disappointed

an anti-choice protester was killed yesterday. as you well know i am vehemently pro-choice but this does not mean i think the opposition should be silenced and under no circumstances harmed. at present it seems this person was not even particularly pro-choice. he also killed a gravel pit owner and was on his way to kill another guy when he was caught. he was offended by the graphic images being displayed in front of a school. why he couldn't file a complaint with the police or counterdemonstrate or petition the school . . . ?

i was disappointed in reuters who apparently just reprinted randall terry's article as their own and therefore included this little tidbit: "They will also discuss the Obama Administration's response and the response of the child-killing movement." i don't even feel like discussing the number of things wrong with that statement but it isn't because i disagree with the content that i object. okay, maybe that is part of it. but i just wish that the news would work a little harder at being less opinionated.

i am also disappointed in the pro-choice movements relative silence on the subject. now, unlike some that i have read - i do not find this an apples to apples comparison with the killing of tiller. but it doesn't change the fact that a statement should be made. a strong statement. i have written NARAL on that very subject and left their page on FB. i heard they did issue a statement but it isn't on their website and it damned well should be. if they couldn't do it for decencies sake then they should have done it for political reasons. i am getting more disappointed by the moment.