Hi everyone,
Here's this week's article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/11/us/11roeder.html?ref=us
Questions to Consider:
1. Why is this particular court case controversial?
2. What does this debate suggest about American views on abortion?
3. What are your views concerning this issue?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This case is controversial because the defense plans to shift the focus from the defendant's homicide to the morality of abortion. Also if this is allowed it gives future cases a precedent to cite, and allows anti-abortion activist to become more bold.
ReplyDeleteI am still unsure about my personal feelings toward abortion, but i do support others rights to it. I believe that everyone should be able to make their own choice based on their beliefs and their situation.
1. This case is so controversial because although its purpose is to find Mr. Roeder guilty of murder, the larger issue tackles the morality of abortion. Some will argue that Mr. Roeder should be venerated for his “crime,” because he rid the world or Kansas of a man whose profession involved destroying Life. While, others feel Roeder murdered an innocent man and should be given a sentence just as tough as any other murderer. In essence, the case involves the steamy debate over abortion, and its outcome will show the American public the justice system’s view on this issue.
ReplyDelete2. Americans hold this debate over abortion as a very important one, as some are willing to claim a murderer as a “hero” for saving lives after he killed of an abortion doctor. When an event as extreme as this makes national headlines, you know it is because Americans feel their ethics are being questioned.
3. I don’t know what to say about abortion. I mean it is the right of the mother to decide if she wants to carry through with it or not, and if she does….she has to answer to God for her actions and deal with the consequences on her own. I don’t think the government should put limits on people’s choices. If they legalize abortion…the option is free to anyone, whereas if they prohibit abortion, the public has no choice at all. Having the choice to decide for your self is much better than being told what to do. Say for instance, the government decided that Mc Donald’s would only sell cheeseburgers on their menu… there would be no Quarter pounders, McChicken sandwiches, Big Macs, fillet-o-fish, etc. How would Americans feel being stripped of all their choices…pissed off right? I guess the option should be out there. This way, the people who want abortions will be able to have them, while those who don’t believe it in should just mind their business….its not their decision to worry about.
Anything involving abortion will almost always be controversial. Religion versus science--is it a human life, or is it simply a fetus? Is it murder, or is it not? This case is particularly controversial because a late-term abortion doctor, ironically in a twist of fate, was murdered. The man accused of murdering him is strongly pro-life and is a probably Christian. To him, murdering Dr. George R. Tiller was fit because Roeder most likely saw him as a murderer, performing late-term abortions. However, pro-life groups, specifically Operation Rescue, do not condone his actions. They see it as undermining the Christian faith. This trial seems to decide how morally correct "revenge" and abortion really are--the defendent kill Dr. Tiller as revenge for the lives that he took as an abortion doctor.
ReplyDeleteIn a southern conservative city, Roeder has supporters who call him a hero for murdering someone that they had considered a murderer. Others see him as a cold-blooded murderer who took the life of a doctor.
This shows how split Americans are on the topic of abortion, the extremes that people are willing go to to show their points. It also shows how passionate Americans can be when their faiths and beliefs are challenged. Pro-choice versus pro-life has been controversial for several decades (Roe v. Wade 1973 was, and still is one of the most controversial cases in the history of the United States), and we still continue to argue because of our personal opinions. The debate of abortion shows the stubbornness of Americans, as well as how much faith and religion can affect our viewpoints.
I'm pro-choice. Women should be able to choose what they want to do, as long as they're fully aware of what they're doing, and what the consequences may be. We should have the right to decide everything in our lives, because (in most cases) only we know what's best for ourselves. If you're pro-life, think of it this way: why do you want to push your beliefs onto others so badly? The other person doesn't believe everything that you believe; they may not think that fetuses are actual people. That's what I find so hypocritical of religion--you're judging someone for not believing the same things that you believe when they don't have the same beliefs as you do. And isn't God the only person who can judge? You have the right to choose a lot of things--what you wear, what you eat, when you sleep, etc.. Why not add "whether to abort" to the list?
This case is controversial because instead of it being treated as a murder trial, it is being treated as a trial of moral values. Mr. Roeder's trial is being looked at, to some, as since he was murdering future children, then the murder of him was being justified. It was supporting the statement, "kill one, save many" and this causes some people to believe that he should be let free. My view concerning this issue is that Mr.Roeder was not justified in his killing of Dr. Tiller. I don't have a particular take on the abortion issue but i think that everyone has the right to their own opinion and people's personal beliefs should not be brought into this trial.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that Mr. Roeder 's action was justified. A murder is a murder. Whether or not he thought of it as "kill one, save many," as stated in the article, I don't think killing anyone is right. Sure, abortion may be wrong but it doesn't mean that the doctor should be killed. It's all about one's personal views. Abortion is one's decision and society shouldn't stop people from this. In society, taking a life is a crime. However, if you think about it, doesn't killing animals make people criminals as well? Similar to abortion, these moral/ethical issues are very controversial and honestly, it's not about right or wrong. These controversial topics will never have a right or wrong answer because they're just personal choices or personal viewpoints.
ReplyDelete1. Why is this particular court case controversial?
ReplyDeleteIt is actually pretty obvious why this court case is controversial. Scott Roeder is on trial for murdering late term abortionist George Tiller. The controversy in this case arises from Roeder’s argument that he has actually saved lives by ending the life of “Tiller the Baby Killer.” Additionally, there is great effort in preventing this case from shifting away from a homicide case to an abortion case. This case must not lose its purpose to the greater issue of whether or not abortion should be legal.
2. What does this debate suggest about American views on abortion?
This debate suggests a very troubling pattern in American views on abortion. America is becoming stubborn and violent when it comes to deterring abortions. The case of Scott Roeder is not an isolated one; Shelley Shannon also attempted to kill Dr. Tiller. Additionally, there a man, not mentioned in the article, was killed for protesting abortions close to a high school. There is bloodshed from both sides of this debate. The people are divided, and for some incomprehensible reason, willing to kill to get their way.
3. What are your views concerning this issue?
In regards to the murder of Dr. Tiller, I see a huge contradiction. One of the mantras of the anti-abortion movement is “pro-life.” Then isn’t ironic how a “pro-life” advocate took it upon himself to take the life of another. In my opinion, Roeder’s actions are impediments to his cause. Additionally, I feel that people should just let things be. It doesn’t really have an effect on another person’s life if a woman decides to have an abortion. There is no legitimate reason to murder someone. Also, I am all for choice. My opinions are so because I consider circumstances that may have forced women to have unwanted pregnancies (i.e. rape or ignorance of contraception.)
-Pd 2 Rich CC
Janine
ReplyDeleteGod is dead (Friedrich Nietzche). He has been dead for a long time or maybe he has never been born. We don't know. We just follow the Bible written by man. But whenever you involved religion into a situtation, it almost always becomes complicated. Abortion is contradictoary to a religious belief. Look at the situation now. A religious man killed another religious man at church. What's the difference? They have different opinions. Why should you kill another person because that person's opinion differs from yours? This hypocracy, in my opinion, has deemed God dead for an incredibly long time. Then it continues to the point where other religious people are praising the murderer. It just doesn't make sense to me. If killing is abhorred by the religion, why would the followers praise it? Because a man had a different opinion? The human race wouldn't be able to survive if this type of killing would be deemed reasonable. Hey, it could turn into the Crusades, part 2.
Anyway, religion shouldn't play a part in the government. It just skews the perspective and makes people lose sight.
This just makes me sad and frustrated that people can't be open-minded towards other people's opinions. You could still stand firm on your opinion while listening to someone else's thoughts on the matter. We should be able to freely make choices.
DEREK YAM
ReplyDelete1. Why is this particular court case controversial?
This court case is automatically controversial because of the issue of abortion. The defendant is trying to get away with murder by saying that his motives were to stop other murders. He is trying to justify manslaughter by murdering an abortion doctor. This brings up a whole conflict between the morality of abortion..
2. What does this debate suggest about American views on abortion?
This debate suggests that many or some Americans have strong feelings on abortion. If they believe that killing a man is justified if it stops abortion, it shows they are willing to go far.
3. What are your views concerning this issue?
I believe that the man should be prosecuted for man slaughter. He should not be able to hide behind the issue of abortion and get away with murdering another. That would be hypocritical of those who do not support abortion because in the end, another life is being murdered.
SY Pd 2
ReplyDeleteThe reason why this issue is so controversial is because the conflict between abortion rights has lingered for so many years that the murder of an abortion doctor is not seen as the bigger picture, but rather the views of abortion. The United States of America sees itself as a Christian nation, though I don't believe that to be true but I can save this argument for later. The Christian view is anti-abortion, but the question is if this time, we went a bit too far. What I think about abortion is that it's wrong. To me, abortion is like murder. You're killing innocent babies every time someone has an abortion, and we're allowing that to happen: thousands of them. So to punish a man who ended a life of an abortion doctor to bring awareness to everyone about the thousands of unnoticed murders seem unreasonable. Sure, he killed a man. But there's a justification behind it. Punishment is logical, but not a death sentece.
This case is as controversial as it is because it deals with the two radical sides of one of the most controversial issues of our time. The case isn't just an average murder case, but a case that revolves around the issue of abortion. In countries such as America, where society is influenced by religious values, this issue tends to split people up dramatically. Radical opponents of abortion are attempting to justify the murder while radical supporters are claiming that the court decision will lead to an "open season" on abortion doctors. With such radical beliefs on each side, it's hard for the public to stay impartial on the case.
ReplyDeleteI think that the controversy over this case says a lot about American society and views. We are a nation that's struggling to be progressive and democratic (giving people the right to abortion) while still keeping our traditional and puritan influenced views (opposing abortion because it goes against religious values).
Personally, I believe that if we claim to be a democracy, then we should at least give people the option of supporting or opposing abortion. We can't expect others to follow and live by our own values. It's healthy and admirable to stand up for your own beliefs, but attempting to force those beliefs on others is taking it too far.
I feel like abortion is a women's choice and if she feels like she can't care for the baby, or if she was raped and cannot give the baby a good life, if she would've had to give the baby up for adoption then maybe she would feel compelled to abort her baby. However, abortion during the third trimester is pretty much killing the baby because by then itls features are sdeveloped and the brain may be as well. I can understand why the citizens of witchita feel strongly about this, but this case should focus on the act of murder not the purpose of it. Something as nationally dividing and controversial as the legality of abortion should be disscussed inthe supreme court.
ReplyDeleteThis case controversial because many people consider a man who commited a crime as a hero.As LeeAnn said Mr Reoder is a murderer, he had no reason to kill the doctor.It's too easy to kill someone to defend our own personal ideas:America's a democratic country.There are laws for that. Everyone has the right to be in favour or against abortion.Every crime is a crime whether it's for personal reasons or not.There are two major points of view about abortion that are completely contradictory.On the one hand,many Americans are christians and are attached to moral principles.They see abortion as an unbearable crime that they are ready to do everything to stop. But, on the other hand , we are now in the twenty-second century which means that women have the right to to keep a baby or not when they get pregnant.It's a form of liberty that that women had to strive a lot to achieve.Killing people who don't think like you is is gooing back to a form of tyranny.Everybody has his/her own moral and has the right to live his /her life as he/she wants to.But there are people who are to forget the law to defend their belief.
ReplyDeleteThis debat suggestys that many Americans are against abortion.They want to fight it as if it were a serious disease.They accept and justify a crime because they are against and therefore they are less and less tolerant .This shows how strong religious and moral perspectives are in the society and also shows what personal opinons can make people do and accept.The only important thing to them is defending their ideas and any method can be tolerated. I think things can't work this way.
I think there's nothing to rejoice about in this case.It's wrong to encourage crimes.Instead of considering a murderer as a hero , this tragedy should encourage people to be more tolerant.As for me, I'm against abortion because I have my own moral convictions but this is absolutely not a reason that can justify a crime,taking people's life away is not a game.Nobody should put pressure on people to prevent them from doing what they want to.If everyone kills to defend his/her personal opinions,then there'll be no more values such as respect and tolerance and the society will become a disaster.
I think everything is controversial in this trial.
ReplyDeleteFirst, as Cade said , some abortion opponents want to erase the murder to highlight the fact that Doctor George R. Tiller performed abortion. As if, this murder has not an impact because it is about the fact that somebody decided to put an end to someone's life. They act as if it is just about abortion. Moreover, as Nisha said these abortion opponents think that Scott Roeder is a "hero" !!!
How a murderer could be a hero too?
I think that even people who kill in name of Justice are not hero because use violence and kill people can't be a solution. But when it is about a murderer because of an ideological point of view, I think there are not excuses.
And we can notice that even people like Troy Newman who are abortion opponents desagreed this act! Indeed, it is not with the violence that we can resolve this kind of subject.
In fact, abortion is a sensitive subject. It was forbidden in several countries during several times and I think that the fact today people think like Scott Roeder or Regina Dinwiddie, in the U.S , prooves the fact the U.S still are a very conservative country.
I personnaly think that we can’t kill people because we desagree with them ! If everybody act like this I think that there will be a lot of murders ! Add to this I think that we can’t judge people who perform abortion because some people need them ! We have to think to women who lived very difficult situations and we are pregnant because of some bad causes … sometimes I think that abortion is a way to erase a crime commited upon women by some criminals. So I think it is to easy to judge people because they are pro- abortion.
I think the solution is to regulate abortion because in fact some people use abortion as a morning after pill ! ! ! And we know this case in Martinique because a lot of young girls have got babies really early or sometimes do what they want without pay attention to the consequences and then , they use abortion as a normal solution.
I think, for these girls, we need regulations.
To conclude I think that this article shows the drifts of some people when they are obsessed by their believes ! But I think that Justice has to pay attention to the fact – a man killed another man- and no to the reasons !
This doctor performed abortion, ok but who cares ? It was a human … We can be pros or cons abortion but people can’t do justice by themselves !
Joanna xxx
This case is controversial because it proves that there are bloodshed on both sides. It also raises an issue which is of utmost importance if we take the time to consider it seriously : how far can we go in the name of our principles and values?
ReplyDeleteThis case is interesting as it stresses how much the American society is divided concerning the matter of abortion. We may wonder if finally, religion has indeed no power or influence on an American society that claims freedom of speech and opinion. This case also highlights the fact that modernization of some ideals has not been achieved yet. Indeed, being against abortion is somehow denying women's right to choose. What about women's freedom? And women's emancipation? Time has changed and yet, someone has killed a doctor for having authorized an abortion.
I fully respect everyone's point of view about that matter and my point is not to compel anyone to share my opinion, but I come to think that we should be more tolerant towards the women that choose to do abortions. I also believe that in a country that claims to be the country of freedom, such acts reveal that sometimes women lack of this freedom because they have no choice left. Abortion is a matter of choice above all and mainly personal choice. It's our duty to respect people's choices because one cannot interfere in others' life freely. Acting this way is purely denying others' rights and existence as a free human being.
I will finish by adding that this case shows that many of us are capable of the worse to defend their ideals. I have no opinion yet about that but I'm wondering if we have the right to choose to end someone's life in order to defend our values. I think it triggers tensions and conflicts and bloodshed on long term.
Let us not forget that the USA is a democratic society : yes, people have the right to demonstrate against abortion, yes, people do have the right to say out loud that they are against abortion and do propaganda, but they do not have the right to kill for it and to prevent people from exercising their freedom of choice and opinion.
This case is controversial because its focus has shifted from a trial over whether or not a man is a murderer but whether or not his murder was just because of the cause. This case shows just how much people value human lives by willing to risks the lives of few to save many.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in my opinion, it does not excuse Mr. Roeder from what he has done. People have a choice of whether or not they want to keep a child. Though many have the right to disagree with this it doesn't provide any one with the means to kill the doctor doing his/her job.
L'affaire dont il est question est controversée parce qu'elle soulève les ambigüités qui existent au sein même de la communauté américaine. On s'aperçoit bien que les deux camps s'opposent radicalement et aucun compromis ne semble dans ce cas, envisageable.
ReplyDeleteL'avortement est une question de liberté et de respect de cette liberté. Mon avis sur la question de l'avortement se résume principalement à cela. Nous sommes dans un siècle où les femmes se sont considérablement émancipées et ont pu obtenir des droits auxquels elles ne pouvaient prétendre il n'y a pas si longtemps que ça. L'avortement c'est la possibilité pour la femme de choisir ou non de mettre au monde un enfant. C'est la possibilité pour elle de ne pas forcément mettre en péril son avenir à cause d'un "accident" de parcours. C'est pour elle la réalisation de cette liberté qu'elle est censée avoir quant à son corps et ses choix personnels.
On pourrait croire qu'un état comme les Etats-Unis, où la liberté est une des valeurs fondamentales du socle démocratique, accepterait mieux l'idée de l'avortement. Pourtant, les deux camps se déchirent mutuellement. Au nom de cet idéal de préservation de la vie, certains tuent. Jusqu'où peut-on aller au nom de la défense de nos convictions quelles qu'elles soient?
En ce qui concerne l'avortement aux Etats-Unis, je pense que la situation actuelle est en profond décalage avec ce que prône le pays et le modèle de société.
Cindy and Nisha are right, a crime is a crime. That's all and the discussion should be over since there was no legitimate defense. Not only this is a crime but also and especially a murder of an innocent man. I think it is an aberration to congratulate this man for this crime and seeing him as a hero is a strucking opinion for its stupidity.
ReplyDeleteHowever, real issue here concerns abortion. I wonder why people are not exhausted by endlessly disscussing over this. True, this a current matter that many women are facing. But after so much speeches about tolerance and respect of every one beliefs, etc, it is quite surprising that people keep on thinking that we shouldn't allow a woman not to carry a child. If the woman knows that she's unable to offer the child a decent life, she must have the right to refuse the child's birth. Every stories in life don't end up like those coming from fairy tales or optimistic movies. Sometimes and i'd rather say, very often, the children born in this situation live a very difficult childhood whereas this very period is very important in a man's maturing process. It defines the man one will become. And we are not surprised when we learn about criminals' past. This does not mean that every man having lived a troubled childhood becomes a murderer or something similar. Nonetheless, the consequences of this can be fatal.
Furthermore, i would like to speak about what generates the whole debate: the religious question. Likely it is honorable to defend ethics. Every man in life does not find back the right path after having lost it as would the prodigal son of the Holy Bible. So taking a bad path since birth can be very detrimental without a doubt. Moreover, refusing the abortion follows the religious commandment forbidding to attempt to any life since every birth means the coming of one of God's children. However, as Carmen said, if a woman was raped, she should be able to refuse to have the child for it is an abomination. It is not a gift to have a child in these circumstances so even if i certainly would not be able to think truly instead of these women, i understand that they cannot welcome a child born this way as God's gift. It is very difficult. And i'd like to say that I don't believe that the man killed by Mr.Roeder thought before dying that he was killed by a son of God... If he had had the time to think maybe he would even have thought that his murderer's mother should have had an abortion...
this court case is controversial because it has to do the the murder of a doctor who owns a abortion clinic that aborts the unborn child in its last term. the defense's arugement is that he kill the man to save the many life that ill be kill by the dead Doctor. so are people allow to kill one person for the greater good of the life people can save? People love god and god hates killing unborn babies, so no killing unborn babies, so lets kill the people who kill unborn babies. if i brought the child into this world, i have all the rights to take the child out because without me, the child would have never been born in this world. also, why would you bring a child into this world if you cant treat it right
ReplyDeletechristine y,
ReplyDeletepd 8
1) this case is very controversial obviously because of the abortion topic. Abortion is especially controversial in the place,Kansas City, Mo, where the court case is being held. according to the article, the townspeople have been debatig about this topic for over three decades and stll have not found a solution. many of the people have protested, used violence, and conducted trials to try and get a better consensus on abortion. so far, it has not worked. because of the town's main anti abortion stance, the killing of an abortion doctor has suddenly turned into a controversy.
2)after reading this article and thinking to myself, i realized that abortion can be taken both ways. it can take a innocent human being;s life away and it can get rid of a unborn child's pains and sufferings. basically, i am on the fence about this one.
then, say this to all the mothers who leave their child knowing that they could not afford to treat him well. Indeed, you have the right to take the child out and be proud of your action if you want to. It's your choice. But don't tell me that every woman is content with this. And don't tell me that every woman will offer a decent life to the child. I agree, the poor african woman will likely offer to her child the most loving cares she is able to offer. And it is a great thing which is very important. However, the child will have to struggle for life every day due to poverty and it's a pity. We don't live in a utopian world in which everything happens for the best as you seem to think... It does not harm so much to be optimistic but i'm sure for example that all the jews killed in the genocide would have liked that their executioners were not "taken out" from their mothers. Yet, this happened and the genocide was committed unfortunately. Life is made by happenstances. And if you have the opportunity to prevent a child from being unfortunated, maybe you can think that you master something at least in life.
ReplyDeleteI meant "unfortunate"
ReplyDeleteCindy:
ReplyDeleteThis case of abortion is really controversial: in fact , people are divided and they have two points of views ; on the one hand , there are people who are in favour abortion, insofar as killing a baby is a way which lets to a woman to forget a rape for instance ,or to avoid a situation that she can't assume . Indeed , being pregnant is a heavy responsability , because , it is a new life which begins and in which the mother has to take care of her child for the rest of life . Also, for them having an abortion is a right , which only belongs to the mother . If the mother doesn't feel ready to have this baby , she can kill her baby if she knows that she won't bring up him , so , that will avoid to her child becoming a real delinquant later for example;
But , for me , abortion stays a crime , a horrible act which consists in killing an innocent life , without never giving him the good luck to live , and to know what is life .
In our society , a lot of women has recourse to abortion wich is tolerated by law , but in reality , I think that nobody knows if it is a goog thing or not beacause abortion is a way which enables to the women to continue living but which is at the same time a crime.
1. Abortion rights have always been a very controversial topic in the United States. Many people are still on the fence on what the believe, while others are so stuck in their beliefs that no ones opinions and viewpoints matter or are important to them. This case is particular is very controversial because with the background information presents in the case, it is going to be very hard to prevent biasness in the juries verdict, and also it is going to be very difficult to not have the case turn to on regarding the rights and wrongs of abortion, when only the Supreme Court can make that decision.
ReplyDelete2. This debate suggest that American views on abortion is very divided. SOme people have extreme anti-abortion views which causes them to believe that anything that someone does in the name of the cause is justifying while others do not. America is just divided in all of our views and its very hard to actually find a solution that suits both parties.
3. My views on abortion is divided also. I see where both sides are coming from with their viewpoints, and acknowledge all sides points. I do believe that mothers should have the right to decide whether or not they want to carry something in their bodies however I also believe that they also could have taken preventive methods to begin with, such as condoms and birth control. So there is many different factors that come into account when determining which stand one takes on an issue such as abortion, and for me these issues but me on the fence, but I do believe that no one should ever have take their values/morals and force it down other people's throats without regards and consideration of other people and their beliefs.
1. This case is so controversial because its on a hot button issue, abortion. People have argued over this issue for decades and no solution or compromise has been found. Roe v. Wade only intensified this issue by allowing more abortion rights. This is a controversial case because the opinion is greatly divided between the two sides of the issue, pro-life and pro-choice.
ReplyDelete2. This suggests that this issue is volatile and that our country is divided over what to do over the issue. The debate also shows that neither side is willing to back down and that are even some that are willing to go to the extreme to push the argument for their side. This case and the activism that it shown daily for both sides is a testament to that.
3. Honestly, I'm not on either side of the fence for this issue. I don't think abortions should be completely banned as there are situations that we need them. On the other hand, I also don't agree to allowing anyone to get an abortion whenever they feel like it. However, no matter which side you're on for this issue, you can not, under any circumstances, justify going to extreme like Roeder did in this case. I understand if you are a strong supporter of pro-life or pro-choice, but going so far as to kill someone just shows obssession and lack of understanding that the issue is complex and volatile.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe case is controversial, as many have pointed out, because the defense is cunningly attempting to transition the case from one of murder to one of necessary manslaughter. It is clear that in bringing ethical concerns and the entire volatile tension behind abortion rights into the case, the defense is undergoing a desperate attempt to reduce the sentence of one who thought it wise, or rather, justified, to take matters into his own hands. Interestingly enough, the anti-abortion activists themselves are split on the issue. It seems the battle has gradually shifted from abortion rights to determining the appropriate revenge plot.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, this does say a lot about America. I don't understand why the doctor felt the need to continue "killing babies" after repeatedly being threatened and even shot in a conservative town. In my point of view, despite the fundamental "wrongness," he was asking for this. There are plenty of liberal places that need abortion doctors so it was a rather audacious move on his part to go into a conservative town and honoring Roe v. Wade rights. At the same time, if brings the morality vs. law debate into question. While some may not see abortion as "right," it is legal, and that's all that matters in court.
My views are still split on the issue. I have to concede that in killing one doctor, the defendant probably saved a thousand lives. At the same time, is it morally right to force a woman to give birth to a baby that will end up in the dumpster anyway? Honestly, abortion rights were inevitable. This is no longer the day and age when the patriarchal male figure goes to work and puts food on the table while the wife takes care of the kids, except in immigrant families of course. In America, women go to college, sometimes until they're in their thirties, and with both parents working full-time, it is often difficult to properly take care of children. Furthermore, as a scientist, it is rather hard for me to stay objective on the case, since a renewable supply of pluripotent human stem cell lines that can be used to save countless lives in the future also has it positives. I think I'll just let time run its course.
Manjinder Pd. 8
1. Why is this particular court case controversial?
ReplyDeleteThis case is controversial because a criminal murder case of the killing of an abortion doctor is becoming a trial for abortion rights, ignoring the fact that someone was murdered.
2. What does this debate suggest about American views on abortion?
This debates suggests America isn’t still sure about Abortion and can’t decide on an answer yet. Also some Americans might try to find any chance to display their opinions how matter how bad the case is.
3. What are your views concerning this issue?
My view is that this case should be treated as a mere criminal case because someone lost their life to a crazy man. This is not the time for the anti-abortion movement to take action.
Kazi period 8
In my opinion, what happened is unacceptable and intolerable .
ReplyDeleteIn fact to kill a doctor just because he did his work , namely realize an operation, moreover whith the consent of the patient , is a true crime . There aren't other word to call that .
Furthemore, I think the man who killed the doctor shouldn't have to set about with the doctor but discuss with his wife or find with her a compromise because the doctor just applied the law and realized what the patient asked to him .
This case is controversial because there are on the one hand the one who totally agree with the man who killed the doctor because they consider this man has killed a being, and one the other hand, people who consider the doctor just applied the law .
Personnaly ,I don't totally agree with abortion ,but even I'm not for the abortion, I don't support what the man did . In fact , you can't kill someone because you have some values or ideals or for instance because of religious opinions ,as it is the case in many contries . For me, it is a proof of intolerance. Furthemore, when you think well about it , the man who killed the doctor has had a contradictory behaviour because he isn't for the death because he would have wanted to save his child ,whereas he killed someone .That means he acted in the grip of the anger . Consequently , this case shows us we have to think before acting and not let our values, feelings or ideals have the hupper hand .
Moreover this man comitted an error because nowadays women have the right to choose if they want to keep or not their baby , so the man's behaviour is unexplainable .
I just wonder when will we stop to kill because of our values , feelings our ideals ?
Je poste volontairement un commentaire quant au sujet dont traite l’article et non pas sur l’article lui-même…Le thème de l’avortement est un thème qui affecte particulièrement ma sensibilité. Je n’arrive en effet pas à avoir un avis complètement tranché sur la question. Par conséquent, je m’excuse d’ores et déjà pour la lecture peut-être fastidieuse que je vais vous imposer.
ReplyDeleteIl est vrai que je ne peux être soit pour, soit contre l’avortement tout simplement parce que c’est un phénomène que je n’arrive pas à considérer dans sa globalité, il existe en effet trop de cas singuliers où ce phénomène s’inscrit pour qu’on puisse parler de l’avortement « en général »… Cinq ou six sont les cas pour lesquels je conçois l’avortement : en cas d’inceste, en cas de viol, de défaillance de contraception, de maladie, de danger pour la mère ou pour le fœtus. Ces exemples malheureux sont pour la plupart des traumatismes pour celles qui en font les frais, par conséquent, on peut comprendre qu’elles ne veuillent pas garder cet enfant qui sans cesse leur rappellerait ce qu’elles ont subi.
Le faible pourcentage de défaillance d’une contraception peut selon moi excuser un avortement. A quoi bon garder un enfant si on sait ne pas pouvoir subvenir à ses besoins, d’autant plus qu’on ne l’a pas voulu et qu’il est arrivé par malchance? En cela, l’avortement est légitime.
Toutefois, loin de vouloir jeter la pierre à qui que ce soit, j’ai du mal à voir d’un bon œil un avortement, en dehors des conditions citées préalablement. Et cet avis n’est en aucun cas empreint d’idéologies religieuses mais tout simplement humaines…
En effet, je me dis (peut-être à tort) qu’un avortement est un peu comme un « meurtre toléré ». Je m’explique. Il est vrai que lorsque l’avortement a lieu, le fœtus n’est pas complètement formé, toutefois la vie est belle et bien présente et avorter c’est ôter ce début de vie… D’autant plus que les progrès de la médecine sont effectifs donc au XXIe siècle il est difficile de croire à un accident (même si comme on pu le montrer auparavant, il peut y en avoir mais c’est tout de même un pourcentage qui reste très très faible) les moyens de contraception sont en effet trop nombreux et de plus en plus performants. De plus, il y a trop de couples qui souffrent de ne pas avoir d’enfants et qui ont donc recours à l’adoption ou aux mères porteuses, pour que ceux qui ont eu cette chance d’enfanter la gâche en tuant cet enfant.
Mon point de vue peut être perçu comme étant trop extrême surtout quand je parle de « meurtre toléré » ou de « tuer » mais il faut bien admettre que quand un spermatozoïde rencontre un ovule, c’est l’aube d’une nouvelle vie…
En somme, seul un cas d’extrême urgence peut à mon avis justifier un avortement. Maintenant, on entend souvent les féministes parler d’émancipation des femmes, de la liberté des femmes, de la « cause féminine », et j’en passe, mais je crois toutefois qu’il ne faut pas se tromper de problème. La femme avait en effet une situation compliquée (et c’est un euphémisme !) dans une société majoritairement voire exclusivement patriarcale où la voix du père, et par extension de l’homme était considérée comme la voix de Dieu…
C’est un phénomène qui tend maintenant à disparaître justement grâce à l’émancipation des femmes. La femme peut il est vrai disposer de son corps comme elle le souhaite. Mais je crois tout de même que l’avortement ne devrait pas servir de justification à l’émancipation des femmes ce n’est pas selon moi l’exemple le plus probant. Je me demande d’ailleurs si cela doit servir d’exemple…En définitive, j’espère n’avoir choqué personne et j’espère que mon avis ne sera pas taxé de conservatisme ni d’apologie de la religion catholique qui elle non plus par les voix du Vatican voit d’un mauvais œil l’avortement. Il n’en est rien…C’est tout simplement un avis qui diffère de celui de l’opinion commune…Cordialement.