ROEDER'S TRIAL: THINGS TO COME FOR US?

George Offerman


As I mentioned in an earlier post, no matter which way one holds Roeder and what he did, the fact that his defense was not allowed for whatever reason, does not bode well for those who fall outside the purview of political correctness, and may soon be used against us. I am attaching a very well written piece by Dr. Monica Miller, Associate Professor of Theology and Religious Studies at Madonna University in Livonia, Michigan.

Dr. Miller, one of the ND 88, writes one of the best pieces on the need to have a fair trial and the need to consider motive, despite the fact it is extremely unpopular and very few on the pro life side want to contemplate. It is a must read, and I am posting the forward to the piece, that addresses the Roeder trial, and encouraging everyone to go to the link posted below to see Dr. Miller’s paper in progress concerning the moral use of force and her conclusions.




From Monica Migliorino Miller, Ph.D. Director of CPLS
see www.prolifesociety.com
for Roeder conviction another way to access this paper.

In light of the January 29, 2010 Scott Roeder conviction, this working paper (Scroll down) on the ethics of using force in defense of the unborn, is offered for your consideration. My conclusion is that lethal force cannot be justified-- though it is not intrinsically immoral. The point of this paper is to examine this issue with a critical mind.

Here are some thoughts re the Roeder case:
1) According to principles articulated in my paper-- Roeder's killing of abortionist George Tiller, was an illicit use of force--even though his motive was licit.

2) Roeder is not morally guilty of murder. Murder is the morally unjustified taking of innocent human life. Roeder is not guilty of that. He is guilty of an unjustified use of force against an unjust aggressor and so the judge, in the Roeder's case, should have permitted the jury to consider the lesser charge of manslaughter and he did not.

3) The Roeder trial was not a fair trial as long as the victims of abortion were dismissed as non-persons and Tiller's killing of the innocent was never a consideration. And unfortunately since, legally-speaking, no injury is cause to the unborn in abortion--Roeder's defense was, from the start, restricted, unfair and unbalanced.

Monica Migliorino Miller, Ph.D.


Link to Working Paper on the Ethics of Force in Defense of Unborn Human Life

http://www.prolifesociety.com/pages/ArticlesAndPublications/EthicsOnUseOfForce.pdf




As one can see, Dr. Miller attempts to work through some difficult moral, ethical and Theological issues pertaining to force, and how our faith should guide our actions. The forward also points out how the denial of due process by the courts is also not moral, and may be used sometime in the future to deal with any other issue that the developing god/state will determine appropriate for their desired ends.

Again, the denial of due process is not a good outcome in this case despite the fact Roeder Killed Tiller. In essence, he was tried and convicted before this even took place and it is an ugly, but not unpredictable event that will definitely have bad outcomes for believers in the near future. Look out.