Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Late-term abortionist shot dead

Late-term abortionist shot dead (Page 4)
Thread Tools
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
washingtonpost.com

Nice that he added "horrifically", to that statement to protect himself from potential lawsuits.
Not that I think he believes it was horrific.
Is that so incendiary? Think about it. If he was the mentor of a popular sitting President we'd think he was a revolutionary no? Am I disgusted by it? Absolutely. Surprised by it? Nope. As it stands now, you're willing to hold this man up as representative of half the country, who also happen to oppose abortion... particularly the late-term variety. Not to mention the failure to acknowledge the numerous pro-life outlets immediately decrying this act of violence.

Is Whoopi Goldberg a terrorist inciter for claiming that anti-abortion laws are a war on woman? War? Hell, better arm up and prepare for battle right? C'mon.

The only real impact of rhetoric like Terry's is spurring the weak minded, dumb asses, and nuts who need a valid reason to be outraged at a harmless movement whose freedom of speech they find inconvenient. You don't want morons like this to have a voice? Don't give 'em one Einstein.
ebuddy
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
Here, for you and that other guy stupi..... whatever,
Late-term Abortions: Facts, Stories, and Ways to Help | RHRealityCheck.org
No thanks.

According to Tiller's spokesperson Peggy Jarman, the majority of the late term abortions Tiller provided had nothing to do with the health or life of the mother, or even the physical health of the unborn. This jives with evidence and other testimony concerning other late-term abortion providers

For what reasons are late-term abortions usually perfomed?
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
What? Because the Dr. was murdered while serving as an usher in his Church, this has nothing to do with religion? If one man kills another man in Church, then it has nothing to do with religion? Is that the logic here?
Yeah, one man who for all we know hasn't stepped foot into a Church in a decade decides to walk into an abortion doctor's Church and shoot him dead while serving as an usher and you immediately think it's all about religion? Really? Is that the logic we're using here?
ebuddy
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
It is? Is the religion Buddhism OldMan? Hinduism? Reformation Lutheranism? Which one? Some of the most vocal of opposition to abortion are "religious", but this doesn't mean the issue is all about religion. Considering the fact that the Dr. was murdered while serving as an usher in his Church, to suggest this is all about religion shows how moronic you are.
Yes, it is primarily about religion, as man has an inclination to make laws often based on religious belief. The vast majority of the population believes in a higher deity, and they believe that life is sacred because of their religious upbringings. If I didn't know better, I'd think you'd never heard of the Ten Commandments, one of which is Thou Shalt Not Kill! Quite frankly, it's astonishing to me how moronic you are to think that you can make a statement that it may be partially religious because some of the most vocal opponents of abortion claim to be religious, yet it isn't all about religion! Get it through your thick head that religious beliefs are what accounts for people being opposed to abortion; it's preached about in almost every church in the country frequently!

You seem to have numerous comprehension problems when you seem to imply that I'm making the connection simply because he was murdered in his church, when I in fact never made such a connection. He could have been shot in his bathtub, but the nut job who offed him still did it because it contradicted his belief in a mythical being and his insane beliefs caused him to decide that the Dr. had violated some tenet of his religious beliefs, so he should therefore be disposed of.


I'm not even sure why I'm wasting my time with you, as you seem to be some state of deep denial, or misunderstanding, of the very concepts you seem to tell us all you adhere to. For many years, abortion was illegal precisely because those who claimed to be religious deemed it to be a slap in the face of their god, who they claim is the only one who can take a life (never mind that they will turn around and talk out of the other side of their mouth about killing one of their own, if he breaks their man-made rules). The laws against abortion are based on religious beliefs, and for you to claim otherwise leads one to suspect how moronic you actually are.
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
The only real impact of rhetoric like Terry's is spurring the weak minded, dumb asses, and nuts who need a valid reason to be outraged at a harmless movement whose freedom of speech they find inconvenient. You don't want morons like this to have a voice? Don't give 'em one Einstein.
Let me get this straight.
You gave his movement a thumbs up earlier and now they're morons.
Got it.
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
The laws against abortion are based on religious beliefs, and for you to claim otherwise leads one to suspect how moronic you actually are.
You can call someone a moron here?
Cool.
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
No thanks.

According to Tiller's spokesperson Peggy Jarman, the majority of the late term abortions Tiller provided had nothing to do with the health or life of the mother, or even the physical health of the unborn. This jives with evidence and other testimony concerning other late-term abortion providers

For what reasons are late-term abortions usually perfomed?
Does that mean you didn't read the article?
Your linked article, from the 90's doesn't say anything different than my first link and according to the second, it quotes the
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:47 PM
 
The suspense is killing me.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
No thanks.

According to Tiller's spokesperson Peggy Jarman, the majority of the late term abortions Tiller provided had nothing to do with the health or life of the mother, or even the physical health of the unborn. This jives with evidence and other testimony concerning other late-term abortion providers

For what reasons are late-term abortions usually perfomed?
Does that mean you didn't read the article?
Your linked article, from the 90's doesn't say anything different than my first link and according to the second, it quotes the Supreme Court,
even after fetal viability, states may not prohibit abortions “necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother;”
“health” in this context includes both physical and mental health;
only the physician, in the course of evaluating the specific circumstances of an individual case, can define what constitutes “health” and when a fetus is viable; and
states cannot require additional physicians to confirm the physician’s judgment that the woman’s life or health is at risk.
See where health includes mental health?

Kansas law,
Kansas law requires that such procedures can only be performed after viability if two independent doctors agree that not to do so would put the mother at risk of irreparable harm by giving birth.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
You can call someone a moron here?
Cool.
You can if they call you one first. Some people apparently can't seem to realize that the bases for their arguments are based on religious beliefs, and then have to resort to name calling when you point that out.
     
(s)macintosh
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2009, 11:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by torsoboy View Post
They are both murderers in my view, and both were wrong for doing what they did.
But... God will forgive them, correct? So... No harm, no foul, right?

The law should be followed
So the murderer of Doctor George Tiller should face the death penalty? He killed someone, apparently just like all those late term abortions he performed. I guess his big mistake was not performing executions with a .357 like his murderer did. Right?
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 12:13 AM
 
Or, we could have no late-term abortions OR executions, wouldn't that be snazzy?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 12:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Or, we could have no late-term abortions OR executions, wouldn't that be snazzy?
So allow the mother/wife to die for an unborn child/fetus?

Shouldn't that be a choice for the mother and father of the unborn child?

If my wife and I have 2 children together and she is suffering from pregnancy complications in her 3 month of pregnancy, I should have the option of abortion if I feel the risk is too high to continue with the pregnancy.

You are willing to torture another human being to safe your wife.

I'm willing to abort a 3 month fetus to save the wife and mother of 2 kids.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 12:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Yeah, one man who for all we know hasn't stepped foot into a Church in a decade decides to walk into an abortion doctor's Church and shoot him dead while serving as an usher and you immediately think it's all about religion? Really? Is that the logic we're using here?
Was that your original argument? No. Why change your argument? You lack of logic astounds me. You should be talking about the murderer, not where the Dr. was killed, because that is irrelevant to whether abortion is a largely religious issue.

Here's what you said in reply to OldMacMan:

Considering the fact that the Dr. was murdered while serving as an usher in his Church, to suggest this is all about religion shows how moronic you are.
Does it matter where the Dr. was murdered to determine if abortion is a largely religious issue in the US? At least your 2nd attempt made some sense.
( Last edited by hyteckit; Jun 3, 2009 at 12:56 AM. )
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 01:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Conversely, if anyone doesn't think that the pro-abortion movement has anything to do with lacking religion, they are just deluding themselves.

(Devil's Advocate here)
So, you are agreeing with me that the issue with abortion has a lot to do with someone's belief/faith/religion?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 01:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
So allow the mother/wife to die for an unborn child/fetus?
Wise up. I don't think anyone was saying that 2nd trimester abortion shouldn't be an option when the mother's life is in danger. Sheesh.

3rd trimester is a different subject. Most of the time the child can be taken via c-section, or by induced labor, and it can live a long and happy life. If for some reason that isn't an option, and they will die, I can't see why a late term abortion couldn't be a last resort.

So...

1st trimester: abortions by choice
2nd trimester: mother's life is in peril
3rd trimester: only if the mother's life is in peril and the baby can't be delivered (from what I understand the baby is mostly "delivered" in almost all post-viability abortions).

Personally, I'm on the fence about babies with very severe birth defects, but I'm leaning towards it still being wrong. Then, there's the case of those aborted due to lack of higher brain function, but I suppose they could still find jobs as liberal commentators.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
ThinkInsane
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Night's Plutonian shore...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 02:22 AM
 
I guess it's time to make the following statement: The debate in this thread has thus far been far more civil than I would have expected given such a contentious topic. That being said, I see it starting to slip a bit. Keep it on topic, debate the topic at hand, refrain from personal attacks and make your arguments like rational adults (I give you all the benefit of the doubt here). No name calling, no little kid bullshit. State your points, back it up as best you can, and be respectful of others, even if you don't agree with them. Even if you vehemently don't agree with them. That is all.

Thank you and carry on.
Nemo me impune lacesset
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 05:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Wise up. I don't think anyone was saying that 2nd trimester abortion shouldn't be an option when the mother's life is in danger. Sheesh.

3rd trimester is a different subject. Most of the time the child can be taken via c-section, or by induced labor, and it can live a long and happy life. If for some reason that isn't an option, and they will die, I can't see why a late term abortion couldn't be a last resort.
Um.. didn't you just say:

Originally Posted by Shaddim
Or, we could have no late-term abortions OR executions, wouldn't that be snazzy?

So what do you consider late-term abortions now? Some consider 20th week of gestation to be late-term abortion, which is still in the 2nd trimester.

You mention no late-term abortion, but didn't define it before.

So you now support late-term abortion in the 2nd trimester, but not late-term abortion in the 3rd trimester. Is that it?
( Last edited by hyteckit; Jun 3, 2009 at 05:16 AM. )
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 05:09 AM
 
Details about Scott Roeder, the person who murdered Dr. Tiller.

1. started to get involved with anti-abortion when he turned to church.
2. occasional contributor to a newsletter, Prayer and Action News, a newsletter with anti-abortion views
3. Dave Leach, an anti-abortion activist from Des Moines who runs the newsletter Prayer and Action News said "... so far, the Bible discussion I have seen overwhelmingly supports anyone willing to sacrifice everything in order to physically stop an abortionist from killing thousands of babies."

Still think this is totally not related to religion?


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/us...wt&twt=nytimes

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/abort...roeder-suspect
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 05:27 AM
 
A personal story about late-term abortion from a woman who was 3 1/2 months pregnant.

My Late-Term Abortion - The Boston Globe

My Late-Term Abortion
President Bush's attempt to ban partial-birth abortions threatens all late-term procedures. But in my case, everyone said it was the right thing to do — even my Catholic father and Republican father-in-law.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 05:35 AM
 
One thing I found interesting about the above article besides the personal perspective.

In fact, Roe v. Wade already protects the rights of a fetus after the point of viability, which occurs sometime after the 24th week of gestation, in the third trimester of pregnancy. Massachusetts bans all abortions at and beyond the 24th week, except to protect the life or health of the mother. Indeed, according to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, in 2001 there were only 24 abortions after the 24th week, out of a total of 26,293 abortions.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 06:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
Does that mean you didn't read the article?
No, I read it. It just wasn't all that relevant when I could get information from "the horse's mouth" instead of a biased website designed in order to try and fool people. Tiller's own staff claims that most infant murders he engaged in were for convenience and not a true physical health issue.

Your linked article, from the 90's doesn't say anything different than my first link and according to the second, it quotes the
Your article said that most late term abortions where done for reasons of convenience, and not for the life or physical health of the mother or infant? Could you find me a quote? I know that Kansas did try and make it's laws tougher because people like Tiller were taking money to kill infants left and right, but I'm pretty sure he can use the standard loophole late-term abortionists have used forever to get around these so-called "tough laws". The limitations put in place where limits already there from Roe V. Wade and that didn't stop Tiller from ignoring them then.

See where health includes mental health?
You mean like, having the baby could cause the mother stress, and therefore be hard on her "mental health"? Yeah, I get it. A loophole. Tiller's spokesman says that the reasons for the majority of his baby murders were not for any legitimate health reason.
( Last edited by stupendousman; Jun 3, 2009 at 06:44 AM. )
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 06:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
So, you are agreeing with me that the issue with abortion has a lot to do with someone's belief/faith/religion?
Actually, no. I was highlighting how silly the argument is.

To suggest that all people who oppose abortion are doing so based on religious belieft or that all person who support abortion rights have no strong religious beliefs is a pretty silly claim.

You can very well oppose abortion based on science and a respect for basic human life regardless of whether you are religious or not. I've always said the law should be based on consistent science - we shouldn't allow the killing of human life where a heartbeat and active brainwaves are present in a situation where if the situation is left alone, the human life in question will no longer need the extra medical attention required by it's mother in a reasonably short time. That's the standard we use for those outside the womb, and it's the same standard we should use inside it. Location shouldn't matter.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 06:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
In fact, Roe v. Wade already protects the rights of a fetus after the point of viability, which occurs sometime after the 24th week of gestation, in the third trimester of pregnancy. Massachusetts bans all abortions at and beyond the 24th week, except to protect the life or health of the mother. Indeed, according to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, in 2001 there were only 24 abortions after the 24th week, out of a total of 26,293 abortions.
Actually, it protects nothing. Doctors can simply say that they feel that having a child could be too stressful to a woman's mental health. Of course, rearing children correctly always involves stress and any rational person knows that this is just a meaningless and convenient loophole to allow abortion on demand.

Don't think you or any of the other faux choice people are really fooling anyone. Very few people are that stupid. Tiller's own spokesperson made it clear that the late term abortions he provided weren't done so for any real health issue, all the while there was supposed to be this Roe V. Wade protection (and of course RVW was based on a series of lies as well).
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 06:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Actually, no. I was highlighting how silly the argument is.

To suggest that all people who oppose abortion are doing so based on religious belieft or that all person who support abortion rights have no strong religious beliefs is a pretty silly claim.

You can very well oppose abortion based on science and a respect for basic human life regardless of whether you are religious or not. I've always said the law should be based on consistent science - we shouldn't allow the killing of human life where a heartbeat and active brainwaves are present in a situation where if the situation is left alone, the human life in question will no longer need the extra medical attention required by it's mother in a reasonably short time. That's the standard we use for those outside the womb, and it's the same standard we should use inside it. Location shouldn't matter.
Strawman argument.

I never said that "all people who oppose abortion are doing so based on religious belieft or that all person who support abortion rights have no strong religious beliefs is a pretty silly claim."

I never said only religious people oppose to abortion.

What I've said:

"If anyone doesn't think the anti-abortion movement has anything to do with religion, they are just deluding themselves."


If you do not believe anti-abortion movement has anything to do with religion, then you are delusional.

This was in response to people asking what does religion have to do with the debate about abortion.

Maybe because the anti-abortion movement is largely a Christian movement in the US. Are you telling me the Christianity has nothing to do with the anti-abortion movement?

Yes, there are atheist who are against late-term abortion solely for convenience, including myself. I'm against abortion in the 3rd trimester unless the woman's life is in danger or if the baby has some sort of abnormality like this person in the story:

My Late-Term Abortion - The Boston Globe
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 06:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Actually, it protects nothing. Doctors can simply say that they feel that having a child could be too stressful to a woman's mental health. Of course, rearing children correctly always involves stress and any rational person knows that this is just a meaningless and convenient loophole to allow abortion on demand.

Don't think you or any of the other faux choice people are really fooling anyone. Very few people are that stupid. Tiller's own spokesperson made it clear that the late term abortions he provided weren't done so for any real health issue, all the while there was supposed to be this Roe V. Wade protection (and of course RVW was based on a series of lies as well).
Can you please back up your claim?

Are you suggesting Dr. Tiller has been performing illegal abortions openly for over 35 years?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 06:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Maybe because the anti-abortion movement is largely a Christian movement in the US. Are you telling me the Christianity has nothing to do with the anti-abortion movement?
While I'm sure it's no coincidence that people who have a belief system that teaches a respect for all human life would be involved with such a movement, I think it's insulting to all the people who are involved who aren't particularly religious to suggest that the cause they are involved in is simply "religious".
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Can you please back up your claim?

Are you suggesting Dr. Tiller has been performing illegal abortions openly for over 35 years?
Um, no. I've already said he has the "oh, it will cause stress" legal loophole which makes all late-term abortions legal due to child birth/raising causing ALL women an excess of stress. There are no real legal protections to the unborn due to their being no real limits on the type of "health" issues Doctors can use as an excuse to perform the abortions.

The laws in Kansas are essentially meaningless. Dr. Tiller's spokesman said for herself that the reason why the majority of the abortions he performed were done because a mother did not want to have a chlid and decided very late in the pregnancy. Of course if pressed, I'm sure he'd talk about the amount of stress that would cause and therefore use that as a "health" issue. That's S.O.P.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
While I'm sure it's no coincidence that people who have a belief system that teaches a respect for all human life would be involved with such a movement, I think it's insulting to all the people who are involved who aren't particularly religious to suggest that the cause they are involved in is simply "religious".
Oh please. I'm pro-life. You are just anti-abortion. Anyone who agrees with torturing human beings whether innocent or guilty, invading a country on false pretenses and slaughtering thousands of innocent lives, and support the death penalty cannot call themselves pro-life.

Anyone who thinks it's okay to kill doctors who perform legal abortions, even legal late-term abortions, cannot call themselves pro-life.

I just respect the life of a mother/wife over the 3 month old fetus.

I'm pro-life and support the option for abortion before the 3rd trimester. I agree with Roe vs. Wade, that if the child is viable in the 3rd trimester, abortion should only be an option if the mother's life is in danger.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Um, no. I've already said he has the "oh, it will cause stress" legal loophole which makes all late-term abortions legal due to child birth/raising causing ALL women an excess of stress. There are no real legal protections to the unborn due to their being no real limits on the type of "health" issues Doctors can use as an excuse to perform the abortions.

The laws in Kansas are essentially meaningless. Dr. Tiller's spokesman said for herself that the reason why the majority of the abortions he performed were done because a mother did not want to have a chlid and decided very late in the pregnancy. Of course if pressed, I'm sure he'd talk about the amount of stress that would cause and therefore use that as a "health" issue. That's S.O.P.
Who's Dr. Tiller's spokesman? Or rather spokesperson?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Who's Dr. Tiller's spokesman? Or rather spokesperson?
At the time of the quote, it was Peggy Jarman who he hired to take care of all of his pro-abortion lobbying. The information was taken from an interview in the Kansas City Star.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
While I'm sure it's no coincidence that people who have a belief system that teaches a respect for all human life would be involved with such a movement, I think it's insulting to all the people who are involved who aren't particularly religious to suggest that the cause they are involved in is simply "religious".
They may not be "particularly religious," but it's a safe bet that their religious beliefs nevertheless have a serious impact on their views. One may claim to be a Christian, Muslim, etc., and not be particularly active (or even participate in regular religious activities, for that matter), but that doesn't mean they don't consider their beliefs when deciding upon an issue. Many people don't, in fact, consider themselves particularly religious, and rarely, if ever, attend church, or pray, but they nevertheless believe in a god (because that's how they were raised and conditioned), and will say that abortion is wrong. The issue of abortion didn't become prominent in the U. S. until it was made legal, and those fighting that legality were primarily from religious communities, who think they can put the horse back in the barn, and somehow legislate what other people should believe. This shouldn't be a hard concept to grasp, but apparently some want to make it harder than they need to.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Oh please. I'm pro-life. You are just anti-abortion. Anyone who agrees with torturing human beings whether innocent or guilty, invading a country on false pretenses and slaughtering thousands of innocent lives, and the support the death penalty cannot call themselves pro-life.
If you can't see the difference between murdering an innocent unborn baby and causing extreme discomfort to people who murdered thousands in order to stop the murder of thousands more, then there's really nothing in this area left for us to discuss.

..and I'm not "anti-abortion". I do think it has its place in certain circumstances. As a birth control method, especially late term, I don't think is one of those circumstances.

Anyone who thinks it's okay to kill doctors who perform legal abortions, even legal late-term abortions, cannot call themselves pro-life.
I don't think it's okay.

I just respect the life of a mother/wife over the 3 month old fetus.

I'm pro-life and support the option for abortion before the 3rd trimester. I agree with Roe vs. Wade, that if the child is viable in the 3rd trimester, abortion should only be an option if the mother's life is in danger.
Then I'm sure we both can agree that Dr. Tiller was pretty much a monster, since he did late term abortions when the mother's life was in no danger.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
At the time of the quote, it was Peggy Jarman who he hired to take care of all of his pro-abortion lobbying. The information was taken from an interview in the Kansas City Star.
So just to make things clear. The basis of your whole argument is based on what Peggy Jarman, a hired spokesperson, said during an interview in the Kansas City Star?

That's all the "facts" about Dr. Tiller you are going by?

Here's what Peggy Jarman was quoted saying:

The Kansas City Star (8/26/91) quoted Tiller spokeswoman Peggy Jarman saying that "elective abortions should be considered acceptable into the 26th week because these fetuses are not capable of surviving outside the womb without artificial life supports."

http://www.christiangallery.com/atrocity/tiller.html


For reference on what we have been talking about regarding late-term abortion and trimester.

late-term abortion: after 20th week of pregnancy
3rd trimester: Weeks 28-42
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
Yes, it is primarily about religion, as man has an inclination to make laws often based on religious belief. The vast majority of the population believes in a higher deity, and they believe that life is sacred because of their religious upbringings. If I didn't know better, I'd think you'd never heard of the Ten Commandments, one of which is Thou Shalt Not Kill! Quite frankly, it's astonishing to me how moronic you are to think that you can make a statement that it may be partially religious because some of the most vocal opponents of abortion claim to be religious, yet it isn't all about religion! Get it through your thick head that religious beliefs are what accounts for people being opposed to abortion; it's preached about in almost every church in the country frequently!
So close and yet so far away. I'm going to correct you here if nothing more than for the sake of the sanity of this forum and to show you how by your logic, it is impossible to reconcile your argument with your own philosophy.

If religion is a human construct, the majority of Americans claim belief in a deity, and in fact the world's population overwhelmingly believes in a deity; opposition to abortion is founded then by the same principles that have founded any ideal of man including the very notion of saving lives and healthcare itself. Medicine, Art, architecture, laws, etc... these are all products of a human nature that has created the deities. How can you say it's "all about religion" when mankind through human nature created religion, the figures of it, the tenets of it, and all subsequent behaviors, actions, laws, and views supposedly "related" to it? Was it not the values of mankind en masse that defined religion?

In light of the fact that the vast majority of our populace claims belief in this same deity up to and including the very victim of this crime whose career most found offensive, was not only welcomed into his Church as a congregant, but as a servant; wouldn't you really have to conclude that the problem here is the criminal intruder himself and not "religion" in general? Wouldn't this make more sense in light of the fact that the very laws that will convict the criminal were founded on these same principles? Given the rarity of this crime and in consideration of the numbers of "religious" people in this country, isn't it really more sensible to conclude that the problem here is with one man and his inability to cope with the rule of law? Laws that must also be "all about religion"?

You seem to have numerous comprehension problems when you seem to imply that I'm making the connection simply because he was murdered in his church, when I in fact never made such a connection. He could have been shot in his bathtub, but the nut job who offed him still did it because it contradicted his belief in a mythical being and his insane beliefs caused him to decide that the Dr. had violated some tenet of his religious beliefs, so he should therefore be disposed of.
The irony of pointing out comprehension problems while failing miserably to comprehend my argument.

I never claimed you are making the "religious" connection because the Dr. was killed in a church. I'm challenging your logic given the fact that the Dr. was serving in a Church. How is it then, being a religious phenomena, that the overwhelming majority of the populace in belief of their deity; are able to live their lives without attempting to take the life of another? How is it that an abortion Dr. with arguably more of a religious conviction than his murderer is a victim of a "religious" crime?


I'm not even sure why I'm wasting my time with you, as you seem to be some state of deep denial, or misunderstanding, of the very concepts you seem to tell us all you adhere to. For many years, abortion was illegal precisely because those who claimed to be religious deemed it to be a slap in the face of their god, who they claim is the only one who can take a life (never mind that they will turn around and talk out of the other side of their mouth about killing one of their own, if he breaks their man-made rules). The laws against abortion are based on religious beliefs, and for you to claim otherwise leads one to suspect how moronic you actually are.
Couple of things here first of all. I'm pro-life and I oppose the death penalty.

Religious beliefs and the subsequent laws and values are defined by the human nature that created them. Right? Your problem is a math problem OldMan. That you can point to a singular instance of a crime committed by one man with an obvious inability to cope with the rule of law, among an overwhelming majority of the population who not only condemns the act, but also adheres to the same religious principles of both the killer and the Dr., means that you have a math problem and an ideological conundrum.

One that manifests itself in the kind of myopic reasoning I'm seeing in this thread and that which leads to a degree of intolerance rivaled only by Tiller's killer.
ebuddy
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
So just to make things clear. The basis of your whole argument is based on what Peggy Jarman, a hired spokesperson, said during an interview in the Kansas City Star?

That's all the "facts" about Dr. Tiller you are going by?
Are you saying that the person Tiller hired to talk to politicians and the media about his business doesn't understand his business? Especially when everything she said pretty much coincides with testimony from other people involved with late-term abortion providers?

Here's what Peggy Jarman was quoted saying:
Actually, she was also quoted as saying that 3/4 of the late term abortions Tiller did was for women who either found out late that they were pregnant and elected to abort, or decided late. Nothing to do with any true health issue.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 07:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
They may not be "particularly religious," ...
Or religious at all.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 09:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Are you saying that the person Tiller hired to talk to politicians and the media about his business doesn't understand his business? Especially when everything she said pretty much coincides with testimony from other people involved with late-term abortion providers?
A spokesperson's job is to learn as much as possible, but their word is not absolute fact, nor is their word 100% representative of the entity they represent. A spokesperson is more of a public relations person.

Should we treat every single word from Press Secretary Scott McClellan, the White House spokesperson under Pres. Bush, as absolute fact and 100% representative of Pres. Bush and VP Cheney?

Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Actually, she was also quoted as saying that 3/4 of the late term abortions Tiller did was for women who either found out late that they were pregnant and elected to abort, or decided late. Nothing to do with any true health issue.
Again, define late-term abortion. Are you against all abortions or just late-term abortions? If you are just against late-term abortions, then at how many weeks into pregnancy? Around 24 weeks as suggested by Roe V. Wade?

Late term abortions can be considered at 4 months pregnant.

Quite a number of women don't know that they are pregnant until they are 3 or 4 months pregnant. Hell, some don't even know when they are 6-8 months pregnant, or until they gave birth.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 10:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
A spokesperson's job is to learn as much as possible, but their word is not absolute fact, nor is their word 100% representative of the entity they represent. A spokesperson is more of a public relations person.

Should we treat every single word from Press Secretary Scott McClellan, the White House spokesperson under Pres. Bush, as absolute fact and 100% representative of Pres. Bush and VP Cheney?
Unless we have a good reason to doubt it, it seems like a reasonable assumption that they're pretty close to the mark at least.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 10:48 AM
 
Abortion is murder, just like assassination is.

The murderer obviously thought that he would do some greater good by murdering someone who murders unborn babies.

His moral compass is probably a religious one, probably seeing life as something sacred not to be spilled easily, espescially the life of unborn babies, who are by definition the most innocent.

Some abortions are still useful, for example if birth would threaten the health and life of the mother considerably, but otherwise abortion would be murder, no matter if early or late-term.
If women/girls/men/boys aren't ready to become mothers/fathers, then they shouldn't have sex at all until they are, or if they cannot control their urges, restrict it to anal or oral sex, or use more than one prevention-method at the same time, like for example the pill and condom...

It is a failure of societies to let children, teenagers and twens alone on such an important aspect of life, out of a sense of freedom or shame. The societies are even celebrating the dating, dancing and kissing of their youth, knowing fully well that espescially in combination with alcohol which reduces the last internal barriers regarding sexual intercourse, often enough unprotected.

Sure, dating, dancing, kissing, drinking, having sex is great satisfying (at least if done right) fun, but the price is too high: unwanted pregnancies leading to murder of unborn or born babies (really no difference).

It is a failure of education, of society as a whole, but it's a failure that can't be corrected by murdering doctors who practice abortions, because they merely offer a service that is demanded by society, through which it can pay to undo a mistake, to get rid of responsibility.

Not only can the problem not be solved nor the practice stopped through vigilancy, it also undermines the civil society as a whole by inspiring other people to take right into their own hands and to become plaintiff, judge and executioner in one.

A possible solution would be a mandatory temporary chemical sterilization of all girls/women or of boys/men until they complete their education and are ready and willing to have children.

Taliesin
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 11:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
No thanks.
According to Tiller's spokesperson Peggy Jarman, the majority of the late term abortions Tiller provided had nothing to do with the health or life of the mother, or even the physical health of the unborn. This jives with evidence and other testimony concerning other late-term abortion providers

For what reasons are late-term abortions usually perfomed?
Your quote of tiller's spokesman comes from nrtc website. Is that really credible?
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 12:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Your quote of tiller's spokesman comes from nrtc website. Is that really credible?
Did you read that page stupendousman posted?

The only quote from Peggy Jarman is "About three-fourths of Tiller's late-term patients, Jarman said, are teen-agers who have denied to themselves or their families they were pregnant until it was too late to hide it."

NRLC is the one making an assumption that "it is well established that the great majority of late-term abortions do not involve any illness of the mother or the baby".
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 12:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Unless we have a good reason to doubt it, it seems like a reasonable assumption that they're pretty close to the mark at least.
Reasonable assumption and pretty close isn't 100% accurate. Neither do we know how accurate are the quotes of what a spokesperson supposedly said. Some made up, some misquoted, some accurate.

Late-term abortion means different things to different people. 20th week? 24th week? 3rd trimester?

We can't even get an agreement on this forum on what's considered late-term.

Yet we assume to know what a hired spokesperson meant when she said "late-term"?

Maybe she should have been called in as a witness by prosecutors when Dr. Tiller was being charge with illegal late-term abortions which he was acquitted of:

Kansas late-term abortion doctor acquitted | U.S. | Reuters


I'll put more weight into a court case than blogs/websites quoting what a spokesperson might have said about late-term abortions and interpreting what she meant by late-term abortion.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 12:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Your quote of tiller's spokesman comes from nrtc website. Is that really credible?
They source a Kansas City Star newspaper interview.

Again, define late-term abortion. Are you against all abortions or just late-term abortions? If you are just against late-term abortions, then at how many weeks into pregnancy? Around 24 weeks as suggested by Roe V. Wade?
Personally, I'm against all abortions. Legally, I think the case can be made for abortion in the first trimester based on scientific evidence that the fetus does not exhibit many or any of the traits we normally associate with being "alive" for those outside the womb. Namely, a beating heart and normal active brainwaves.

I believe though this has nothing to do with it being Constitutional (Roe V. Wade being a good example of judicial fraud) and abortion law should be decided on a state-by-state level as it was back during the time of the founding fathers. There was nothing back then to stop abortion from being regulated by the state, and nothing added since whose intent was to give a "right" to an abortion.

I think that at the time a fetus is "viable", since the fetus has all the same scientific signs and symptoms of being "alive" as a baby outside the womb, it should be protected against from murder. I don't think "oh well, the mother might be really stressed out if she doesn't kill her baby" is sufficient reason to be allowed to do it, but that currently is legally allowable.

Most research I've ever been able to find, where they've actually asked people involved with late term abortions, or they could cull statistics has shown that the majority are not done because of some kind of serious medical issue, other than it would cause the woman "stress" to have the baby.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 12:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Maybe she should have been called in as a witness by prosecutors when Dr. Tiller was being charge with illegal late-term abortions which he was acquitted of
If the abortion would cause the woman a headache, he can legally deem the abortion to be medically necessary. He was acquitted because the law is essentially meaningless.
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 01:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
They source a Kansas City Star newspaper interview.
An interview from 1990 with no context or link to the article that I can find.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 01:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
So what do you consider late-term abortions now? Some consider 20th week of gestation to be late-term abortion, which is still in the 2nd trimester.

You mention no late-term abortion, but didn't define it before.

So you now support late-term abortion in the 2nd trimester, but not late-term abortion in the 3rd trimester. Is that it?
I addressed all your points in my post. Read it again at your convenience.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 01:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
An interview from 1990 with no context or link to the article that I can find.
Interview, Kansas City Star (August 26, 1991)

It's cited on a bunch of "pro choice" websites. The citation is even part of the Congressional Record:

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:...&client=safari

Surely you don't suggest that if it can be found that the interview didn't exist, or that Tiller denies the claim, that someone on the other side of the ideological "fence" wouldn't have already posted the evidence already, do you?

Again, this isn't the first time someone working for a late-term abortion provider has gone on record as stating that the reason for most of these types of abortions have truely little to do with valid "health" issues.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 01:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
They source a Kansas City Star newspaper interview.
I was looking for the original interview and couldn't find it. Without that, isn't the whole quote hearsay?

Knowing several women who've had to end pregnancies due to abnormalities similar to the boston.com article posted above, I would not want to be forced to carry such a pregnancy to term, nor justify my decisions. It's a MYOB kind of thing, personal and private.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2009, 05:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
I was looking for the original interview and couldn't find it. Without that, isn't the whole quote hearsay?
If you wish to dispute the quote, you can always contact the paper for a back issue. Given that it's all over the internet, part of the Congressional Record and there doesn't seem to be any official rebuttal on the part of Tiller or any other pro-abortion group, I think the evidence shows that the quote is likely not fabricated.

Knowing several women who've had to end pregnancies due to abnormalities similar to the boston.com article posted above, I would not want to be forced to carry such a pregnancy to term, nor justify my decisions. It's a MYOB kind of thing, personal and private.
I'd also allow for exceptions where a doctor can determine that the baby could not survive outside the womb without any kind of special, "heroic" measures.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:49 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,