I wanted to hold my next letter to the editor until after the Obama administration reached critical mass. However, the murder of Dr. George Tiller and the editorial (Herald, June 2) about that event compelled me, a dedicated pro-lifer, to respond now.
The editorial spelled out just about every conceivable abortion issue, pro and con, except one. And that issue is raised in the editorial's sub-headline stating Tiller "did not receive fair hearing."
The killing was carried out in a carefully planned and premeditated manner at a time and locale making it very difficult for the victim to protect himself or to plead for mercy before he died. These facts do not in any way change the killer's culpability for his crime. The "rule of law" is still in control.
OK, now, can anyone tell me how this killing scenario differs in any comparable way from the procedure that Tiller used in performing one of his 60,000 near-term abortions? That's more than the number of Americans killed in the Vietnam War. The human fetus had a heartbeat and soon would have emerged from its mother's womb and joined the other 6 billion humans on the planet. But Tiller killed him or her. Did that human receive a fair hearing?
The procedure certainly was a carefully planned, premeditated event. There is, of course, one huge difference - not in the procedure, but how each is judged by that same "old" rule of "law." Nine black-robed humans called the Supreme Court voted on the issue and ruled in favor of murder.
I submit our culture has lost its way. This issue must be judged not by humans, but by God.