Spiritual leaders say ok to killing - this is what passes for religion?

[Not a robought]

Reverend Donald Spitz who consoled Paul Hill up until he was executed today said on camera - paraphrased - what Paul did was a good thing, it saved the lives of 32 unborn babies, referring to the killing of the doctor who performed abortions. CNN gave him air time to endorse killing people who perform abortions.

edit for the transcript:

SPITZ: "...For me it was very sad. Paul Hill was a close friend of mine, and I believe he was a rightchous (sic) man who did a rightous (sic) thing and was unrightchously (sic) put to death by the state of Florida...

He was put to death for saving 32 unborn babies on July 29 and instead of being honored for what he did, he was put to death for what he did." (Wow CNN, use spellcheck already.)


He is identified as a former Presbytarian minister. If he is 'former', why is he allowed to call himself Reverend and continue the facade of priesthood? Moreso, what type of religious leadership is it to advocate violence and death to prevent death?

He's not alone, Reverend Michael Bray of the Lutheran church advocates the same thing in his book A Time To Kill. The various church's do their best to keep the flock roped in, yet considering the above it seems ministers are allowed to run free with abusive complacency. I have a hard time understanding how preachers of faith would sanction people being violent to each other.

Meanwhile some Baptist ministers while against abortion, wouldn't say anything to oppose this execution because of the eye for an eye and the laws of the land (and hey, if they get an unintended martyr as a consequence, I'm sure they won't mind all that much.)

What's more, CNN has reported Hill's final words three times within 2 hours following his death:

"...Two of the last things I'd like to say, if you believe abortion is a lethal force, you should oppose the force and do what you have to do to stop it..." Coming from a confessed killer, those words are vulgar and violent and no doubt the media is going to put it out there a few times more within the 24 hour news cycle.

Among the living victims of this mess is the slain doctor's step-daughter Catherine Fairbanks who opposes the execution because she believes it is no different than Hill's planned murder of her father.

The other victims here include Hill's family for which he had these final words, "I also thank the Lord for giving me an excellent wife and three wonderful children." Gee... I wonder if he thought how they'd feel on Father's Day?

So much evil.

[Walt Starr]

1. Donald Spitz should be tried as a terrorist

He is no different than a fundamentalist Muslim advocating violence for political reasons.

[King Bush II]

3. actually

i think the fundementalist muslims have much more sane and rational reasons for killing, at least compared to this nut.

[maveric]

2. Sure, Hill saved 32 babies that Rev Spitz will not give a shit about

after they are born and are viable human beings.

Pro-lifers are the biggest hypocrites I've ever seen.

[sangha]

4. No

That is what passes for fundamentalism.

[roguevalley]

5. I think the 32 babies should have been born and sent to

the rev. They are good with life until they are
born and then? Nothing. Men. <G>

[greekspeak]

6. In Tallahassee, on the NPR affilliate's local news today

They kept putting on Paul Hill justifying his actions. There was no remorse...he SAID he had no remorse. He spoke about how he murdered, as if it were a tea party. Disgusting. Sick. Vulgar. I am suprised Jebbikins didn't stop the execution.

[Champion Jack]

7. think about it

EVERYTHING that is bad and wrong with the world can be traced back to religion.

[LanternWaste]

8. Well...

On the other hand, the are many spritual leaders, lay people and members of the Christian ministry who feel that murder is wrong, regardless of the situation. I happen to count myself among those numbers.

While engaged in a conversation recently regarding the (then) upcoming death sentencing of the perpetrator, a very poignant question came up. Actually, it was more a variation of the trendy and over-marketed "What Would Jesus Do?" theme.

The question was posed: "Would you have killed Hitler beforehand, knowing what he would do?"

The answer was: "No. I don't think Jesus would have, either. It is not my place to remove life from another person."

I concur with his answer. Most, if not all of the Christians that I know simply do not believe that the taking of a life will solve any problems; and, in most cases, merely exacerbate pre-existing problems.

I have a hard time not over-generalizing special interests, political parties or religions, but I do know that fundamentally all people are individuals. Over-generalizing is something that my church has been guilty of in the past and consciously attempts to avoid now. I hope that that same bit of invalid logic is not used against the Church because the angriest "pastors" are usually the loudest and funded by marketing agencies. Those aren't churches- those are corporations led by embittered men.

[Terwilliger]

9. Nota...don't give into the temptation...there is no evil

only ignorance