effort would lead anywhere good? Likely, like most Senate hearings, they'd lead to nothing and be ignored by almost everyone. But if they caught on with some large segment of the public?

If your goal is to push American Muslims to embrace radical, anti-American ideologies that preach that the U.S. is the enemy of Islam, then Red-baiting style public inquiries in the press (or maybe the Senate) into what Imams are preaching isn't a bad idea. It's not as good as the Iraq War, but it might be somewhat effective.

I still remember the Yglesias post from 2003 in which he argued that George W. Bush was an Iranian agent. (Bush had, to date, taken out two of Iran's major enemies Saddam and the Taliban) Maybe we should take seriously the possibility that Goldberg is some sort of jihadist mole? I kid, but c'mon.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:33:07 -0000

Eva,

You know very well that the Church is not funneling money to child rapists. It is however spending millions to compensate the victims of clerics who raped children, as a result of its failure to protect those victims from child predators among the clergy. These failures occurred even though those victims reported these crimes to bishops who had both the authority and the moral/legal obligations to remove those criminals from serving as pastors and to report those criminals to law enforcement officials.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

lebecka — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:29:58 -0000

Not cheap, just the truth. The Church values unborn children much much more than born ones.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

GregSanders — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:24:45 -0000

I'd been thinking some of these points, but hadn't put it together with such care and precision. Well done.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Jen R — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:18:40 -0000

Yes, I think this is a much more apt comparison.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

lebecka — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:17:51 -0000

eltoro,

you still have not commented on the fact that while the Catholic Church is in a constant tizzy about abortion, it is perfectly willing to turn its back on already born children being raped by its priests. The hypocrisy of the Church devalues its moral arguments.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

eltoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:17:07 -0000

Amichel,

You are being deliberately obtuse yourself; surely you are intelligent enough to realize that in times of war, even the good guys are capable of committing war crimes. Moreover, even if the war crimes committed by the bad guys exceed those committed by the good guys, it doesn't absolve the good guys of the war crimes that they commit. The evils committed by Al Qaeda don't justify the violations of the Geneva Convention that occurred under the Bush-Cheney administration, and the evils committed by Saddam Hussein at Abu Ghraib during his regime don't justify the abuses committed by the US military at Abu Ghraib after the fall of Saddam.

Re: Not To Push The Point...

Melanie — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:02:42 -0000

Excellent point. Thanks for this.