Bubbaman and Last Mohican think that she was RIGHT to blame this attack on muslims? Are you off your fucking trolleys, you two?

Schlussel has many fans here at LGF. Even today someone put a link to her in the spinoffs, that got several up-dings.

re: #1 Jimmah

Bubbaman and Last Mohican think that she was RIGHT to blame this attack on muslims?

Absolutely not, at least in my case. Obviously Muslims are not to blame for today’s attack, and as usual, Debbie Schlussel makes no sense at all. I dinged this down because of the gratuitous use of the “no true Scotsman” fallacy in a strange, awkward attempt to somehow use today’s shooting as an opportunity to plug pro-lifers.

Scott Roeder:pro-life movement::James von Brunn:Muslims is not a valid analogy.

re: #3 Last Mohican

How was this an “awkward attempt” to “plug” pro-lifers? I simply noted that blaming all those who are against abortion as responsible for Tiller’s death is as fair as blaming all Muslims for this attack on the Holocaust museum. I used the event of Dr. Tiller’s murder since it was a recent event that could be related to.

Try not messing your pants every time you read the word “pro-life”.

re: #4 bkgodfrey

How was this an “awkward attempt” to “plug” pro-lifers? I simply noted that blaming all those who are against abortion as responsible for Tiller’s death is as fair as blaming all Muslims for this attack on the Holocaust museum. I used the event of Dr. Tiller’s murder since it was a recent event that could be related to.

Try not messing your pants every time you read the word “pro-life”.

Your argument is ostensibly a reasonable one: it’s wrong to condemn a whole group because of a heinous act committed by one of its members. To apply this principle to real-life examples: it’s wrong to blame all pro-lifers for a murder committed by one pro-lifer, just like it’s wrong to blame all Muslims for a murder committed by one Muslim.

There are two problems with that. The first is, and I’m not sure how much more directly I can say this, James von Brunn is not a Muslim. So there’s no valid analogy here — nobody in this case was condemning a group because of the actions of one of its members. The second problem is that, unrelated to your point about the actions of one person not necessarily reflecting upon the attitudes of the group of which he is a member, you used what’s been called here the “no true Scotsman” fallacy to claim that a pro-lifer who commits a murder isn’t really a pro-lifer.

Try not working in the word “pro-life” every time you comment on something that happens in the world.

re: #5 Last Mohican

I rarely mention pro-life topics in anything I discuss because of the very nature of the subject and the abject failure of most to be able to sanely discuss the topic. Perhaps this indicates a needed evaluation of terms and that we all take time to decipher a meaning between “pro-life” individuals and “militant anti-abortionists”.

The “no true Scotsman” fallacy is a difficult one to apply, as anyone in the world can declare themselves “this” or “that”. What is your definition of a “pro-life” individual? Is it anyone from the 19-year old single mother who doesn’t believe in abortion to the individual who murdered Dr. Tiller while he was headed into church? That is a vast array of opinions and quite odd, in my opinion, to group everyone with such varying opinions into one such group or movement.

I did not mean for this to disintegrate into a fighting match over who is and who is not pro-life. The case of Dr. Tiller was simply the most recent case of an entire group catching blame (by some) for the actions of one individual claiming to be part of their group. In the case of “pro-lifers” there is an apparently much-needed discussion on terms with which to describe the group, as I said, those who support legal, non-violent methods to lower abortions, and those who will murder to get their point across.

One need look no further than the Muslims in which I defended in my piece, as fair-minded individuals go out of the way to acknowledge the difference between simply non-violent “Muslim” and the “militant Islamists” claiming to do their work on behalf of Allah.