Edward Feser, Dr. Tiller's Murder, and Free Speech Rights.

[Written by John W. Loftus] Earlier I called for Edward Feser to be fired from his teaching post for writing inflammatory and incendiary rhetoric whereby he argues that the recently murdered abortion doctor, Dr. George Tiller, forfeited his right to life by being an abortionist. Feser argues Tiller was “worse” than Jeffery Dahmer, who killed and/or ate 17 human beings. You can see the progression of events here, and some final unanswered points about it right here.

I stepped into this debate by arguing Feser Should Be Fired From His Teaching Post!. Lucky for Feser he’s tenured so this will not happen. Still a few people think I had gone too far, citing free speech, first Amendment rights, and such things. Or, that I haven’t taken into consideration his whole argument where he also condemns vigilantism against abortionists, which he does.

I was claiming Feser ought not to say what he did in the most vocal way I can, precisely because I find it reprehensible in the worst way. How would he feel, as unlikely as it would be, that someone kills an abortionist and upon being arrested quotes him? I think he would feel terrible. That's the point. We must tone down such inflammatory incendiary rhetoric on occasions like these, because of what it could lead to. One is indeed responsible for the repercussions of the rhetoric they use. One must be careful not to use such inflammatory rhetoric when it comes to human beings who simply disagree on the issue of abortion. It’s like pouring gas on the fire.

As an aside, one cannot fail to notice Feser’s blog is subtitled Dispatches from the 10th Crusade, which is another use of inflammatory rhetoric since there were only nine Medieval crusades. Feser is a crusader. A crusader is a killer. Who in his right mind would want to identify with the word “crusade” if he knew the history of them, which I'm sure as a Catholic he does?

Since Feser is immune from firing I’m not pressing that issue any longer. But I do want to address some of the questions that have surfaced in response to my post.

As far as free speech goes, there have been many people fired for expressing chauvinism, racism and homophobia in academia, as sportscasters, and as pundits. Hate speech is not something the law tolerates, nor do employers. Whether you like it or not this is "politically incorrect" speech, which I applaud. One cannot call an African American the "N" word nor a woman the "B" word, for those words have a history of oppression to them in the English language.

In an article for TIME magazine in 1989 called In Praise of Censure by conservative columnist Garry Wills, a good case was made for the same things I agree with today. Follow the link to page three where the money quote is:

"It is a distortion to turn "You can express any views" into the proposition "I don't care what views you express."

This article for TIME was provoked by some “pornographic” art that was partially funded by our government. When the government is involved and when we are the government, we have a say in what we want to allow and support.

And just in case you are not aware, there is no such thing as free speech. It’s a political prize won by the diligent, so argues Stanley Fish, in his brilliant and thought provoking book. That's why there is something called "politically correct speech" in the first place!

Can Feser really be more certain that abortion is unjustifiable murder when we reasonably consider the arguments to the contrary?...Enough to say Tiller was worse than Dahmer? I think not, not by a long shot. Not even close. What motivates him, is the need to feel divinely certain about this. Nothing less than divine certainty will do for you. There can be no room for doubt with religious fanatics like Feser, even though he'll deny being one. Doubt will cause Feser to tone down his rhetoric. And doubt will lead to fewer people being killed.

Nothing inspires the faithful but being divinely assured of what God thinks or wants them to do, and I find this completely abhorrent to thinking people who can only at best come to probable, not divinely certain conclusions about such things. A divinely certain conclusion does not need thought. It only needs action.

Feser’s kind of rhetoric can potentially lead to more murders, for there is nothing stopping someone who embraces the first part of Feser’s argument, that Tiller is more evil than Dahmer, to also reject the second part where murdering Tiller is wrong.

I just wonder what abortionist providers (and their families) might feel like after Feser’s post in a Christian dominant society, when he said they have lost the moral right to life. I think they would fear for their lives, and their fear would be justified, just as Feser would be afraid for his life if he lived in that atheist dominated society and the analogous words were spoken about his profession. Feser is therefore fear mongering. He’s trying to scare abortionists into stopping the helpful service they provide for many people who need and request it. And I find that reprehensible in the worst possible way. He should be ashamed of himself.