= new reply since forum marked as read
More than likely, however, the MSM would report it as someone with a personal issue against someone or something about the clinic "snapped" and the police managed to take him down before he did any damage. Very little mention about religion unless the person was a pastor, and then it would be about the shooter's personal outlook rather than any push or overt influences from the various anti-choice, ultra-religious or apostolic organizations he identified with.
Still other MSM outlets would probably blame the clinic for being an attractive nuisance for a lone-wolf , and that if it weren't there, the poor simple shlub would never have been worked up enough to do something so drastic to save all the poor little babies getting killed.
No discussion about how hate is addictive, or what influences these "lone wolf nut-jobs" to decide that it's a holy mission to terrorize people for the hard best outcome choices they need to make for their own lives.
There is no difference between being promised that one would elevated to a seat in Heaven at the right hand of Jesus or being promised 72 virgins if one does the bidding of whatever vile action a high priest of the Profits tells him/her that Gawd approves of.
There's never going to be a serious discussion about the willing participation in the ultimate Blasphemy that anyone who claims to believe in a Creator of the World should be in arms against. There should be lots of serious discussions terrorists and their enabling fellow travelers who profit off that terror are really only all about re-making the entire Universe into small enough pocket world that a particular manufactured version of god piggy-backing on a mainstream religion's Creator can control in.
Because that would be totally against "the first amendment" - imputing or interfering with the religious practices of most citizen's, right?
We can't point out the weaknesses against particular categories of human experiences - well, not against the categories that people in positions of power occupy, because that would be "broad-brushing". Otherwise, we'll be accusing all the millions of peaceful [FITB], upset the social order, or the well-being of the country, or something like that.
On edit, I apologize for assuming that someone who would target a women's health clinic because of family planning issues would be a man. There are plenty of women who fear or hate reproductive choice enough that they would be willing to kill to feel the power from believing they're doing the right thing for an angry Gawd.
Haele
