Abortion charges again rejected / LJWorld.com

Archive for Thursday, December 28, 2006

Kline to appoint special prosecutor

By Scott Rothschild

December 28, 2006

Advertisement

Topeka — A state district court judge in Wichita on Wednesday rejected for the second time charges brought by Attorney General Phill Kline against abortion provider George Tiller.

But Kline, who leaves office in 11 days, said he would not give up. Kline announced he would appoint a special prosecutor today to continue the investigation, and he took swipes at Paul Morrison, the man who defeated him last month and will take over the attorney general's office Jan. 8.

"The investigation is ongoing," said Kline, an ardent opponent of abortion.

Wednesday's developments capped another frenzy of activity in Kline's three-year investigation into clinics run by Tiller in Wichita and Planned Parenthood in Overland Park.

Last week, Kline filed 30 misdemeanor charges against Tiller, alleging that in 2003 Tiller performed illegal late-term abortions on 15 patients, ages 10- to 22-years-old, and failed to properly report the abortions to the state.

Tiller, through his attorneys, has denied any wrongdoing, saying that the abortions were legal under exceptions to a state late-term abortion ban that allow the procedure if the mental health of the woman is in jeopardy.

Hours after Kline filed the charges late Thursday, State District Court Judge Paul Clark dismissed them after Sedgwick County District Attorney Nola Foulston said Kline had no authority to file the case.

On Wednesday, Kline asked Clark to reconsider his decision.

Kline argued that his office has broad authority and doesn't need Foulston's consent to pursue a case.

But Foulston said, "This district attorney is being usurped by some out-of-towner who's on his way out."

Reader poll

Clark refused to reinstate the charges.

Just moments before the hearing started, Kline announced he will appoint Don McKinney, an attorney from Wichita, to be the "independent special prosecutor" to take over the investigation.

McKinney "will have full discretion regarding how the state will proceed with its case against Mr. Tiller," Kline said.

McKinney, a Democrat, endorsed Kline, a conservative Republican, in last month's election.

During the campaign, McKinney demonstrated in front of The Wichita Eagle to protest what he said was the paper's downplaying of sexual harassment allegations that a woman had brought against Morrison in 1991 and that Kline had trumpeted. Morrison denied any wrongdoing, and the allegations were never proven.

Morrison, the Republican-turned-Democrat district attorney of Johnson County, defeated Kline 59 percent to 41 percent.

In the campaign, Morrison criticized Kline repeatedly over the investigation into the clinics, saying Kline was abusing his power.

In his statement today, Kline said the appointment of McKinney would preserve the investigation once Morrison takes over the attorney general's office.

"This appointment of an independent special prosecutor will remove this investigation from a highly charged political process in which millions of dollars has been spent in media and campaign efforts to elect as attorney general a candidate who, without reviewing any of the evidence, repeatedly pledged not to pursue this investigation and expended the majority of his campaign criticizing the existence of the investigation," Kline said.

Kline acknowledged, however, that Morrison could fire the special prosecutor after taking office, but he urged him not to. Kline also said he would leave it up to McKinney whether to appeal Clark's decision.

In a statement, Morrison spokeswoman Ashley Anstaett said that when Morrison takes office he will "assess all pending cases and appointments and make the appropriate decisions based on the evidence, the law and his proven judgment."

Anstaett added: "Kansans expect more from their attorney general than grandstanding and political stunts - that's why they voted for change. On January 8th, Paul Morrison will refocus the vast resources of the attorney general's office on the people's priorities."

Meanwhile, abortion opponents said the fight was far from over.

"We won't rest until Tiller is brought to justice for these crimes," said Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue.

- The Associated Press contributed to this report.

More like this

Sebelius criticizes Kline's actions in abortion probe 34 comments / December 28, 2006
Morrison will fire special prosecutor in abortion case 122 comments / January 8, 2007
On the records: Patient privacy concerns new AG 27 comments / January 9, 2007
Morrison won't keep Tiller case prosecutor 96 comments / December 29, 2006
Judge reopens arguments on charges against Tiller 24 comments / December 27, 2006

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

28 December 2006
at 5:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TheSychophant (Anonymous) says…

Morrison would be foolish to allow Kline's handpicked wingnut comrade to remain as special prosecutor beyond the end of Little Phill's term. If I were Paul Morrison, my first official act as AG would be to fire the that charlatan, whom, while hiding behind “Christian piety,” endorses and supports the “bottom feeding” politics which bestowed eternal infamy upon that contemptible weasel Kline.
28 December 2006
at 6:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rtwngr (Anonymous) says…

Thank goodness you are not Paul Morrison, TheSychophant. You are as reactionary as Phil Kline is conservative. You are a bigot of the religious variety.

I find it incredulous that there is no outcry about pregnant adolescents receiving abortions at any stage. It appears that all a familly member has to do to avoid prosecution for incest and rape is to march their teenage relative to the abortion clinic where it is all hushed up. Much to the delight of the pro-murderous society perpetuated by people such as yourself.
28 December 2006
at 6:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

temperance (Anonymous) says…

Has anyone checked out the special prosecutor appointed by Kline? Don McKinney — a guitar pickin' anti-choice freakazoid. Take a look:
http://www.maggotpunks.com/antis/file…
28 December 2006
at 6:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

rtwngr: You sure do seem to know a lot about those abortion cases, such as the motivations of whoever impregnated those girls, not to mention their identities. Were you personally involved, or do you just make stuff up?

By the way, if you're going to call someone reactionary and a bigot, it's best to not immediately follow it up by saying a (or the) society is “pro-murderous.” At least, if you don't want to look like a hypocrite; I suppose that may not bug you, though. . .
28 December 2006
at 8 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

nugget (Anonymous) says…

The correct spelling a few posts up is:

sycophant - a servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people.

Sounds like Phill Kline to me. This “news” is nothing more than a bumbling attempt at headline grabbing. Kline's stumbling through the legal system is amusing, but sad. If he wants to pursue this, that's his right, but you'd think he'd understand and follow the proper legal channels in doing so. The self implosion witnessed prior to the election continues. He'd better be honing the resume for his next gig while he's learning how to be a real lawyer for the first time—he'll be unemployed the day after the next election. Check what Johnson County thinks of him as a protector of the law if you don't believe that statement.
28 December 2006
at 8:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ladysilk (Anonymous) says…

Phil's legal pursuits bring to mind the many atrocities performed by the Christian church in the name of morality and God. What Phil and others like him seem to forget is that they are not God nor do they speak for God and therefore do not have the right to pass judgement upon anyone, period.
28 December 2006
at 8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Solomon (Anonymous) says…

Serious question. Does the law require reporting of any pregnancy of a girl below the age of consent? If so, does the “privacy” of an abortion negate that requirement, thereby trumping the rape that occurred?

28 December 2006
at 8:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

To the best of my knowledge: 1) yes, law requires it and 2) no, does not negate.

Of course, those issues aren't the ones with pending charges, it doesn't look like Kline had any evidence of that strong enough to pursue a case.
28 December 2006
at 8:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Your absolutely right ladysilk. If a mother wants to murder her unborn child ,she has every right to do so…….You spoke of “the many atrocities performed by the Christian church”.Other than disagree with your “pro-choice” point of view,what other atrocities have they performed???Its my belief that you know abortion is wrong.Thats why you get so angry and hostile about the subject.
28 December 2006
at 9 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

Aren't you making a HUGE leap, assuming that just because a teenager is pregnant that it automatically means an adult is responsible for it?

Gee, think back to your own teen years. Did you have sex? Before or after the age of 16? With someone much older, or someone your own age?

If we're going to make assumptions, then I'll assume that most teenage girls who become pregnant do so with the help of boys their own age. That's the way it usually was when I was in high school. I don't think teenagers have changed that much over the years.

While some of you purists seem to think that sex between two teenagers is still a crime and should be prosecuted, I don't. Teenagers have been having sex with each other probably since the beginning of time, and they're not going to let Kline's opinion on it change their minds.

And even if it was an adult, exactly how do you plan to find out? It's not required to even put the father's name on a birth certificate, and if the girl doesn't want to talk, she won't. What are you going to do, beat it out of her?
28 December 2006
at 9:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

true_patriot (Anonymous) says…

Yes, Kline's lapdog sounds like a real “independent” prosecutor indeed.

The other issue here is that if in fact Kline really was most concerned with tracking down sexual predation and not grandstanding on the abortion issue to deal with his diminishing relevancy and the taint from his ethical breaches, he wouldn't have focused so narrowly on an abortion clinic. The majority of victims of child predators do not end up in abortion clinics. He's so transparent.

The “pro life” extremists (as if everyone isn't pro-life) don't support life when it comes to supporting prenatal care, post natal care, single mothers and working poor families raising babies and young children, and support sending Americans off to die and having their entire family structures decimated as a matter of choice rather than necessity. Not to mention their constant denial of the reality that if abortion in all forms were to be criminalized, those with financial and social connections would continue to have safe abortions one way or the other while the rest will be out having unsterile, dangerous abortions one way or the other, just like it was for centuries before Roe v Wade.

It's ironic that they engage in incredibly selective morality
to the point of caricature while railing against moral relativism.
28 December 2006
at 9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

DaREEKKU (Anonymous) says…

The opinion that abortion is “murder” is just that….an opinion. This opinion is formed due to religious definition that life begins at conception, when scientific evidence shows that it does not. Keep this in mind before posting your religious jargon on the poster-boards. I agree with many other people, the people fired Kline, they disapprove of his actions, he should be gone. If Kline were able to get private medical records just to expose people who have abortions (he had no other good legal basis) think of all the OTHER legal records he could obtain. Just a thought..
28 December 2006
at 9:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

preebo (Anonymous) says…

What Kline and a lot of abortion opponents do not realize is that you cannot infringe on personal liberties of the mother if she decides to get an abortion. Until Roe v. Wade is overturned the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment will protect her rights. The simple fact is that the Constitution does not view fetuses as “born or naturalized citizens”, (as it is currently read) so they are not covered by the same clause in the Bill O' Rights. So even if Kline would have had the charges reinstated against Tiller they (Tiller's attorneys) would have taken this case all the way back to the Supreme Court, where they would have declared the Kansas law as Unconstitutional and we would be back at square one. What people fail to realize is that even if Roe v. Wade is overturned that does not mean abortion would be made illegal. All that would do is place issue back on the states and state courts. In no way does my commentary endorse Tiller's action or Late-Term abortions in general, as I happen to be pro-life, but it is important that the debate be rooted in facts and reason and not passion and reaction. The answer to this problem is not illegal versus legal, because there are horrible possibilities if either is taken to the extreme. The answer will be as complex as the issue. We, from both sides of the debate, need to create a dialogue between each other to find the solution that will result in the betterment of all involved.
28 December 2006
at 9:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

SloMo (Anonymous) says…

I asked awhile back if anyone knew whether Kline had attempted to obtain medical records for underage boys who had been treated for venereal diseases. If not, why not? Wouldn't the presence of a venereal disease in a young boy indicate that adult-on-child sexual abuse had occured? Does the law require reporting these cases?

My suspicion is that Kline is either on a witch hunt for abortion providers in general or a get-Tiller-in-particular crusade, and I resent him using sexual abuse as a cover.
28 December 2006
at 9:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

daddax98 (Anonymous) says…

Couple of questions for the pro-lifers. should there be an exception for rape or incest or physical deformities? If so why? Don't these babies have just as much right to live? Additionally all pregnancies are dangerous so who decides if there is enough danger to the life of the mother to justify an abortion, or is this even an option?

28 December 2006
at 9:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

preebo (Anonymous) says…

Logicsound04,

I would tend to agree, but I believe those lables “Pro-Choice” and “Pro-Life” to be loaded terms. I am “Pro-Life” on all levels. Those who choose to keep a child rather then have an abortion or who would never entertain ideas of abortion are in practice “Pro-Choice”. It just echoes the idea that the terms used to define the positions are really not that far apart from each other. It is the few who take the passionate and unreasonable route on both ends of the issue that drive the wedge between us and prevent us from creating a truly uniting resolution.
28 December 2006
at 9:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

preebo (Anonymous) says…

Right_thinker,

First of all, to associate Wichita as Ultra-Liberal is comical. Wichita is a far cry from say, the 9th Curcuit Court. Stop thinking in political terms when applying this case in the courts. It may be hard to believe but there is a difference from political and judicial philosophy. Kline violated procedure and his case suffered. All Kline is guilty of is being a bad lawyer. He should have dotted all the i's and all the t's before taking this case on. This was meant to be his AG Swan Song and he dropped the ball on a procedural technicality. His office should be embarrassed.
28 December 2006
at 10:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Baille (Anonymous) says…

“Additionally all pregnancies are dangerous so who decides if there is enough danger to the life of the mother to justify an abortion, or is this even an option?”

Two doctors.
28 December 2006
at 10:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Roadkill_Rob (Anonymous) says…

Why doesn't Kline go after God? He performs more abortions (miscarriages) than anyone else. Speaking of…what happens to a soul when a miscarriage happens?
28 December 2006
at 10:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acg (Anonymous) says…

sublime, you've got to be kidding us, right? “What other atrocities has the church performed?” Are you living under a rock? Does it really need to be spelled out for you or are you so blinded by the religious nonsense you've been swallowing for so long that you refuse to see the truth? Wow, I didn't think anyone was that naive anymore.
28 December 2006
at 10:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oxandale (Anonymous) says…

Well, for a woman (or a couple), the decision to get or not get an aboration is a very personal one. Personally, i think that Phil Kline should not be pulling the stunts that he is currently doing so. Late term abortions, I have always wondered…why wait so long to get one? Anyway, here is a guy who is trying to leave the office swinging, no matter how misguided he may be. I cant say that i agree with what he is doing, respect the privacy of those individuals, their reasons for getting the abortions are just that…it is their decisions. It isnt an easy decision to make. A womans body may not physically mature enough to follow thru with a healty pregnancy, the woman might not been had a healthy pregnancy (whether it be by choice or other wise), the pregnancy could have resulted from rape/incest, or in some instances stupidity (young drunk and in the backseat of a car), there fore ill prepared for being “mom”. I am sure everyone will agree parenthood can be a scarey thing, no matter who you are.
28 December 2006
at 10:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Roadkill_Rob (Anonymous) says…

Wow, I had no idea Wichita is ultra-liberal! Man, talk about being blind. right_thinker, you officially lost all credibility.
28 December 2006
at 10:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Take your stinken Bible thumping tactics & shove it where the sun does NOT shine, KLINE! Enjoy your fun in the sun, MORON, because come Jan. 8, it's all going to crumble! I have to wonder, was Kline sexually abused as a kid or was he dropped on his head, either way, he has so much brain damage, no wonder he can't think straight, even though, Tiller's charges have been dropped twice. Kline is a sad excuse for a law enforcement officer & I LAUGH at him & all his supporters for his defeat in November! I also laugh at all Tiller haters! None of you that I just mentioned have a case. If Paul Morrison is smart, come January, he will focus on Murders, robberies & other horrific crimes, which have nothing to do with Tiller! move on kansas!

28 December 2006
at 10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Roadkill_Rob (Anonymous) says…

There's nothing wrong w/ being liberal. And i think most everyone will agree that Wichita is far from liberal, let alone “ultra-liberal.”

right_thinker, I believe you and people like you are confused and it's dangerous not to educate yourself.
28 December 2006
at 10:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

BTW, Kline himself is a criminal for infringing on women's rights that are protected under the Roe V. Wade decision. Shouldn't charges be brought forward against the religious zealot himself? If that doesn't happen, so be it, but he has one sad record that future law students in Kansas will laugh at for years to come because he never fought crime. The only fight he committed to was the fight against doctors like Tiller. That is not a record that I would be proud of, Tiller haters & Kline supporters.
28 December 2006
at 10:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

One more thing, folks, none of you or I are above the law. What I despise the most about Kline is that he claims he is above the law. Well, news flash, you're not above the law, MORON! Get in back of the line, you zealot!
28 December 2006
at 11:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

LawrenceRes (Anonymous) says…

So Right Thinker, from reading previous posts let me see if I have figured out the conservative philosophy on the subject…

* Teach abstinence only. Do not teach methods of pregnancy prevention. No condoms, no birth control, no emergency contraception.

* If pregnancy occurs (no matter what circumstance- rape, incest, birth control failure, etc.) carry through with pregnancy no matter what the mother's age, social status, income, single, married, whatever.

* Right Thinker bitches about welfare. So no public assistance to give a mother a chance to get on her feet. (I don't agree with people who take advantage of the system and make no attempt to better themselves but that problem will probably always exist)

* However, a parent should not put their kids in daycare, so she should stay at home and raise babies. No need to be working because that is selfish and bad parenting according to RT. Yet if not working, how will she afford to put food on the table? The father? Please.

Interesting. What a vicious cycle, and so full of contradictions. Maybe we should be providing realistic sex education, access to healthcare, affordable birth control (prices are rediculous), accessable emergency contraception (NO, it does not abort a pregnancy, only keeps egg from dropping if has not already), affordable health care for women who do find themselves pregnant, affordable daycare, more college scholarships and grants for nontraditional students, the list goes on.

I do not believe in having irresponible sex and then using abortion as a birth control method, however pregnancy happens and in some cases the women does not have many options. And the quality of life for the baby would be sad.

Maybe RT should be adopting unwanted babies and educating young women and men about sex and contraception.

Yeah right!
28 December 2006
at 11:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Roadkill_Rob (Anonymous) says…

LawrenceRes, your philosophies are too rational, and therefore, way too ultra-liberal for someone like right_thinker to comprehend.
28 December 2006
at 11:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

LawrenceRes (Anonymous) says…

I think it would kill right_thinker to know that I grew up in a conservative to moderate household with a homophobic father and a sort of traditional mother, and I went college, became educated and started to think for myself.

Oh, and by the way. I became a mother at the age of 18. The father was a deadbeat, I worked at a kwik shop and took no less than 18 hours of college credit each semester. I earned an associate and a bachelors degree and never went on public assistance. I could have choose abortion but personally, I never would. However, that is an exceptional case and I was lucky to have supportive friends and family or I would have ended up who knows where.

Maybe more women would choose to carry through with a pregnancy if they had the support of their friends, family, community, local colleges/high schools, churches (yeah right). I couldn't tell you how many dirty looks I got from old women and bible thumpers because I was young and pregnant. They ALL must have waited until marriage to have sex right? Or is it they were LUCKY enough to have never been caught or become pregnant.

Forget about left-wing/right-wing. I'm just tired of hipocrites and closed-minded people.
28 December 2006
at 11:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ryanjasondesch (Anonymous) says…

right thinker: I hearby nominate you and Kline for the Biggest Douche in the Universe Award. Previous Award Winners include the Great Jon Edwards. Few on here have given you any credibility for a while. Not many will take someone seriously when they seem to find a way to blame Clinton for everything (by the way, how you haven't mentioned about how Clinton is somehow responsible for Tiller's practice).

And by the way, having no credibility means all reasonable people, liberal moderate or conservative, don't buy a single inflammatory piece of garbage you waste half your day in typing. So stop, please. You're embarrasing yourself. Or don't, it's amusing sometimes to read the opinions of fools.

And I hardly believe that you don't loose any sleep at night, getting so worked up over the 'looney left'.
28 December 2006
at 12:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Baille (Anonymous) says…

“On Wednesday, Kline's office got a chance to tell the judge, Paul Clark, why he should reconsider. Kline did not appear at the hearing, leaving the arguments to his assistant, Stephen Maxwell”

Kline isn't going to be able to duck the courtroom once he becomes a real criminal attorney - or will he? Will he be the worst DA JoCo has ever seen or just one of the worst?

28 December 2006
at 12:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

preebo (Anonymous) says…

… Just a little sidenote.

Isn't interesting how Kline is now appointing a Third-Party prosecutor for this case? When the attorneys for Tiller and Planned Parenthood attempted to do the same thing through Morrison's office, Kline and his personel stated that there was no authority in the Attorney General's Office to subcontract legal prosecution out to another body.

What it appears that we have here is a situation that Kline has figured that any prosecution of this case will end sooner then it began with Morrison taking over in a few weeks. His actions now are nothing more then political in nature. Kline has always been a better politician then a litigator. He again, is playing to his base in attempt to keep himself in their minds for the future.

…as an attorney his only claim to fame was trying the Kansas Death Penalty case in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, which is something of an accomplishment, but did nothing to win his case the precedant was already set by Ohio and other states before his shot came up. All the court did was uphold the lower courts ruling. He could have tried the case from a hospital bed. Anyone who practices law knows Kline was a civil procedures attorney and was never one for criminal practice, so it is suprising that he would drop the ball in this case, but maybe it isn't that suprising afterall.
28 December 2006
at 12:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Tiller the Killer may have judges and politicians in his pocket but he's got Bill O'Reilly on his azz.

Tiller is going down this time. Bank on it!

The attacks on Kline are from a small group of loudmouth leftwing whackos. Their main purpose is to divert attention from the foul subject at hand - i.e., killing babies.
28 December 2006
at 12:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Oh yea, boldaq, Bill O'Reilly is a GREAT source of information regarding abortions & doctors like Tiller. What planet are you from? Have you ever had to face the decision of whether to continue a pregnancy or get an abortion because of the dangers that come from the pregnancies themselves? I don't think so. So, you & the other Tiller haters & Kline venom lovers get in back of the line. There is no room in Kansas for hate mongers like Kline. NONE!
28 December 2006
at 12:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

sublime said:

“You spoke of “the many atrocities performed by the Christian church”.Other than disagree with your “pro-choice” point of view,what other atrocities have they performed???”

Hmmm…let's see here: the sexual abuse performed by Catholic priests on small boys comes to mind; the Salem Witch Trials; oh, and the Inquisition was also pretty atrocious — Christians were pretty creative on how to torture would-be sinners back then. These are just a few examples of course…let me know if you want some more.:)
28 December 2006
at 12:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acg (Anonymous) says…

To anyone with more than 2 brain cells to rub together, Bill O'Reilly is a joke. I have to admit, I was worried there for awhile. It felt as if the Age of the Bible Thumper was upon us, but it seems to have started to ebb, thankfully!! More and more people are waking up to what this moron O'Reilly and that skank Coulter are all about. I think Tiller need not worry at all. There are too many people out there who are sick and tired of the bible freaks and their dogmatic nonsense who aren't going to lie down and take any more attacks on our personal freedoms. And we stand behind Tiller and his right to do his job, all the freaking way!!
28 December 2006
at 12:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Well, acg, I wish I could share your sense of confidence because until we circulate a petition to have charges leveled against Kline for violating the privacy statutes that are clearly defined in the decision of Roe V. Wade, we're not gonna go very far in bringing down the Tiller haters.
28 December 2006
at 12:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

preebo (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq,

Since you and others like you insist on going down this road of claiming murder and infanticide, I have one question…

What of the women who carry these “babies” almost to full-term and then decide to have the pregnancy terminated? Are they not as guilty? I hear nothing of their complacency with the procedure nor the practices of Dr. Tiller or Planned Parenthood. Should we not hold them as accountable under your determination for the death of the fetus? You villify Abortion Clinics, but you say nothing of the women going into the procedure. It's as if you liken them as lambs to a slaughter, but in reality they are in many cases women who are intelligent, throughtful, and most of all aware of their circumstance. If you continue to hold this line of thinking then you might as well hold the women accountable as well.

My guess is that you won't. The mere concept of holding hundreds of thousands of women criminally liable would hurt your campaign. Say you get your wish and we outlaw this practice… then what? Women attempt it themselves in alleys across America, or cross into either Canada or Mexico to obtain the procedure. The reality is that abortion clinics are not the problem, but rather the want and demand for the procedure is. To solve this quandry it will take a real debate established on finding a solution that will help mankind and not divide it based on half-baked social conservativism.
28 December 2006
at 1:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Roadkill_Rob (Anonymous) says…

A quick question for boldaq and right_thinker, if you are both so pro-life, what are you doing to help ease other human suffering? There are A LOT more atrocities in the world other than abortion.

Put your money where your mouth is instead of complaining about left-wing whackos on a blog.

28 December 2006
at 1:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

All y'all who make George Tiller out to be the bad guy, stick it! Those of you Kline Supporters who value life, what are YOU doing to ease the pain & suffering of Neuro Muscular Disease patients? I am waiting…..oh you don't have an answer. You curse the women who get these abortions, when you clearly have NO clue about the pain they endure, yet you revere Phil Kline. To people like you: you make me sick!
28 December 2006
at 1:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

fletch (Anonymous) says…

This is what cracks me up about these ultra-socialist right wingers. They claim they want small government, but they want that small government to control your actions, thoughts, medical decisions, and religious beliefs. The right wing has up and turned into a bunch of pinko commies. They Kline the Medical Czar standing over your shoulder calling you a filthy whore reminding you not to get a prescription for birth control because it would make Jesus cry.

The Kansas right wing needs to go back to Russia where they belong.
28 December 2006
at 1:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“Bill O'Reilly is a joke.” acg

And the joke is on you and your liberal ilk. Bill O'Reilly has the support of mainstream America and is becoming more powerful everyday. He's already brought down many leftwing renegade judges and Paul Clark is one of the worst. Tiller and Clark are going down.

This is what you “stand behind”. Proud of yourself?

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_…
28 December 2006
at 1:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Baille (Anonymous) says…

luffa
28 December 2006
at 1:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

In your dreams, boldaq! Tiller is not going down because KLINE will not be in office after Jan. 8th. Spare me the psycho babble trash about Tiller & Clark!!! You didn't apparently answer the question from before, zealot, what are you doing to ease human suffering? There are TONS more people suffering from other ailments that are far worse than abortion. Well……?
28 December 2006
at 1:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Before I sign off for the day, everyone, especially you who love Kline & hate Tiller:

What Phil Kline has done in recent days proves even more why he cannot be trusted. He relies on the lies of Bill O'Reilley & that whench Ann Coulter to conduct witch hunts against doctors like George Tiller. That is a sure sign of desparation for a man who never fought crime during his tenure.

All of you who HATE Tiller & love Kline, your logic is flawed beyond measure. How can you say you're for smaller government when KLINE illegally invades privacy rights of abortion clinic patients by ignoring the statutes set forth by the Roe V. Wade decision? What are you, the abortion clinic haters doing to ease the human suffering throughout the world that is far worse than abortions? You have no answers, & to think that Phil Kline can ease the ills of Kansas, stick it!
28 December 2006
at 1:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acg (Anonymous) says…

Absolutely! I'm totally proud of myself. I'm proud of me for many reasons, but sticking with what's germane to this conversation, I'm proud of myself for being smart enough to know that more often than not right wing conservative is synonomous with bigot, homophobe, racist, zealot and alot of the times, idiot. So, if you're asking me if I'm proud of myself for sticking up for a liberal viewpoint, then I'd have to say you bet your a** I am. I'm always willing to stick up for the rights and freedoms our country and constitution guarantee us. One of the most important of those being the separation of church and state. See, I don't begrudge you bible thumpers your right to believe that nonsense. I'm just tired of you all cramming it down the rest of our throats. You want to believe that life begins at conception because of some muddled viewpoint some idiot preacher, minister or priest put into your head because you aren't smart enough to think for yourself, go right ahead. The rest of us maybe aren't so deluded.
28 December 2006
at 2:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ihatejohntravolta (Laura Watkins) says…

if wichita was “uber-liberal”, i don't understand how or why they would have supported George W. Bush in 2004. “According to unofficial vote totals for 2004, Bush received 105,413 votes and John Kerry received 61,418 votes from Sedwick County”.

28 December 2006
at 2:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Shelby (Anonymous) says…

So…when *does* life begin? Is it when the baby takes a breath of air?
28 December 2006
at 2:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Bill is not getting more popular, he's lost millions in viewers over the last couple of years. Seems people are quite sick of his spin.
28 December 2006
at 2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

preebo (Anonymous) says…

Parkay,

Again you are taking the wrong approach. My argument wasn't against the violation of the “Women's-Right-to-know Act.” Your argument cannot be concluded on this Blog as none of us have access to the case documents, but you cannot argue that Kline mishandled his duties as AG when he dropped the ball in regards to jurisdiction by not following the law to notify and include local jurisdictions into the investigation. Because of a simple procedural error he lost the case. Bad move for a legal professional. Especially, one who has been in the profession for more then a few years. I would like to think our top legal officer would be able to make better decisions in office. Wouldn't you?
28 December 2006
at 3:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Shelby (Anonymous) says…

Being against the handing out of late-term abortions like they're lollipops represents “draconian morals”?
28 December 2006
at 3:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“what are you doing to ease human suffering? more people are suffering from other ailments that are far worse than abortion. Well……?”

Is it your position that because there are other crimes being committed in the world that it's okay to kill small human beings? How can you look at the reality of abortion and say it's okay? This isn't about “women's rights”. More men are for abortion than women. It was an all male ruling that gave us roe/wade. It's often the irresponsible boyfriend who wants the baby killed. Conversely, the vast majority of Prolifers are female.

As O'Reilly shows, we have judges who buy into a legislative crock known as “restorative justice. “To leftwing whackos, no one even the most criminally depraved is really responsible for his actions. In one chilling case, ignored by the media until O'Reilly had the courage to expose it, Vermont Judge Edward Cashman had to sentence a man guilty of raping a girl repeatedly from the time she was 6 years old until she was 10. His sentence: a mere 60 days in jail. Why? Because Cashman buys the lefty line the man didn't need “punishment,” he needed “treatment.” .
28 December 2006
at 3:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

For some women pregnancy and motherhood also carry long term psychological and financial and life altering impacts. Sometimes enough for women to act desperately and risk their own lives to end a pregnancy. So lets say you take a depressed mother and force her to give birth. Now instead of just depressed, you've got her depressed with a screaming baby, and when she can barely care for herself, you're setting her up for infancide as well.

Those are the undisputed facts. Some women the psychological impact is so great they slip into major psychosis. If you don't think there is potential for irrepairable harm in that, you need an education.
28 December 2006
at 3:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

No, I think most women are pro-choice and the majority of pro-lifers are males. They don't have to carry the child, they have no idea what it is like to be pregnant. I saw one woman on Dr Phil tear up women who had postpartum depression because they didn't feel like she did, that motherhood was her calling on earth and all other mothers were scum if they didn't feel that way.

How can I look at the reality of abortion and think it's ok? Because I've lived through the reality of traumatic pregnancies. Because I've heard the stories of others who have too and know I'm far from alone.
28 December 2006
at 3:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Shelby (Anonymous) says…

LOTS of things “carry long term psychological and financial and life altering impacts.” *That* is an undisputed fact.

Justification for killing a developing fetus in the third trimester it ain't. In my opinion, no one should have the legal power to kill this living, functioning human, even if it's not convenient.

28 December 2006
at 3:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Roadkill_Rob (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq wrote:
“Is it your position that because there are other crimes being committed in the world that it's okay to kill small human beings?”

No, the point is that why don't you get involved in other, serious atrocities? If your so concerned about the human race, there is alot more that can be done but it seems your content w/ just complaining about left-wing whackos and their idealogy of a woman choosing.

Also, O'Reilly is a proven liar who sexually harrasses his employees. He should be fired for that and confusing small-minded people. Here is a clip of Keith Olberman exposing a Bill O'Reilly lie:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7KMaPnFVCa…
28 December 2006
at 3:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Shelby (Anonymous) says…

I think Preebo might have touched on this idea earlier, but the problem with the (broader) issue of abortion is that, to fully appease those who are pro-abortion or those who are anti-abortion would bring about a slippery slope that would lead to greater problems for society, so the key to reaching any sort of ideal is via compromise.
28 December 2006
at 4:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

drewdun (Anonymous) says…

I'm glad we have people like boldaq and rt to tell us what is best for us. And don't forget that o-so-pious Bill O'Reilly that boldaq is droning about. Hey boldaq, google 'Andrea Mackris + loofah' and get back to me, k?
28 December 2006
at 4:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

That's your opinion Shelby, and I'm glad I can make those decisions for my own body, and you can make your own decisions for your own body. See how that works?
28 December 2006
at 4:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

goodcitizen (Anonymous) says…

My 2 cents.
1. Say hypothetically, a man father's a child, then that child requires a liver transplant a year or so down the road. The man is a perfect genetic match. Should that man be required to give his child a part of his liver?….it will grow back, just inconvenience him for awhile, some recovery involved, some risk, but hey every medical procedure involves some risk, and he did make the decision to have sex after all.

2. Do you want someone looking over the shoulder of your doctor, making them second guess whether or not they will be prosecuted for deciding to save your life?

3. I was raised Catholic, and I can remember how when I was a young woman the priest gave a sermon about a mother who was facing certain death if she continued her pregnancy chose death. He held her up as the pinnacle of what a woman should be and desire—this was on Mother's day. I'm not downplaying that woman's choice or her sacrifice, but to tell ALL women that the greatest thing they could aspire to was to value themselves and their existence less than a developing fetus seemed crazy to me then and emblematic of patrimony and misogyny now. As we backslide into fundamentalism in many world religions, I fear for my freedom. I fear second class status, paternalism, and a lack of control over my own life.
It is a complicated world, and reproductive decisions are more and more difficult to make. Still, it is more scary for me to think of NOT having control of my body and those decisions being made by someone else.
28 December 2006
at 4:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Shelby (Anonymous) says…

No, here's how it works: those who are anti-abortion are concerned about the human inside “your body” for whom you're making a decision. THAT'S the issue, Moxxie.
28 December 2006
at 4:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ImpactWinter (Derek Dodson) says…

I think a fantastic idea got sidelined a little bit earlier on, and thats Sexual Education: enlightening folk, teens specifically, but we all could do with a refresher on the specific dangers and…intricacies of sexual relationships could go a long way to solving this problem on a national scale; But thats not what conservatives (on the whole) believe; they'd rather our youth be uneducated (because the parents sure as hell don't want to talk about filthy sin) and deal with the after effects (pregnancy) by denying the one of the few options remaining…

sensibile…
28 December 2006
at 4:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

goodcitizen (Anonymous) says…

That's part of the scariness…too many people put my body in quotes, meaning it really isn't mine at all.

I hope that if I do decide to become pregnant, that those people care enough about the human inside “my body” to see that I get proper medical care, nutrition, and that the air and water I ingest/intake are not polluted by the corporations in which they invest.

28 December 2006
at 4:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Shelby, my body, my life, my business. Not yours nor anyone elses.
28 December 2006
at 5:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…

Bill O'Schmuckly? On FAUX news? LMAO!!! These guys are in last place in ratings and it gets worse for them every day! Their credibility is zip and their “fair and balanced” reporting that they try to pass as “journalism” is being seen for what it really is: Nonsensical hype!

Babies, already born babies, already born girl babies are being slaughtered by the thousands in India. Where's your outrage for that boldaq?
28 December 2006
at 5:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Baille (Anonymous) says…

I heard O'Reilly talking about restorative justice on my drive home from work a couple weeks ago. Problem was he didn't seem to know what it is. Somehow he equates the concept of “restorative justice” with treatment for the criminal offender. That is not what the restorative justice model does.

But O'Reailly has never been one to let research come in the way of a good rant.

Think for yourself, boldaq. Don't buy the BS.
28 December 2006
at 6:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

Poor O'Riliey fans…if they didn't have him to think for them, how would they function?*L*

Shelby — Would you prefer that women perform their own abortions with a wire coat-hanger? Because that's what will happen if women are banned from having the option of a medical procedure.

It seems to me that people like you don't realize that banning abortion won't stop it from occurring, or, maybe you do realize this but you don't care about the woman bleeding to death or dying from an infection after trying to perform an abortion herself, or after going to an unlicensed quak to do it for her? Or maybe she'd just “abort” herself from life by committing suicide?

If an abortion ban is passed, and if any of the above was committed by women deprived of the right to choose, would your way of thinking be: “Well, she deserved to die for doing such a heinous thing. I'll pray for her soul because she'll probably roast in hell”?

Because, if that's how you and people like you think, I don't think that's very Christian of you. You're not God, nor do you speak for him, and you don't have the right to judge. You also don't have the right to demand others to make what you consider “the right choice” for their bodies or spiritual well-being.
28 December 2006
at 6:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

Oh, yes, Faux News, the people who were going to bring you the interview with O.J. Simpson about his new book…you know, the one where he talked about how he would have murdered his ex-wfe, IF he'd been the one that did it?

Faux touted this piece of “news” ad nauseum for several days, until the book was pulled, and suddenly the interview went away and nobody at Faux explained why…could it be because their legal team advised against it?

O'Reilly is an ego maniac, thinking he's one step above God, and is so pathetic it's unbelievable. Anybody who even listens to his drivel should have their heads examined.
28 December 2006
at 6:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

crazyks - Well said.:)
28 December 2006
at 7:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

I'm well aware that leftwing whackos hate Bill O'Reilly. They have great reason to. He's their greatest enemy. They hate Bush, too, but he can't hurt them the way O'Reilly can because O'Reilly exposes them for what they are.

I agree that people, as well as women, should have control over their bodies. But when they have an abortion, it's not their body being killed, is it?

“Fundamentalist”, as used by pro-deathers, is just another name for Pro-Lifers. Lefties love “Christians” like John Traitor Kerry who are prochoice. So, let's not confuse the subject of killing babies with religion, gay rights, etc. Prodeathers would rather talk about anything but abortion.

Why? Because they can't win if they talk about live, growing human beings being stabbed, snipped apart or poisoned and horrible burned by a saline solution.
They'd rather argue for the rights of subhuman abortionists to do their job.

This is a holocaust. Plain and simple.
28 December 2006
at 7:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“the interview went away and nobody at Faux explained why.”

You weren't paying attention. Bill O'Reilly made the interview go away.

28 December 2006
at 7:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Saw a bumper stiocker today:

“Pro-Choice Is A Lie!

The BABY didn't choose To Die!”

Wir mussen die Babies ausrotten!

Thanks.

Marion.
28 December 2006
at 7:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Marion rocks.
28 December 2006
at 7:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq, you suck. Give me a break. You are telling me & others who despise Phil Kline that it is OKAY for government to invade abortion clinic patients' privacy. you are as unamerican as they come. Thank God you're not the AG of Kansas, LOSER!
28 December 2006
at 7:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

By the way, Boldaq, you & others like you who LOVE Kline & Hate Tiller make me want to vomit!
28 December 2006
at 8:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

What Tiller does to make money is vile. Vomit away!
28 December 2006
at 8:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on December 28, 2006 at 7:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

“I'm well aware that leftwing whackos hate Bill O'Reilly. They have great reason to. He's their greatest enemy. They hate Bush, too, but he can't hurt them the way O'Reilly can because O'Reilly exposes them for what they are.

I agree that people, as well as women, should have control over their bodies. But when they have an abortion, it's not their body being killed, is it?

“Fundamentalist”, as used by pro-deathers, is just another name for Pro-Lifers. Lefties love “Christians” like John Traitor Kerry who are prochoice. So, let's not confuse the subject of killing babies with religion, gay rights, etc. Prodeathers would rather talk about anything but abortion.

Why? Because they can't win if they talk about live, growing human beings being stabbed, snipped apart or poisoned and horrible burned by a saline solution.
They'd rather argue for the rights of subhuman abortionists to do their job.

This is a holocaust. Plain and simple.”

No, it's not “plain and simple.” It's a very complicated issue. If it was “plain and simple” like you believe it to be, there wouldn't be any discussion about it. Try to explore viewpoints other than your own, and you'll see how complicated this topic is.
28 December 2006
at 8:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq, you are so full of crap!!! Bill O'Schmuckly made it go away? Puh-lease, Murdock - you know, Bill's boss - pulled he plug on that one. Sheesh! You don't even kow your favorite network. To top it off your hero is a sexually harrassing philanderer! Yeah, some Christian! Go stick you head back in the sand since you are incapable of thinging for yourself. lame-oid!!!
28 December 2006
at 8:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Who agrees that a medical professional who has performed an abortion on a 10 year old child in Kansas, but who has not reported the rape and subsequenet abortion, has complied with Kansas law?

28 December 2006
at 9:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Shadower, there was no charge, just a question. Anyone care to respond to the hypothetical situation I pose?
28 December 2006
at 9:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Godot: If you meant it as hypothetical, you probably would have announced it as hypothetical. You meant it to be an insinuation of something actually done, and since you evidently have no evidence to back it up, that just makes it misrepresentation. Feel free to amuse me by scrambling to cover and rationalize how you are still both right and righteous.
28 December 2006
at 9:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Shadower dodges, does not want to reveal stance on hypothetical question. Why?
28 December 2006
at 9:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Jonas and shadower, let us begin, anew.

Say there is a child, say, 10 years of age, who is pregnant.
Some adult presents her to a physician, in Kansas, who promotes himself as an abortionist. (see Tiller's website) The adult comes to an agreement with said physician that an abortion will be performed on the 10 year old child, and the abortion is performed. The physician does not report the abortion to the State of Kansas.

What laws have, or have not, been broken?
28 December 2006
at 9:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Baille (Anonymous) says…

Lay out your hypothetical more completely, Godot. There are many laws that are involved in providing medical care to an unwed pregnant minor. There are many agencies to which one could, and may be required to, report a minor who has had sex. It is difficult to comment on your hypothetical because it is too vague.

Why don't you just lay out your proposition plainly, Godot? I assume that you propose that Kansas law requires a physician to report any abortions provided to a child of 10? OK. Sounds reasonable. If you would point us all to the applicable statutes it would be helpful.

You also seem to assume that any 10 year-old girl who is pregnant is the victim of rape. Ok. Again that sounds reasonable. However, we still need to look at the statute. I know it is easy to find, but we should all be on the same page as we work through your hypothetical.

Also, if you would, please address the status of both actors when the 10 year-old girl is pregnant after having intercourse with a 10 year-old boy and discuss whether you would need to report both the boy and the girl as sexual offenders and victims of sexual abuse. There should be a couple of statutes on this as well. I believe there are also a couple of AG opinions which make for helpful and sometimes humerous reading.

Is there more to your hypothetical that I have left out?
28 December 2006
at 9:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

To Shadower, Jonas, Logrithmic, Baille and all, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!! May we all work together to make 2007 the best. For life. For our future. For all.
28 December 2006
at 10:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

What do we do with all these dead babies, anyway?

thanks.

Marion.
28 December 2006
at 10:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tscherer1 (Tom Scherer) says…

Phill Kline, former radio d-jay should return to radio. He is great at talking a lot, but not much in reality worth any recognition.

I suggest we now refer to him as the Johson County D-JAY, instead of joco da. Besides, we all know Eric Rucker will really be the new DA, so he can tell Kline exactly what it is, a DA does.

Tom Scherer, Candidate, United States Congress

28 December 2006
at 10:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“Good morning from radio staion KANU; voice of the University of Kansas Radio Network”.

1970.

Broadcast from a small room in the basement of Hoch Auditorium.

Unknown announcer.

;)

Thanks.

Marion.
28 December 2006
at 11:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

All the anti-woman people on this thread. Tomorrow I want you to check yourselves into the hospital to donate your kidney, liver, bone marrow….whatever will keep you in the hospital as someone else's life support for the next 9months. Husband and wife teams included. Don't have a sitter? Haven't had a chance to make plans on how to live for the next 9 months financially while you're laid up? Too bad, I guess you get the point. Hubby/Wife teams are so you know how a single mother must feel to be on bedrest. You can rely on the relatives to raise your kids right? You can worry about losing your job later. I'm sure the church will pay your bills.

If this is about saving the life of strangers that mean nothing to you, then your body is disposable for the treatment of saving other people's lives too, and this can include men sacrificing now as well! See isn't this fun! Saving real lives already breathing, feeling and living. Real lives that already affect others. It is more important for me to mandate you to save these other people's lives more than anything in the world.

So bright and early tomorrow morning folks, chop chop. And bring a living will, because you know sometimes things just go wrong, but I'm sure it's the sacrifice you're willing to make.
29 December 2006
at 12:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

What do they do with all the dead babies?

Thanks.

Marion.
29 December 2006
at 12:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Hello, kline lovers & Tiller haters, abortions are NOT illegal. Get that through your thick & dense skulls. Oh, I forgot you must have left your heads in Topeka while schmoozing with Wag the Dog Wagle & Connie Morris, while Bob Corkins was a stripper. You Godot & others who love Kline's illegal tactics are pathetic LOSERS!
29 December 2006
at 12:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Well, under the Race Laws in Germany prior to and during WWII, killing the Jews, the intellectuals, the Poles, the Gay/Bi/LesTGD. the Gypsies, the mentally ill and just about anyone was not illegal.

We used to have laws in this country and even right here in Lawrence, Kansas which restricted the activities of Blacks and Native Americans.

Were those laws right?

Laws do not make a thing right.

Thanks.

Marion.
29 December 2006
at 2:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

There was no law broken about failure to report child abuse. The charges are not even related to that. The failure to report is because Kline didn't like the way Tiller filed his paperwork to the KDHE on the reasons for the late term abortion, that's all.
29 December 2006
at 6:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Dareekku—You should stop lying to yourself while you spew your heathen jargon about abortion.As if your heathen point of view is any more significant than that of a Christian stand point.
29 December 2006
at 8:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

craigers (Anonymous) says…

moxxie, cheap contraception is available to those who want it. That is a choice.

29 December 2006
at 8:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

werekoala (Anonymous) says…

“cheap contraception is available to those who want it.”

But God forbid we tell our kids about it in school. They should just figure it out on their own. And if they don't figure it out on their own, that's just what the little sluts deserve, right?
29 December 2006
at 9:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

craigers (Anonymous) says…

logicsound, no I wouldn't be in favor of abortion in those cases. In all abortion cases, the child is an innocent life. And if we were only dealing with the small percentage of times that contraception fails, then we wouldn't have such a large number of abortions occurring.

Sorry werekoala, you are putting words in people's mouths.
29 December 2006
at 9:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

I have read the blog entries on here, and I didnt hear from 1 woman who has had an abortion herself….why is that? I personally have had an abortion when i was young and stupid, and i had it for all the dumb reasons listed in this blog…my body my right, cant take care of a baby at 19 and being single, and those are all bogus reasons, I dont agree with kline, however i also dont agree with many half witted opinions on this blog. Have any of you ever seen a sonogram of a 6 week fetus? Let me explain, the heart is beating, you can see it and you can hear it, therefore it is alive, Have you ever seen an abortion preformed via sonogram? The baby actually tries to move away from the medical instrument thats trying to extract it, therefore your conclusion that the baby doesnt feel anything also doesnt hold water. I deeply regret the poor choice I made, however this isnt a battle between christians and non-believers, I dont suppose anyone has a problem spending US currency that says In God we trust do ya? Or how about the reason your living in this country in the first place? Why is that? This country was founded on christian principals….but those of you who bash churches are still here in this same country. Phil Kline is looking to make a political career move, I agree with that, but I also have 3 teenage daughters, and if at any point one of them becomes pregnant then I want to know, at 10, 11, or 12 even beyond those girls dont have the skills to make a good informed decision about their lives, I was 19 and have regretted it ever since i seen it, I would emplore all of you to sit up and take notice that no other woman on here has admitted to having an abortion but me…why is that? Dont bash the church just because they dont agree with the right to choose, this is America and we can say anything we want within reason and with responsibility, just because we may not agree with one another doesnt make your opinion right and mine wrong or visa versa, but rather respect each other enough to allow everyone to voice that opinion….Just have some facts to back it up other than a narrow minded opinion of what you think is right and wrong…..and correct me if im wrong but should a MAN be deciding this anyway??????
29 December 2006
at 9:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Ya'll aren't at the hospital? Why is that? i told you it's not your choice to use your body! Get to saving lives now like you claim!

Diva, how do you know that if you had the baby, that you wouldn't feel just as strongly that you had made the wrong decision? You don't, because you didn't have to try to feed and clothe that baby and ruin your life over having it. And no, our nation is not a Christian nation, it's a free nation. First amendment. Do you really think “in god we trust' has always been on the money?

If you were so ambivalent about having an abortion, why did you get one? Did you feel trapped, depressed? Guess what that doesn't go away after you have a baby, it just gets worse.

And yes I've seen all the sono pics, the baby does not move away from the instruments. Please. It has been PROVEN that babies don't feel pain till they are a certain gestational age, it is simply impossible due to the development of the nervous system. And they don't do those kind of abortions on the older babies anymore.

Don't try to take away my choice because you felt you made a bad choice. It was your decision to make, and I want to reserve the right to keep my decisions for myself as well.
29 December 2006
at 9:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Wow, first of all moxxie mama you never read any part that said i dont think any woman should have the right to an abortion….what i said is that an 11, 12 or 13 y/o do not have the skills to make that decision, I firmly beieve that decision is between a woman her concious and her God…I do however believe that this is not a mans decision to make, nor should a mans opinion count on the subject. You can try to spout off and make this country a God hating country but that will never happen, moxxie mama I would ask the same question… what are you doing to improve human life and conditions on earth?
29 December 2006
at 9:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldgranny (Anonymous) says…

ksdivakat ..that was a brave thing to admit.
I personally oppose abortion. But I do not like Phil Kline's tactics. If this problem is ever solved it won't be because of some egotistical jerk like him.
moxie-mama-I can't believe that you really are a “mama” and still feel that way!
29 December 2006
at 9:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Appearantly you do as well, most of the blogs on here are about accusing every church and every christian of being right or left winged, ignorant and other insignificant verbs, my point is this, 60% of this country is Christian, or identify with christian principals…..are you a man scenebooster? Or are you a woman who has had an abortion and therefore earned the right to voice her opinion on the subject, although not a popular opinion, Im not on here telling anyone they are ignorant or stupid and i would appreciate the right to voice my opinion in the same respectful manner.
29 December 2006
at 10:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Gee maybe it was this comment “Dont bash the church just because they dont agree with the right to choose, this is America and we can say anything we want within reason ”.

You gave no indication whatsoever in your post that you were pro-choice, it all sounded like the same anti-choice drivel.

Granny, many mamas feel like I do, that having my baby was a bad decision. I'm not alone. But we sure do get chastized by the group who thinks motherhood is their only purpose in life.
Must be nice not to have to struggle for so many years.

29 December 2006
at 10:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

I notice all the anti-choicers are refusing to go give their bodies to another to save their lives. Hmm. Hypocricy abounds.

Come on, there is no time to lose, people are dying as we speak.
29 December 2006
at 10:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

trinity (Anonymous) says…

diva you asked the wrong question here, of moxxie mama; “what are you doing to improve human life and conditions on earth?”

i happen to know that moxxie is *not* someone to toot her own horn, AND that she is moving mountains in her life&the lives of many many people around her. so, lay off that question, eh?

can any of you fine folks, no matter your stance on this issue, *see* what is going on here? how the religious right is becoming more&more of a freedom sapping joke?? God has nothing to do with all this!!! it's these PEOPLE who are spouting half truths and their own personal interpretations, who are undermining basic rights and freedoms. sheesh!

do y'all stand behind phreddie&his phamily of phreaks too? i'd venture a guess-yes.

moxxie, DAMN i'm glad you're posting here! :) love ya gal!
29 December 2006
at 10:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

I”ve missed you trinity! You should pop me an IM!

And that's exactly the point thanks.
29 December 2006
at 10:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Moxxie, I feel sorry for your child and I will pray for him or her, going through life knowing your mother didnt want you and would have rather aborted you has to be a struggle. I dont ever recall though calling your opinion drivel, perhaps the lesson here should be respecting anothers opinion and experience. Please dont assume that since youve seen something on a sonogram that makes you an expert on abortions, unless of course you are in the medical profession, which by the way in case i havent mentioned…I am. So if you would like we can debate the actual abortion issue, however that was not my point. Im simply saying that Kline was wrong however should 10,11 and 12 y/o be allowed the right to have an abortion and their parents not know? Absolutely not!
29 December 2006
at 10:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

werekoala (Anonymous) says…

It all gets down to rape and incest:

If you're against abortion because you believe it kills babies, the only morally consistent choice is to force the young, innocent victims of these crimes to bear their rapists' child.

If you think there should be an exception allowing rape and incest victims to have abortions, but not anyone else, well, you're a hypocrite who only believes it's murder when you disapprove of the mother's actions.

And to me, that really seems to be what it boils down to - disaproval of women having sex without wanting to get pregnant. For every time you hear a pro-lifer talking about the innocent babies, I can show you two where they are talking about how the stupid sluts should be keeping their legs together.

Personally, I'd have a hard time being involved with an abortion after the first trimester, and I don't have a problem with common-sense restrictions on late-term abortions. But I also think that it's like the right to die - an intensely personal decision with almost no universal rules. And in situations like that, I prefer to leave it to the people actually involved, not a bunch of old white guys in suits, to decide what's best.
29 December 2006
at 10:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Yes I happen to be a medical professional too. And I do worry about what is happening that a 10 year old got pregnant in the first place, maybe telling mom and dad isn't in that child's best interest.

Think of me what you want to, but it's not that I didn't want my children, nor that I don't love my children. I do. I just wish I had never had them, they'd have been better off.
29 December 2006
at 10:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Well Trinity…share with the good people of Lawrence exactly how: “she is moving mountains in her life&the lives of many many people around her.”
Since she wants a hard and fast answer from anyone whose opinion is different from hers…wheres her hard and fast answer? I personally take the comment ” lay off that question, eh?” a personal threat….I either back down from my opinion and agree with her or else? Give me a break……………God bless you both in spite of….
29 December 2006
at 11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

While you may be a very religious person, ksdiva, and your decisions are based on that, not everyone in America is…and they don't have to be.

What medical procedures are available to all people nationwide shouldn't be based on the religious beliefs of just some of the people. If the Jehovah's Witnesses had their way, based on their beliefs, no one nationwide would ever be able to have a blood transfusion, even if it would save their lives.

So you had an abortion and you regretted it. I'm sorry. But I have never talked to a woman who had an abortion and bragged about it, or talked about it to others as if it was the most wonderful thing since sliced bread. No woman I know who has had an abortion goes around touting them to others as the thing they should definitely do.

The women I know ALL regretted having the abortion, or regretted their life circumstances at the time that made them feel that abortion was the best option. If you're caught between a rock and a hard place, then any decision you make is going to make you have regrets, no matter what that decision was.

I never had an abortion, nor would I ever have chosen to have one. But I wouldn't deign to make that decision for someone else, anymore than I would try to make any other medical decision for someone else.

I did, however, have a baby at the age of 19, out of wedlock. Now that's she's been here for so many years, do I regret having her? No. I love her with all my heart, and she knows that. She understands the difficult decisions I made concerning her, and understands.

Why don't you?

(continued)

29 December 2006
at 11:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

(continued_

I also know it wasn't easy, to be unmarried and a mother. I had complications after childbirth, and I wasn't able to work for several months. But I had the support of my mother and other family members, who helped out as much as they could. Otherwise, I'm afraid life for my baby wouldn't have been as kind as it turned out to be.

And that is the whole rub. Not every teenage girl (or woman) who becomes pregnant has the same options. Not all of them have families who will support them and help out. Not all of them have money, or families with money, to help out in a pinch with medical care or medical costs, or paying bills if the mother isn't able to work. Or to provide babysitting if necessary.

No, I can't assume how you felt about it, because I haven't experienced the same thing. I also doubt that you've experienced having to raise a baby by yourself with little money and not many options. By the time you had your next baby, I'll bet you were prepared, and made sure you had everything in place ahead of time that you'd need.

Yes, of course there are women out there who use abortion as a means of birth control simply because they're selfish. But this is by no means the majority of women who choose to have abortions.

Just because some abuse it doesn't mean it shouldn't be available to all who may need it.

To put it in other terms, just because there are some people who abuse the system that exists, and may drive away without paying for the gas, doesn't mean we should abolish all gas stations because it might happen again.

Just because some people shoplift at Wal-Mart doesn't mean they should shut the store down because it might happen again, and someone might abuse they system.

In a perfect world, abortion wouldn't be necessary. For one thing, girls wouldn't get pregnant without the means to take care of a baby. But even if they did, in that perfect world they wouldn't have to worry about it, because others would always be there to support her and make sure she has everything she needs.

Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. And sad to say, some of the babies that are aborted are better off, instead of having to live with a crack-head mother, or father, or live with abuse in childhood, or live in poverty. Babies don't get to make the choices, their parents do.

No, teenage girls may not have the maturity or emotional development necessary to make the decision of getting an abortion. They also do not have the maturity or emotional development to make a decision about keeping a baby.
29 December 2006
at 11:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…

Diva, you present your self in a most condescending arrogant manner. Glad you know everything.

Who are you to think that your prayers are wanted or welcome? Oh, wait, you know everything.
29 December 2006
at 11:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

My point exactly crazy: ” teenage girls may not have the maturity or emotional development necessary to make the decision of getting an abortion. They also do not have the maturity or emotional development to make a decision about keeping a baby.” Those are your words so my question is……then who makes the decision for them? And again, please dont assume anything as you are incorrect, I DO know what its like to raise a child alone and with little resources and my family COULD not help me out so im perfectly aware of how life is hard on that side as well. Personally for me I am against abortion however, its not up to me to choose for you or anyone else, I dont have to answer for you I have to answer for me, is kline wrong in how hes going about this? yes in my opinion he is, however there is something to knowing if a 12 y/o has received a late term abortion and that needs to be investigated.
29 December 2006
at 11:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

And scenebooster……….my point is, why should you as a man have any decision making priveleges as to what a WOMAN does with her body? It could be argued that if that is true then why cant women make the decision to have a man get a vescetomy? Would you want me as a woman to make a decision about your body and if something should or shouldnt be done? I spoke of respecting one anothers opinions, and i even respect yours….can you say the same? God Bless you as well scenebooster…………
29 December 2006
at 11:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

Does anyone truly believe (ksdivakat) that Kline opened this investigation for any reason other than to intimidate and harrass Dr. Tiller and other abortion providers in Kansas?

There may very well be evidence of wrong-doing as Kline claims, but judge after judge seems to think not. Kline pursued this investigation out of spiteful ideology and dogma in order to harrass and intimidate abortion providers.

Nice behavior from the top law enforcement officer in the state.
29 December 2006
at 11:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Azure, Im not going to debate my spirituality with you, according to what I believe my prayers are wanted and welcomed, I do not in no way intend to come across as condesending or arrogant, I dont believe I am, however its a natural human reaction to be defensive when one is attacked for personal beliefs, everyone has so much to say but nobody can back it up, where are the doctors on here commenting? Nurses? Lawyers? anyone that actually knows something? I am an RN, so I have the experience from both a personal and professional knowledge, and i decided to exercize my right to free speech, just as you have, and God Bless you as well for your opinion, as it is just as important as anyone elses.
29 December 2006
at 11:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

your worst nightmare, please read my postings….I do NOT agree with kline….however, I think there is something to be said about 12 y/o's having late term abortions and nobody is interested……..are you telling me that we should just throw our kids to the wolves and let the medical profession do with them what they may without the knowledge or permission from the parents?
29 December 2006
at 11:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

OMG, the old “America was founded on christian principles” distortion…

Merely wishful thinking on the part of fundies, but not supported by historical evidence.

Yes, the founders were part of a society that evolved from christian culture so of course they were influenced by christian ideas (which were influenced by classical greek and roman ideas which were influenced by sumerian and babylonian ideas, ad nauseum).

To say, however, that America was founded on christian religious principles is ludicrous. Indeed, as quoted above, American foundations often arose despite christian religious principles.

The Constitution describes a secular representative democracy based on laws and established procedures, not religious dogma and ideology.

29 December 2006
at 11:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…

What make you think they aren't posting? Just becuase soemine isn't saying, “I'm a doctor,” doesn't mean they aren't posting here. Just because someone doesn't say, I had an abortion,” doesn't mean those that have had one aren't posting here. Impossing your credentials or airing your dirty laundy, so to speak, is not necessary to state your opinon if, in fact, all opions are valid.

Do you really think that 10 and 12 years olds are going to clinics without a parent. come on!!! They have to go to court to do that. Please, think!!

May the Goddes bless you, Diva, and open your eyes.
29 December 2006
at 12:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Azure, correct me if Im wrong, but since this has been such a media sensation, everyday they talk about this its always the same explaination……..to obtain the abortion records of 20 women including 1 that is 12 y/o.
Is the media incorrect in reporting this?
29 December 2006
at 12:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

What a nice summation of the true roots of the “pro-life” agenda:
“I agree that people,
as well as women,
should have control over their bodies. ”
29 December 2006
at 12:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…

Yes, but that doesn't mean that they were there without benenfit of parent and it doesn't mean that correct reporting by the clinic didn't happen. Way to Phill in the blanks, diva.
29 December 2006
at 12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

I apologize that I spoke my opinion, Azure, I believe that somebody needs to check out the situation and see if the 10 y/o was raped or molested. As dumb as it sounds, I just dont think that grown men should be impregnating 10 y/o girls…but maybe im to old fashioned and liberal…or is it conservative? no wait maybe Im left-winged…or is it right winged? whatever it is, I think that proper reporting isnt the only thing that one should worry about……….
29 December 2006
at 12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

While AG, did Kline pull all the live birth records to mothers under age 16 1/2 years?
Did he investigate the STD stats of people of both sexes under 16 years?
29 December 2006
at 12:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Azure_Attitude (Anonymous) says…

Of course the 10 year old was raped, even if she was willing - statutory rape. What is at issue with Kline is the late term aspect. He is not currently addressing the reporting in court, though he does in the media, and he surely would address it in court if he felt there was any chance at all he could get away with it.

No need to apologize, you are entitlled to your opinion just as I am to dispute it since we are engaged in this public forum.
29 December 2006
at 12:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

If both participants were underage, both parties are guilty of statutory rape. This is true whether or not a live birth ensued. This is also true if either or both parties acquired an STD as a result of sexual activity by persons under the age of 16. Where is the investigation of these aspects of the situation?
Also, why were records of 90 women, not all of whom were minors, requested if in fact, the investigation was “for the children?”

29 December 2006
at 12:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

werekoala (Anonymous) says…

PC_Conservativeman:

Just curious, but what will happen when the Right takes over? What changes will be made, and how will we be better off for them?

Also, since we can back-and-forth with quotes all day long, I think, as a strict constructionist, I'd like you to show me where the Constitution makes any reference to religion. Hint, there are two places it is mentioned explicitly.
29 December 2006
at 1:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Wow PC………..Heres what sceenbooster had to say, in fact, he quoted the same people but heres what he said they said……

Ahh, the c-man raises his ignorant head…let's recap:

Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Question with boldness the existence of God. I do not believe any of the Christian doctrines.”

James Madison wrote, “During almost fifteen centuries the legal establishment known as Christianity has been on trial, and what have been the fruits, more or less, in all places? These are the fruits: pride, indolence, ignorance and arrogance and servility in the clergy. Ignorance, arrogance and servility in the laity, and in both the clergy and laity, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”

Thomas Paine wrote in his “Age of Reason”: “Whenever we read the obscene stories, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.”

The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, ratified soon after John Adams became president, says in part: “As the government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enimity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen (Muslims); and as the said States never have entered into any war or acts of hostility against any Mahametan nation; it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries

So I am confused how the same people are quoted as saying completely opposite opinions? Dont get me wrong I agree with you…..I just find it funny……….
29 December 2006
at 1:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Stop the presses! I am confused how is it that both PC and scenebooster are quoting the same men with very opposite opinions? Theres only 2 possibilities…1) somebody is obviously misquoting these men or 2) the men you are quoting were completely bonkers as they contridicted themselves all through history, so im curious which one it is???
29 December 2006
at 1:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

I'd guess the side that has stopped digging up quotes and resorted to the same tired name-calling is the side that is misquoting the Founding Fathers.
29 December 2006
at 1:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

Of course it should be investigated if a 10 year old, or 12 year old, is pregnant. I'm not saying it shouldn't be. But to assume that just because she is it's because of incest or sexual abuse by a parent or family friend is ludicrous.

She could very well have been impregnated by a boy not much older than herself. Yes, technically still rape, but not the same as if an adult were responsible. Have you ever listened to the schoolyard talk of these kids? I have, and it would make your hair curl to hear what they already know (or think they know), and what they're already doing, even at that tender age.

And as far as I know, any girl under the age of 16 can't have an abortion without the consent of the parents. So I would guess it's the parents making the decisions and giving permission. Some states require parents to be notified, or require parents to give permission for an abortion, even if the girl is over 16. I don't know if Kansas is one of these states or not.

As to why they would wait to have a late-term abortion performed on a young girl, I don't know. The parents should have known long before then that she was pregnant. But, kids can be pretty tricky and deceiving sometimes, and hide things very well. In fact, in a lot of the cases where a teenage girl has given birth and stuffs the baby in a trash can somewhere, the parents usually say they had no idea she was even pregnant.

If Kline is so worried about children and sexual abuse of children, then why isn't he investigating all the cases where girls under 16 have given birth?
29 December 2006
at 1:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

I see the tightie righties have given up making any attempt at rational argument and reverted to name calling and hyperbole. Big surprise.
29 December 2006
at 1:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

such as?
29 December 2006
at 2:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

Con-man is back, this time as PC_Conservativeman. I really enjoy your posts. keep it up.

You know, one reason I enjoy your posts so much is that it is this type of vitriol that the Right Reverend Ted Haggard was accustomed to spewing on his flock, and we all know what the Good Reverend's true behaviors were…

PCCulturewarriorcon-man, you sometimes argue a little too vehemently with Tychoman.

Your mutual affections with right_thinker are cute.

What's the old Shakespeare quote, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”…

29 December 2006
at 2:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Logic, I wasnt aware that we were to present our credentials up front, in the future I will know that rule, I do find it interesting that you resort to name calling and speculation to get your point across…..I respect your opinion, even if i dont agree, its your opinion and you are entitled to it.
29 December 2006
at 3:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

“Largely homosexual”?

Is that a reference to a big fat f………………………..?

Sounds like a “hate” crime to me!

Thanks.

Marion.
29 December 2006
at 6:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Diva, you're wrong on both accounts. The men were brilliant, and all the quotes are correct, but it showed they struggled greatly with religion in government and whether or not religion should be a part of government, which they finally fully addressed in the first amendment.

My question to you is, you stated earlier that the US was founded on Christianity, how could you have an informed opinion on that if you didn't know those quotes existed? Or did you just THINK that it was true because someone told you that?

And that quote from Ben Franklin about primitive Christianity, that HAD to be a negative statement about Christianity, primitive is NOT a positive thing.

Diva as an RN you know that many times when documenting, forms aren't always worded right, you have to have your diagnoses correct for insurance to pay, you have to have your care plans written just right. From what I understand ALL the charges Kline is alleging come from paperwork. The explanations and paperwork aren't good enough for him. This would be like a TB case coming into the hospital, and when you report it to the KDHE, Kline saying that your report wasn't good enough (for whatever reason).

And you should also know that when a child who is pregnant and wishes to keep her baby presents to the hospital for care relating to the pregnancy, they are within their legal right to obtain care for themselves- no parental involvement is needed. But conversely if they present with a headcold, they still need parental permission to be treated. Now why can a teen make decisions regarding her care for pregnancy UNLESS it involves having an abortion? She's allowed to choose to keep her baby, but she's not allowed to choose not to? See, this law protects girls who don't want to have an abortion but their parents may be pushing for it, they can't force her. But the law supports forcing her to keep her baby. I can bet you there was anti-choice legislators who had a hand in that one.

And I don't believe consensual sex between two teens should be considered rape of any kind. I think if it's a really young person, some kind of intervention should be required as something is obviously wrong, but criminalization no.
29 December 2006
at 6:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

“What about the small percentage of the time that contraception fails? I assume you would approve of an abortion in those circumstances, right?”

88,000 abortions were performed in NYC alone in 2005. There were less than 250,000 live births in NYC in 2005.

Were those 88,000 abortions justified by the result of “the small percentage of the time that contraception fails”?
29 December 2006
at 6:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

“I think if it's a really young person, some kind of intervention should be required as something is obviously wrong, but criminalization no.”

Really. And how young would you go?
29 December 2006
at 8:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

No criminalization at all. For consensual sex. Two eight year olds having sex, obviously something has happened for two 8 year olds to be going quite that far, they're victims, both of them, not criminals. I would say find out why they know that much. A ten year old would probably fit into that catergory, but I know 12 year olds who actively SEEK out sex.

By the way, there is an appropriate curiosity about sex at every age that coincides with development. Very little kids are even known to explore their own bodies, and that is considered normal. Two 8 year olds kissing also normal. I think there is even a normal rockwell painting portraying it. Freud acknowledged it in almost all of his works from a very early time. Psychology is well advanced as to what is considered developmentally 'normal' considering sex and development. But think about it this way, historically, girls as young as 12 were being married off to have children, and in some cultures that is still the norm. The girls are developing faster than they did back in those days, why? The only thing that has changed is how our society views sex at that age, to put it off till later.

At 10, some girls especially are hitting puberty, and boys aren't quite there yet. I'm not saying intercourse is a normal thing at that age, it's not.
29 December 2006
at 8:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

Posted by right_thinker (anonymous) on December 29, 2006 at 1:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

“PS: PC_Conservativeman, welcome! I'm sure you know but this board is dominated by a small but extremely vocal cell of very far-left, secular-progressive, liberal–for the most part athiest and homosexual (which is fine) but want total conformity to only their ideology.”

Wow…I don't even know where to begin with the above post, but I'll do my best to express myself in a civil manner. :)

First of all, to label those you consider to be “liberals” as “for the most part athiest and homosexual” is very UN-American in my opinion. It reeks of bigotry and ignorance despite your added afterthought in parenthesis.

Second of all; it's nonsensical to seriously think that anyone here is genuinely trying to get those of an opposing opinion to “conform to only their idealogy.” There may be a few people posting here from both “right” and “left” perspectives who believe they can change someone else's way of thinking by posting on this forum, but I think for most of us it's just an online debate.

It's unfortunate people feel they must resort to stereotyping when they can't add anything of merit to the debate.
29 December 2006
at 8:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

Posted by moxxie_mama (anonymous) on December 29, 2006 at 8:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

“By the way, there is an appropriate curiosity about sex at every age that coincides with development. Very little kids are even known to explore their own bodies, and that is considered normal.”

I agree that this behavior is normal. When my six-year-old niece was still in diapers she would sometimes explore her vagina while her mother changed her diaper. Her mother was pretty disturbed it and she kept slapping her hand to make her stop, but the doctor said it was normal.

29 December 2006
at 8:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Right, moxie_mamma, if you do not supervise your pre-teenage children, if you let their hormones rule their behaviour, and do not attempt to guide them toward healthy behavior, it is possible that 10 years olds will engage in sex, resulting in a child becoming pregnant.

That does not make it acceptable. The true criminal in this case is the negligtent parent. And that parent is likely to be the one to take the pregnant child to someone like Tiller, and pay him his fee for abortion.

In such a case, I would hold the parent liable.
29 December 2006
at 8:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

YOU are out of your mind. Chain the kids to the bed? IS that what you'd like to do? Because I can tell you for sure, you cannot CANNOT always watch your kids and hover them to death. Better move your bed in right next to your kid's, because you know they MIGHT sneak out.

I always hear about how things were SO much better back in the olden days from people like you….yeah like when kids went outside to play for hours with no supervision at all? And then you bitch because kids don't get enough exercise anymore? But if a kid is down at the park, and his parent isn't around now it's neglect and charges should be brought??

Know where I had sex for the first time? In a hay loft, in the backyard of my mom's best friend's house. They were in the house. I was outside 30 minutes tops, mom would come out and yell for me, and I'd answer back. My boyfriend had come over, they didn't even know he was there, nor did they know he was my boyfriend. I was 14, he was 18. My first love.
29 December 2006
at 9:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Logicsound04, you are quite slippery. First you say that abortions are necessary because of the minimal number of cases where contraception fails, then, when confronted with statistics from the city of New York that show 88K abortions to 250K births, you cite CHOICE.

Which is it, failure of contraception, or failure to take responsibility for one's actions, combined with a lack of respect for life, other than one's own?
29 December 2006
at 9:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Has anyone ever asked one of the babies to CHOOSE?

Thanks.

Marion.
29 December 2006
at 9:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

I love Godot's 'failure to take responsibility', as if having a baby should be a punishment. There are many reasons for abortion, and usually never just one, but combinations of reasons. Why do abortion rates decline with poverty rates decline? Why do abortion rates decline with more education? For you to say you know every circumstance for which a woman chooses, is arrogant and narrowminded.
29 December 2006
at 9:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

moxxie_momma, your assumption that taking responsibility is equal to punishment is a statement, in and of itself.

And, if, as you say, abortion rates decline with more education, why, in 2005, were there 88,000 abortions to less than 250,000 births in NYC, the mecca of educated liberalism?
29 December 2006
at 10:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

My new book deals with this subject and will soon be available.

Printer's proofs are in and being reviewed.

Thanks.

Marion.
29 December 2006
at 10:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

First, NYC is also the abortion provider to the state, much like you can't say Wichita had 88,000 abortions and say those figures were only from Wichita. That figure is a state figure and representative of others who traveled to the state from neighboring states that do not have abortion providers, and not all too off from the numbers of other states comparatively.

2nd, the abortion rates for residents in the city is the lowest it has been in ten years, teen pregnancy is down, and still 52% of those live births were done on Medicaid. That means taxpayers are funding over half of the babies being born in that city.

Pregnancy rates were even down, because of the success of the programs to reduce teen pregnancies.

29 December 2006
at 10:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Wow, how lucky for NY that it can require all abortions for the state to be performed by doctors in one city. How did NY,the enlightened state that it is, manage to sequester its abortion industry to NYC?
30 December 2006
at 3:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

ksdivakat,

I had an abortion when I was 25, and even married. But the financial situation was not right, so I decided to wait (over my husband's objections - he wanted me to keep the pregnancy). Looking back at it, I think it was the smartest decision I could have made consdering the circumstances. Now, 2 years later, we paid off all the debts, my husband has a job, we bought a house, got medical insurance, and I am considering having a child a couple of years down the road. Had I made a differen decision then, I think it would be the beginning of the end for our family.

After I had the abortion (after I left the doctor's office), I felt like a huge weight has been lifted off my shoulders, and I felt alive again, first time in many weeks, even though I was throwing up constantly and shaking like a leaf. Next morning I woke up, thought to myself, “OMG, I am free…” and felt like I was given a great gift, myself back, and I better get my life together and start being smart about things. Since that day, our lives has been getting better and better. I think the day of my abortion was the pivotal point in my life, in many ways.
30 December 2006
at 7:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

newhere..I read your story,I would be willing to bet money that part of your husband hates you for killing his unborn child.Your actions were very selfish.Doing this in spite of his feelings was a bad move.If and when you decide to have a child ,you will see then what a blessing and a gift they are.Thats when you will know what a mistake you have made and how truly selfish you are.Until your last breath,you will be haunted by your “choice”.I have kids and I know what you have missed out on already.The first two years are so wonderful.When they are newborn and they fall asleep on you chest.(that is so precious)The way they grasp your index finger with thier tiny little hands.The sound of babies laughter is like no other.Watching them grow and learn is amazing.The one thing that you have already missed out on, is that child looking up at you and saying”I love you mommy”.Children are a gift from God.They are so special and they make life worth living……But what do you care??Your”free”.
30 December 2006
at 10:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

Judgmental and controlling are we?
30 December 2006
at 11:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

I'd say it's pretty obvious that her husband does NOT hate her by how well her family is doing. You birth at any cost nuts are trying to demonize her for a decision that she's perfectly happy with. Saying until her last breath, you will be haunted???? Obviously not! Nice try on the guilt though, geez. She's in a better position to provide for her kids and give them the home they deserve.

Sublime, maybe the first two years were wonderful FOR YOU, but not all parents feel that way at all. And some feel that it was a big mistake to have children.

The only selfish act is bringing a child into the world when you're not ready, willing and able to care for it. To make YOU feel fulfilled, or to give YOU someone to love, or to take care of YOU in your old age.

I just had an argument with another parent about adoption. She wants to adopt because, get this…her two children that she has already are severely disabled. She has nobody to count on to take care of them if something happens to her. So knowing that she cannot have another child or the likelihood of that child being disabled too is high, she wants to adopt. I had no problem with that until she said…

because she wants someone who will be able to care for her other children. Because SHE wants to hear one child say mommy. Because SHE needs someone to care for her in old age. I said you don't adopt children to become your personal nanny. THAT is selfish.

I've known some women who are SO screwed up, their family life is in total disarray, domestic abuse, financial ruin, and they are desperately wanting to get pregnant…WHY??? They say they want a child to love, but is that love to bring a kid into such unhealthiness? NO, it's so they can be loved and wanted and needed because they're not getting it from their spouses.

And I'll bet money that the same nuts here saying abortion is SO wrong, are the same people who think gays adopting and single parent families are the downfall of today's society.
30 December 2006
at 11:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“Something that has not been born cannot, by definition, have rights, leaving the pregnant woman as the only person involved in the debate. Therefore any attempt you make to restrict abortions is a direct attempt to restrict the rights of that woman.”

Sorry, but just because a child is still in the womb doesn't make him or her non-existent. You're an extremely selfish individual. You completely deny the rights of the child and the father. It still requires the participation of a male to create human beings and 51% of babies aborted are male. I say that makes it very much a man's business and make no mistake about it, if you were only killing females I would still object.
Do you object to the fact that roe/wade was an all male decision?
30 December 2006
at 11:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“…is that love to bring a kid into such unhealthiness?”

So, your solution is to kill the kid?
30 December 2006
at 11:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

NO dummy, read what I wrote, this particular mother is TRYING to get pregnant, I doubt she'd have an abortion.

My point being that it was a selfish act.

I think YOU”RE the one who is selfish to think that your opinion matters in the life of a woman who doesn't even know you, you have no interest in seeing about what happens to the baby after born nor the mother. What about everyone else's rights, when you don't even care about the rights of the woman one iota. I bet you'd like it if women went back to being the property of their fathers and husbands.

30 December 2006
at 12:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

And I'll bet money that the same nuts here saying abortion is SO wrong, are the same people who think gays adopting and single parent families are the downfall of today's society.

Thats not what I'm saying at all “moxxie_mamma”.I am saying that abortion is wrong….Single parent familys are victims of dead beat Dads.(Not in all cases ,but in most cases)I salute single parents that can raise a family on thier own….You are way too hostile at this point ,so I'm not going to debate the “gay issue “at this time…….Tell me moxxie, how many abortions have you had??I would be willing to bet that all your hostility stems from your own guilt anger.
30 December 2006
at 12:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by deec (anonymous) on December 30, 2006 at 10:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Judgmental and controlling are we?
NO, not really.
30 December 2006
at 12:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by moxxie_mama The only selfish act is bringing a child into the world when you're not ready, willing and able to care for it. To make YOU feel fulfilled, or to give YOU someone to love, or to take care of YOU in your old age.

You Know, that would be selfish,but not near as selfish as murder…er..excuse me, I guess you call it abortion.
30 December 2006
at 1:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

LOL Sublime, that's where you would be so very wrong as you have always been here.

My abortion count- 0.
Number of years as a single parent: 10. I think I know quite a bit about guilt, but it's not from abortion. It's from not ever being able to provide as well as I wish I could, not being able to buy food or getting the electricity shut off, not being able to be there, meet their needs, missing their programs. Guilt from dropping off the kids at the sitter at 6 am and picking them up at 10pm. Guilt of being exhausted to the point that you can't get out of bed and make them breakfast.
30 December 2006
at 1:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

You see, I come from the perspective of someone who CHOSE life. And I'm here to say it is NOT all that it's cracked up to be like you try to make it. Did my heart melt when my kids come screaming mommy i love you! Absolutely. Do I love my kids? Absolutely. But I sure didn't do them any favors by bringing them into this world. So I don't need your 'atta girl' type attitude nor your 'salute'. What I needed then was a job that made more money or an education so that I could get a job that paid better.

Go to a homeless shelter, an abused woman shelter, and see those kids and tell the mother 'atta girl for choosing life'. I'm sure she'll be thankful that you approve. Go to a hospital where the kids have been brutalized, and then go to the mother and say 'atta girl for choosing life'. Go to a foster home where the throw-away kids are and tell those kids 'you ought to thank your mother for choosing to give you life'.
30 December 2006
at 3:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

sublime stated very confidently: “You Know, that would be selfish,but not near as selfish as murder…er..excuse me, I guess you call it abortion.”

sublime, why do you consider abortion to be murder? I'd like to hear your rationale that abortion is the murder of a human life.
30 December 2006
at 5:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“…just as fetuses LOOK like little human beings at late stages of pregnancy. ”

You mean the way black people “looked like human beings” to people like you before the Civil War?
Who would have thought that, more than a century after the Emancipation Proclamation and the Civil War, we would hear the infamous decision of the Dred Scott Case revived so loudly and adamantly? Once it was the slave and his child who had no rights or soul; now it is the unborn child who has neither rights nor soul. In those times a master could deal with his slave as chattel; now the unborn is regarded as a disposable property possessed by the mother___a part of her body which she can destroy without conscience.
30 December 2006
at 9:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Logic:

You will be able to judge MY book by its cover!

Thanks.

Marion.

30 December 2006
at 10:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Hello,

I would like to respond to some of your comments.

Culture_Warrior, you are right, it was a selfish decision. However, most of decisions that I (and I choose not to speak for anyone else) have made in my life have been selfish, from a to a decision to buy a steak and contribute to the slaughter of innocent farm animals to a decision to save for a house or open an IRA instead of giving all the extra money to a cancer research program. Some decisions I made were not selfish (I do give alot of charity and homeless, and I try to help everyone who needs my help at the expense of my other scheduled plans, etc), but the majority was selfish. So, for me to suddenly feel bad about making all my selfish decisions would involve re-thinking a hundred of little selfish decisions that I make everyday, completely change the direction of my life, leave my family, sell everything I have and give it to the poor, and go to 3rd world countries to fight injustice and human suffering, and I am not sure that I am ready for those kind of changes. For now, I am choosing not to feel bad about being selfish, and just do the best I can to counteract some of my selfishness with good deeds of different kinds, however small. But your comment was correct.
30 December 2006
at 10:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Ayn Rand lives in newhere.
30 December 2006
at 11:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

sublime,

I would also like to answer your comment (and thank you for commenting, by the way).

My husband did feel strongly about my decision, and told me that he did not know whether he would be able to forgive me and that our marriage may be over if proceeded with my plan, and I just said that his decisions are beyond my control, and that I feel that I should base my decisions on what I think is a right thing to do, not on what he thinks is the right thing to do - that is the only way to be in control of what I do. So, I told him that I will make my decisions, and he will make his, and that if he left, it would be devastating to me, but continuing with the pregnancy would be even more disastrous, so my decision was to stay.

After the first few days after the abortion, our relationship was falling apart, but the financial hardship we both were going though made us stick together: I worked when he couldn't, and he worked when I couldn't, and we both were dependent on each other's help with the car and everything else… And little by little things got better, and better, and better. Now, looking back at it, I am amazed at how well we have done in such a short time we achieved much more in the last 2 years of marriage than in the first 4. We both changed as the result of all of this, and it seems to me that we both changed for the better. My husband have not mentioned anything about breaking up for the last 2 years, and he and I have been making plans for as far as 10-15 years down the road, so I am hoping that the breakup subject is behind us, but if he ever chooses to leave, I am going to respect whatever decision that he might make about it, just as we agreed.

As for the special moments that I might have missed with this child - maybe so, who knows. I never felt any personal relationship with whoever it was inside of me - it was more like torture, to say the truth. For several weeks, I was either laying in bed shaking and too weak to walk, or nauseated and gagging, or uncomfortable, hot and itchy. At the end I tried to stay away from knives because the temptation of stabbing myself in the stomach and cutting my insides out was too great (yes, that is how uncomfortable it was to me). It was very, very difficult times. Possibly that is why I did not feel any connection with whoever it was inside. I was just relieved when it was gone. If it was born, I am not sure I would be able to love it as much as a child should be loved. Maybe it would have changed on the later stages of pregnancy, I do not know. I am sure that if it was born, I would bring myself to at least like it, and maybe more, but now we will never know.
31 December 2006
at 12:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Godot,
I looked her up in Wikipedia. It is amazing, because I am also Russian-born. Strange world.
31 December 2006
at 12:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“For now, I am choosing not to feel bad about being selfish, and just do the best I can to counteract some of my selfishness with good deeds of different kinds, however small.” - Newhere

Very admirable. One good deed might be to learn about the abortion industry and speak out against the horrors of abortion. You won't learn anything on the Planned Parenthood and National Abortion Federation sites but you can compare them with the National Right to Life and Silent Scream sites and determine for yourself where the truth lies.
31 December 2006
at 12:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

đ' ñđ¾đ¶đ°đ»Đµđ½đ,ñ, ñ đ¿đ¾đ°đ° đ½Đµ đ³đ¾đ²đ¾ññ đ¿đ¾-ññ ññđ°đ,.

đ¡đ¿đ°ñđ,đ±đ¾!

Marion.
31 December 2006
at 12:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

newhere, how quaint.
31 December 2006
at 12:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Also Sprach Tiller Der Killer:

“Wir mussen die Babies ausrotten!”

Thanks.

Marion.

31 December 2006
at 12:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

A bit on Tiller the Killer:

http://www.dr-tiller.com/rites.htm

Thanks.

Marion.
31 December 2006
at 1:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

boldaq,

I have seen 3 out of 4 web sites that you named. After reading their web sites, and some of the blogs of their supporters, I do not feel that either of the sides is representing the truth objectively and accurately, but I tend to side with PP on many issues, because I feel thankful to them for their efforts to preserve my right to terminate a pregnancy. I hope to never need another abortion, but if I had to go through it again, I would prefer to have an abortion performed by a trained doctor, in a safe environment, and with the use of right tools and drugs. My health is one of my most crucial assets, and I would rather not gamble on it.

I think that the horrors of legal abortions are not any worse than the horrors of illegal abortions. Both are very unpleasant.
31 December 2006
at 1:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Well, ask the baby.

No one ever does.

By the way; just what does one do with a dead baby?

Thanks.

Marion.
31 December 2006
at 1:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Marion,

I do not know what they do with the removed fetuses. I am guessing that they are disposed of somehow, but I am not sure how. Check the Internet, I am sure that some info will be available there.
31 December 2006
at 2:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Newhere:

Actually the matter of disposition of the dead babies is one of the subjects with which my upcoming book deals.

Although the manuscript has gone to the printer I am still looking for input on the subject as with the format, anything can be changed right up to the time that the presses start to roll.

Thanks.

Marion.
31 December 2006
at 2:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

You probably know more on this subject than I do, then. I am sorry, I wish I could help more. Good luck with your book. Is it your first book?
31 December 2006
at 2:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

No but it wil be the first to be published.

I have had several articles on a different subject published but those were in the last century.

!

;)

I assure you that this book will wind up the Baby Killers.

Thanks.

Marion.
31 December 2006
at 2:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

It will? Interesting. What are the other subjects what it talks about?

31 December 2006
at 7:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Hey Marion!

Will your

Book's format

Be

Kinda like

Your posting

Format

On Here?

hahaha!
31 December 2006
at 9:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Marion I”m sure the anti-women, anti choice camp will eat up your book.
I trust it will be in the fiction section?
31 December 2006
at 9:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

As for the special moments that I might have missed with this child - maybe so, who knows. I never felt any personal relationship with whoever it was inside of me - it was more like torture, to say the truth. For several weeks, I was either laying in bed shaking and too weak to walk, or nauseated and gagging, or uncomfortable, hot and itchy. At the end I tried to stay away from knives because the temptation of stabbing myself in the stomach and cutting my insides out was too great (yes, that is how uncomfortable it was to me). It was very, very difficult times. Possibly that is why I did not feel any connection with whoever it was inside. I was just relieved when it was gone. If it was born, I am not sure I would be able to love it as much as a child should be loved. Maybe it would have changed on the later stages of pregnancy, I do not know. I am sure that if it was born,, and maybe more, but now we will never know.-posted by
newhere………………………………………………………………WOW…..I don't even know what to say about all that……Maybe you should just get you tubes tied….Some folks just are not cut out for parenthood. You keep refering to you child as “it”. “I would bring myself to at least like it”???WTF???You know what?Don't have any kids okay?!You are obviously incapable of loving anyone other than yourself.
31 December 2006
at 10:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Marion, on that site you posted, it's one of the most ridiculous sites I've come across. Why is it wrong to want to do any of those things after an abortion? This just PROVES how traumatic and emotional the decision is, and that women do not take the decision lightly. Making it all the more real as to why they need it in the first place. And that site shows what terrorists the anti-choice group is, they give out information on anyone who works at the clinic, where they live. That's wrong.

Sublime, now you are the ultimate authority on who should be a parent? Newsflash! She will probably make an awesome parent when she is able and willing. Much moreso than being forced into it.
31 December 2006
at 10:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

Funny that those who confidently claim that abortion is murder fail to present a rational argument upon which their views ar based.

Answers to three little questions can get you started:

1) Do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?

2) Why do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?

3) Where in the bible does it state that human life begins at fertilization?
31 December 2006
at 10:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

I'm pro-choice and I fully believe that life begins at conception, but not equal to those already born. I don't consider 'living' till born. So I really don't care for this argument at all. The woman's life takes precedent over the fetus, in all cases. Without a woman, you have no fetus. That is also the position of medical professionals in trauma. To save the life of the woman first, then the baby if able. This is also why women with ectopic pregnancies are allowed an abortion right in a regular hospital and they even call it a therapeutic abortion. But that is exactly what it is, because there is no way either will survive if allowed to continue. And ectopic pregnancy is not all that rare. And there are 'pro-lifers' out there who think that ectopic pregnancy is not a reason for abortion, that you should willingly die along with the baby because it was God's plan.

The bible even does point out that en-utero is not as important as the living…but then advocates death for the spilling of seed and that one should marry and impregnate their brother's wife if his brother should die.
So I don't carry a whole lot of weight to what the bible says about this issue.

Now you'll have to excuse me, I”m going to go play with my kids in the snow.
31 December 2006
at 10:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by yourworstnightmare (anonymous) on December 30, 2006 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

sublime stated very confidently: “You Know, that would be selfish,but not near as selfish as murder…er..excuse me, I guess you call it abortion.”

sublime, why do you consider abortion to be murder? I'd like to hear your rationale that abortion is the murder of a human life”
Well, because it is….It is my firm belief that life begins at conception not a birth.Abortion is more than a word,its an act of murder……Suction Curettage Abortion

A common first trimester abortion procedure is the suction and curettage method. The abortionist begins by dilating the mom's cervix until it is large enough to allow a cannula to be inserted into her uterus. The cannula is a hollow plastic tube that is connected to a vacuum-type pump by a flexible hose. The abortionist runs the tip of the cannula along the surface of the uterus causing the baby to be dislodged and sucked into the tube - either whole or in pieces. Amniotic fluid and the placenta are likewise suctioned through the tube and, together with the other body parts, end up in a collection jar. Any remaining parts are scraped out of the uterus with a surgical instrument called a curette. Following that, another pass is made through the mom's uterus with the suction machine to help insure that none of the baby's body parts have been left behind. The contents of the collection jar are examined to assure that all fetal parts and an adequate amount of tissue commensurate with gestational age are present.

To me thats murder,pure and simple.
31 December 2006
at 10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by yourworstnightmare (anonymous) on December 31, 2006 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Funny that those who confidently claim that abortion is murder fail to present a rational argument upon which their views ar based.

Answers to three little questions can get you started:

1) Do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?

2) Why do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?

3) Where in the bible does it state that human life begins at fertilization?…………………………………………………………………………………………..

Where in the Bible does God condone abortion?

31 December 2006
at 10:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

posted by moxxie_mamma-“Sublime, now you are the ultimate authority on who should be a parent? Newsflash! She will probably make an awesome parent when she is able and willing.”
awesome ?? i kinda doubt that.She will probably be the type of parent that tells thier child what a mistake they are……tubal ligation is the best answer for her.
31 December 2006
at 10:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

For those of you who are so in love with the idea of abortion,I want you to google images of abortion.See if that does not change your view just a little.
31 December 2006
at 10:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by logicsound04 (anonymous) on December 31, 2006 at 10:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sublime STILL can't see the forest for the trees.

I STILL can't buy into any of your BS
31 December 2006
at 11:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

sublime,

You did not answer the questions, you simply stated a hyperbolic account of an abortion procedure.

Watch any surgery and it will disturb you. Again why do you believe that abortion is murder?

1) Do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?

2) Why do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?

3) Where in the bible does it state that human life begins at fertilization?

Justify your beliefs, or pipe down with your dogmmatic and ideologial rhetoric about abortion.
31 December 2006
at 11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

moxxie-mama said:
“I'm pro-choice and I fully believe that life begins at conception, but not equal to those already born. I don't consider 'living' till born. So I really don't care for this argument at all. ”

I think this is on the right track. Undoubtedly a fertilzed embryo/fetus has the potential to be human, but it is unsupported by reality to suggest that a human fetus is equivalent to a post-partum human being.

Therefore, calling abortion “murder” is pure fantasy and dogmatic rhetoric.
31 December 2006
at 11:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

“Posted by sublime (anonymous) on December 31, 2006 at 10:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

For those of you who are so in love with the idea of abortion,I want you to google images of abortion.See if that does not change your view just a little.”

Should we do the same for war? Though ugly, both are necessary evils that, currently, allow society to function relatively easier than if they were prohibited.

bwahaha! Take that and run with it! I'm willing to attempt to logically defend that statement.
31 December 2006
at 12:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

There are many gruesome images in the world, all of which are reality. So is the mortician, doctor, fireman, paramedic, coroner evil because they have to clean up after a car accident? Is the car manufacturer guilty of murder?

I have seen the pictures of fetuses. They're fetuses. They're hard to look at. So are many other things. It does not change my opinion one iota.
31 December 2006
at 4:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Against abortion? Don't get one. Marion, let a woman do with her body what she wants—it's HER body, not yours.

Sublime, an idiotic argument like “look at pictures! That'll learn you!” is moot. It's a medical procedure, what do you expect?

Calling abortion murder and baby-killing (which it is not) is immature, infantile, and reactionary. Ranting in Russian and German to make yourself seem smart (ooh, you write books too? WOW!) is just egotistical.

31 December 2006
at 7:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by yourworstnightmare (anonymous) on December 31, 2006 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

sublime,

You did not answer the questions, you simply stated a hyperbolic account of an abortion procedure.

Watch any surgery and it will disturb you. Again why do you believe that abortion is murder?

1) Do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?
yes
2) Why do you believe that human life begins at fertilization?When else would it begin??After9weeks?

3) Where in the bible does it state that human life begins at fertilization?Psalm 139:13
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb

Justify your beliefs, or pipe down with your dogmmatic and rhetoric about abortion.

I have answered your questions,although I doubt my answers will appease you…Oh by the way,wordsmith,you misspelled dogmatic and ideological .
31 December 2006
at 7:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by moxxie_mama—I have seen the pictures of fetuses. They're fetuses. They're hard to look at. So are many other things. It does not change my opinion one iota.

big surprise!!
31 December 2006
at 7:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Sublime:

You see, the Pro-Baby Killers simply arbitrarily determine the point at which life begins to suit their own needs, arrogance, sef-indulgence and irresponsibilities.

Thanks.

Marion.
31 December 2006
at 8:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Thank you Marion…You rock….
31 December 2006
at 10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

logicsound = Spock. No emotion, no humanity.
31 December 2006
at 10:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

“Posted by moxxie_mama (anonymous) on December 31, 2006 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Marion, on that site you posted, it's one of the most ridiculous sites I've come across. Why is it wrong to want to do any of those things after an abortion? This just PROVES how traumatic and emotional the decision is, and that women do not take the decision lightly.”

Unfortunately, most of the people making the decisions to order abortions are not the pregnant females, they are the parents or guardians of the female children, or the males in power who might suffer economic and personal inconvenience if a birth occurred.

Tiller's use of depression as a justification for abortion is inexcusable.
31 December 2006
at 10:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Follow the money.
31 December 2006
at 10:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Happy New Year, everyone! Please let's greet the new year in peace and mutual respect. It is much more fun and enjoyable than being angry and snappy. All of you deserve better than that on this wonderful day.

sublime, I appreciate your opinion and your advice. Happy New Year to you and your family!

31 December 2006
at 10:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

moxxie_mama, thank you for your words! Best wishes to you and your family on this New Years eve, I hope that you have a wonderful, happy and prosperous new year.
31 December 2006
at 10:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

And happy First New Year to the babies who were lucky enough to survive the slaughter of 2006. Welcome!
31 December 2006
at 10:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Marion, good luck with your book. May we all do as our heart commands us, regardless of what others say. Happy New Years for you and your family!
31 December 2006
at 10:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by Godot (anonymous) on December 31, 2006 at 10:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And happy First New Year to the babies who were lucky enough to survive the slaughter of 2006. Welcome!

=========

I would also wish to congratulate all alive farm animals for surviving 2006, and wish them best of luck next year.
31 December 2006
at 10:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

hmmm. interesting comparison, newhere. You must be really, really new, here. You, too, were lucky to have made it.
31 December 2006
at 11:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

I guess so, Godot. Happy New Year to you, too!
1 January 2007
at 12:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Happy New Year!

May the upcoming year bring the best to you and yours!

Thanks.

Marion.
1 January 2007
at 12:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Newhere and logic4-

Please, if you believe that the web sites I give you are inaccurate, by all means, send me an opposing view.

Show me a site that counters these facts: (1) By the 3rd week of pregnancy a heart starts to beat (2) By the 6th week brain waves are detectable (3) Week 11 the baby can grasp objects placed in the hands and all organ systems are functioning. The baby has a skeletal structure, nerves, and circulation (4) By week 17 the baby can have dream sleep (REM) (5) Babies can routinely be saved at 21 to 22 weeks after fertilization, and sometimes they can be saved even younger.

So, the point is, that these little human beings are living their lives, growing and thinking inside the womb. Or, do you believe that they're not capable of thinking of anything until their heads pop out of the womb? Do you think daylight turns their brains on?

1 January 2007
at 12:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Marion -

I have an idea for your book. A couple of years ago a Catholic church in Boulder offered to bury the remains of aborted babies that were given to a mortuary to cremate by notorious late-term abortionist, Warren Hern. Hern was outraged! Here's the story:

http://www.boulderweekly.com/archive/…
1 January 2007
at 9:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 1, 2007 at 12:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Newhere and logic4-

Please, if you believe that the web sites I give you are inaccurate, by all means, send me an opposing view.

Show me a site that counters these facts: (1) By the 3rd week of pregnancy a heart starts to beat (2) By the 6th week brain waves are detectable (3) Week 11 the baby can grasp objects placed in the hands and all organ systems are functioning. The baby has a skeletal structure, nerves, and circulation (4) By week 17 the baby can have dream sleep (REM) (5) Babies can routinely be saved at 21 to 22 weeks after fertilization, and sometimes they can be saved even younger.

So, the point is, that these little human beings are living their lives, growing and thinking inside the womb. Or, do you believe that they're not capable of thinking of anything until their heads pop out of the womb? Do you think daylight turns their brains on?

great post!!!!
1 January 2007
at 11:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Boldaq:

great link!

Thanks.

Marmion.
1 January 2007
at 12:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

Marion, I like the slip on your name spelling.

Sir Walter Scott

…Along the bridge Lord Marmion rode,
Proudly his red-roan charger trode,
His helm hung at the saddlebow; 60
Well by his visage you might know
He was a stalworth knight, and keen,
And had in many a battle been;
The scar on his brown cheek reveal'd
A token true of Bosworth field; 65
His eyebrow dark, and eye of fire,
Show'd spirit proud, and prompt to ire;
Yet lines of thought upon his cheek
Did deep design and counsel speak.
His forehead by his casque worn bare, 70
His thick mustache, and curly hair,
Coal-black, and grizzled here and there,
But more through toil than age;
His square-turn'd joints, and strength of limb,
Show'd him no carpet knight so trim, 75
But in close fight a champion grim,
In camps a leader sage……..

You get the idea. The Cantos are long.
1 January 2007
at 1:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

sublime,

Thank you for posting that info. I do not know how accurate it is, but I will trust your word that it is accurate. To me, the brain activity or hand movements of a fetus inside of me mean no more than the brain activity or the movements of some bacteria or other life form inside of me - I respect them both, they are both a marvelous creations of the nature. However, if they are causing me harm or discomfort and I have no specific reason to keep them there, I will do what I can to remove them from there. If they can live outside my body or if they can be removed without distroying them - great, I wish them best of luck. If not, then they are out of luck and their life cycle just ran out.

I doubt that you will agree with this view, and I am not claming my view to be the only correct one or the only possible one, but it is my opinion at this time.
1 January 2007
at 4:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

“Posted by Marion (Marion Lynn) on December 31, 2006 at 7:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Sublime:

You see, the Pro-Baby Killers simply arbitrarily determine the point at which life begins to suit their own needs, arrogance, sef-indulgence and irresponsibilities.

Thanks.

Marion.”

That's not true at all. If it were I'd adovate that women who felt overwhelmed could kill their babies after born. I don't, and I consider that murder. The difference being that it isn't inside of the mother, living off her cells, affecting her hormones anymore. She's now at a stage where she can give the baby over to someone else to help it grow.

Until you can incubate my child inside your own body, then you have no say. That is what it boils down to.
1 January 2007
at 4:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Godot said “Unfortunately, most of the people making the decisions to order abortions are not the pregnant females, they are the parents or guardians of the female children, or the males in power who might suffer economic and personal inconvenience if a birth occurred.

Tiller's use of depression as a justification for abortion is inexcusable.”

You're wrong Godot. How do you think you know what goes on in there? I do. And Tiller asks the girls specifically if this is what THEY want. If the girl even remotely acts hesitant, the abortion will not be performed. So you're lying. You're lying and it makes me angry because you're making things up to support your agenda.
1 January 2007
at 4:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

As far as grasping, that is a reflex. Babies can't willfully grasp anything for a few months after birth. There are many reflexes that are checked at birth….they're not willful movements.

http://pregnancy.about.com/cs/newborn…

And I already showed you where babies are NOT routinely saved at 21 weeks, but you posted that yet again. Shows me that you really don't care to learn about what is really happening.

1 January 2007
at 4:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

We have established that sublime believes that human life begins at fertilization.

As to why sublime believes this: “When else would it begin??After9weeks?”

So the reason that sublime believes this is that she cannot imagine human life starting sometime after fertilization. Needless to say, this is not a very convincing argument. To equate a mere ball of cells with a human life will require more justification than “When else would it begin?”

Sublime, you might try thinking of some of the characteristics that define us a humans and then compare these to a fertilized embryo or even an unborn fetus and see how they match.

As to where in the bible does it say that human life begins at fertilization, sublime states: “Psalm 139:13
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb”

This mentions nothing of fertilization and can be be interpreted to only mean that a human life develops in the womb. No shiite.

No, your arguments do not hold up to the strength and certainty of your statements that abortion is murder. You will need to do better.

If you cannot reasonably justify your beliefs better than this, maybe you should stop being so strident and dogmatic and take a more measured view.
1 January 2007
at 4:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

Maybe godot and sublime could put there heads together and come up with reasons why they believe that abortion is murder.

Does it say so in the bible? Where?

Did your preacher tell you to believe this? What were the preacher's reasons for believing this?

All I see is unreasoned dogma and ideology. I dont think either sublime or godot has put any thought into why they believe abortion is murder other than “my preacher told me so”. Yet they emotionally and intemperately demand that it is so. This makes no sense.
1 January 2007
at 5:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

You know, alot of this would go away if the “Pro Choice(Read: “Pro-Baby Killing”)” folks would stop trying to rationalise and just say that they are for killing babies when the babies are unwanted.

Thanks.

Marion.
1 January 2007
at 6:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Marion

Fetuses. 10 week old fetus is not baby, just as a 10 week old born baby is not not a fetus.
1 January 2007
at 7:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Sigh, Marion, do you just ignore everything you don't want to hear? I said just a few posts ago, that after born, if a mother does not want a baby, I would consider it murder if a mom killed her baby.

So therefore, just being unwanted is not the only justification. There are babies who are wanted and loved and still aborted because of health, financial and fetal diseases.

But like Sublime, you just ignore anything that doesn't support your narrow view of we choicers are about. You just can't wrap your head around the idea that we're anything but extremist, selfish demons.

Would it make you feel better if we said 'we hate babies and want them all to die”? Would that make it easier for you to hate us?
1 January 2007
at 7:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Godot spews: “Unfortunately, most of the people making the decisions to order abortions are not the pregnant females, they are the parents or guardians of the female children, or the males in power who might suffer economic and personal inconvenience if a birth occurred.”

So, you have a personal insight as to just who actually asks for an abortion? You can prove that it's some girl's parents or her deadbeat boyfriend? No? Wow, then you had better stop making crap up to justify your tired argument.

This thread is laughable.
1 January 2007
at 8:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Moxx:

I did not speficially address you but if the shoe fits; wear it.

Thanks.

Marion.
2 January 2007
at 5:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

But like Sublime, you just ignore anything that doesn't support your narrow view of we choicers are about. You just can't wrap your head around the idea that we're anything but extremist, selfish demons posted by -moxxie_mamma……………………………………………………LOL Narrow views…….I don't think your a demon.I just know that not only are you wrong,you are lying to yourself.

2 January 2007
at 5:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

All I see is unreasoned dogma and ideology. I dont think either sublime or godot has put any thought into why they believe abortion is murder other than “my preacher told me so”. Yet they emotionally and intemperately demand that it is so. This makes no sense.

“If you cannot reasonably justify your beliefs better than this, maybe you should stop being so strident and dogmatic and take a more measured view.”
just a couple posts by the so called nightmare….First of all,Im a father not a mother.You keep asking for scriptures to back my claims.As if that would change your opinion.God himself could tell you it was wrong and it would not change your views.Im sure your reply would not be devoid of the word dogmatic ,since that seems to be your favorite word.
2 January 2007
at 8:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

Do I personally believe that life begins at conception? Yes. Do I personally believe that abortion was never an option for me? Yes. I wish abortion never had to happen. But I still would never dream of dictating to others what they should or shouldn't do based on my personal beliefs. Abortion is still a legal procedure, and if you don't like that, then call your representative to try and get it changed. Don't hammer and yowl at women on the boards about the choices they've made in their lives. It doesn't make you look like a big man.

I also personally believe that getting plastic surgery purely for cosmetic reasons is stupid. But it's a personal decision about a medical procedure, just as abortion is, and I wouldn't deign to dictate to others what they can and can't do.

It seems that of all the anti-abortion folks who post here, the poor mother is in a catch-22 situation. If she aborts, you think she's a murderer. If she doesn't abort, and keeps the baby and has no money or other means to care for it, you still think she's scum. If she has to go on welfare in order to care for that same baby, you call her a “lazy, worthless bum; go out and find a job.”

So, how does a new mother, with no options, go about finding a job? With no money for daycare, or no transportaion (and no, everyone doesn't live in wonderful Lawrence, where there's bus service), or no education past high school, if that much, what job options will she have anyway?

Oh, yeah, I forgot…women used to die all the time during pregnancy and childbirth, or die from pure exhaustion just from having so many kids, because it was a man's right to have sex whenever he wanted to. Those women's deaths were just a necessary evil, I guess, and only the lives of the children are precious.

Seems a woman can't win either way with you opinionated , sanctimonious people. She's either a baby killer or a lazy, worthless welfare bum.

Well, what part are you playing in the need for abortions to begin with? Are you teaching your sons that one night of “fun” isn't worth the possible consequences? Are you teaching them that in order to sow those wild oats, some girl may have to pay the price? Are you teaching them that if they do get a girl pregnant, they should be a man and stand behind her and help out?

You keep harping on when life begins, as if the life itself is the most precious thing to you.

If that is the case, and life is the most precious thing; not possible potential, then if you are against abortion and also for the death penalty, then you're all hypocrites.

I don't care what atrocious things a man or woman has done during their lifetime, they are still ALIVE, and if life is the most precious thing, then they shouldn't be killed either, should they?
2 January 2007
at 8:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

“the poor mother is in a catch-22 situation. If she aborts, you think she's a murderer. If she doesn't abort, and keeps the baby and has no money or other means to care for it, you still think she's scum.”

“She's either a baby killer or a lazy, worthless welfare bum.”

Just hearin the tail end, but just wanted to point out a logic error: Are there other solutions besides killing the baby or keeping it?

“…then they shouldn't be killed either, should they?”
I would agree.
2 January 2007
at 9:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

If one denies that a thing is alive one cannot kill it anda can therefore feel no regret, angst, moral qualms or sense of loss.

See how easy that is?

Thanks.

Marion.
2 January 2007
at 10:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

sublime wrote:

“First of all,Im a father not a mother.”

My apologies. None of your post had gender-specific references.

“You keep asking for scriptures to back my claims.”

No, I keep asking you to justify your belief that abortion is murder. I am puzzled by the lack of logical justification and wonder why you hold such beliefs. Is it scripture? Is it your preacher? Why do you think abortion is murder? You state very vehemently that abortion is murder, yet apparently have no rational justification for your belief. This puzzles me.

“God himself could tell you it was wrong and it would not change your views.”

You are incorrect here. I would indeed change my views if I was convinced by evidence and reason that a fertilized embryo or fetus was equivalent to a human life.

As to the word “dogmatic”: if the shoe fits… The reason I use it so much is because so many hold inflexible views based on religious ideology when it comes to abortion.

sublime, could you ever be convinced to change your mind that abortion is murder?
2 January 2007
at 12:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

” …justify your belief that abortion is murder.”

When a woman is pregnant, science tells us that the new life she carries is a complete and fully new human being from the moment of fertilization. By the time most abortions can be performed, the baby already has a beating heart and identifiable brain waves. The baby living in her mother is as distinct and unique a new person/human being as you are from me, and as deserving of protection under the law as we are.

The baby every mother carries as she faces a life and death decision has a beating heart at 18 days after fertilization and brain waves as early as six weeks after fertilization. Most abortions are not performed until nine weeks of the pregnancy. Even RU 486 chemical abortions can't be done until after six weeks.

Now, justify YOUR belief that it's not murder.
2 January 2007
at 12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

“Why do you think abortion is murder? ”

Are you two fighting over the specifics of a word? For example, what if they thought abortion is “killing” a human rather than “murdering” a human?

“that a fertilized embryo or fetus was equivalent to a human life.”

But, perhaps that is not the issue. At what event do you suggest an embryo becomes a human life?
2 January 2007
at 12:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“…what if they thought abortion is “killing” a human rather than “murdering” a human?

That is exactly what “they” think. Why? Because it's so convenient. “Hey, I don't want a kid. I know, let's just murder the baby and call it 'abortion'.”

“At what event do you suggest an embryo becomes a human life?”

Read it again.

“…science tells us that the new life she carries is a complete and fully new human being from the moment of fertilization.”

2 January 2007
at 1:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

And all of that development still takes place, PC, even if the pregnancy is dangerous for the woman, and giving birth will kill her.

In those cases, which do you prefer? The death of the mother or the baby?

In those cases, some women have decided to get abortions. Some have not, and have died during childbirth.

Which one is better, in your opinion?

And before you start spouting all the tripe about how those cases are a small percentage of pregnancies, talk to a doctor.

Any doctor worth his salt will tell you that serious complications and/or death of both the mother and baby, or one of them, can occur with ANY pregnancy, and it can occur suddenly, with little or no warning.

Women have been putting themselves at risk for centuries simply to keep the species going. And a lot of them have died for their efforts. I suspect that if men were the ones expected to do it, there would be far fewer children.

Oh, yes, gr, adoption. Yes, adoption is a possibility, too. So a woman goes through the pregnancy and agony of childbirth just so she can give the baby up. Well, there are a lot of mothers that go through this and find that in the end they can't do it, even if they have planned to do it, even if they know they don't have the financial means to care for a baby.

Quite frankly, for the emotional and mental health of the mother, it's better to have an abortion at an early stage than to go that far, when emotional attachments will be there.

But of course, you don't consider the mother important at all in the equation. She apparently is just a convenient receptacle for a baby.

So she gives the baby up for adoption. So some wealthy couple somewhere can go through an attorney and pay out $20,000, supposedly for “medical costs”, and basically buy that cute little infant. Even though there are masses of children that already exist that they could be adopting. Or they go to some third world country and pick out kids to adopt, even though there are plenty of them right here they could choose from.

Exactly why is it that people who know they have no chance at having biological children always want to adopt an infant?

If that same mother decides to have the baby, can't care for it, and puts it up for adoption at the age of 1, or 2, their chances of ever being adopted are much, much lower.

Yes, adoption is a wonderful option. That's why there are so many websites around full of children looking for their birth parents, and vice versa.

Why don't you all just admit that whether or not a woman has an abortion is none of your business? It's not going to affect your life at all, and it won't influence your chances of “salvation”.
2 January 2007
at 1:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Against abortion? Don't get one. Simple as that.
2 January 2007
at 2:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

The antiabortion movement represents people who not only feel their traditional way of life threatened but wish to impose it on everyone who is “different”. Is this so much different from any type of discrimination based on fear?
When human life begins is a philsopical or religious belief - one that, if enshrined in law, would give a subordinate role of the woman to the protection of the unborn.
Sperm and eggs are alive and potential humans, but most are wasted. Is this murder, too?
The narrow-minded philosphy that if a woman has sex, she must pay the consequences, is vindictive, self-righteous, and on its face, morally wrong. I am certain this stems from the “sex is bad and must be punished” attitude spewing from the prolifers. More crap left over from the witch hunts of yore. How sad.
2 January 2007
at 2:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

This is good. Now we are on the right track, thinking about human development.

A sperm and egg unite to from a zygote.

The zygote divides to form the blastocyst with embryonic stem cells.

the blastocyst implants into the uterus.

The germ layers form from the ES cells (ectoderm, mesoderm, endoderm).

The organs form from germ layers (nervous system, heart, etc.).

The fetus is born.

“science tells us that the new life she carries is a complete and fully new human being from the moment of fertilization.”

Not true. At fertilization, the embry consists of a single cell with no differentiation, not a complete human being.

“Most abortions are not performed until nine weeks of the pregnancy. Even RU 486 chemical abortions can't be done until after six weeks.”

Not true. RU486 prevents implantation of the blastocyst into the uterus.

If human life begins at fertilization, what about human embryos created by nuclear transfer (cloning), which bypasses fertilization? Are these embryos not human life? If not, why the hubub about cloning to generate embryonic stem cells.

If human life begins at fertilization, what about identical twins? Identical twins are created by splitting of the blastocyst. Do these twins share one life or are they two separate lives. If they are two separate lives, then life cannot begin at fertilization.

If human life does not begin at fertilization, when does it begin? I do not know, but I do not think there is a single point at which human life begins. It is the culmination of a process that begins with fertilization and ends with a fully-developed human.

While I think there are good arguments to made against late-term abortion, to call a fertilized embryo a human deserving of rights of adult humans is just ridiculous.
2 January 2007
at 2:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

Some have claimed that fertilization is the magic moment because a new genetic combination has been generated.

What about human embryos produced by nuclear transfer, where the genetic combination is the same as the adult donor?

What about identical twins?

What about cancer cells, that rearrage their genetic combinations? Are these cancer cells new human life?
2 January 2007
at 2:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

Very good points, ywn - Human life is a continuum - human life at conception is a religious belief, not a proven biological fact. I want no part of the violent, extremist prolife belief - my body is just that - my body! And you know what? The law says I have the exclusive right to decide what I do with my body.
2 January 2007
at 2:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“Not true. RU486 prevents implantation of the blastocyst into the uterus.”

The FDA limits RU-486 to women in the first seven weeks of pregnancy. After taking three tablets in the abortion facility or doctor's office, the woman goes home. This drug blocks progesterone from getting to the developing baby. Without this nutrient hormone, the baby starves to death.

Thirty-six to 48 hours later, the woman returns to the doctor to take a second drug, misoprostol, to expel the baby. Misoprostol is an ulcer drug that the manufacturer, Searle, has warned doctors should not be used in pregnancy-related conditions. It is at this time that the woman is most likely to suffer complications.

Seven days later, she returns for an exam to make sure the baby has been expelled and to monitor her bleeding. If the procedure failed, the woman then undergoes a surgical abortion.

The procedure requires three clinical visits and access to emergency medical facilities in the event of complications.

“If human life begins at fertilization, what about identical twins? Identical twins are created by splitting of the blastocyst. Do these twins share one life or are they two separate lives. If they are two separate lives, then life cannot begin at fertilization?”

Why not?
2 January 2007
at 2:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

” human life at conception is a religious belief,”

It's also a scientific fact.

“- my body is just that - MY BODY!”

And you're welcome to it. But when you have an abortion, it's not your body that's brutally and painfully exterminated, is it?

2 January 2007
at 2:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

I think Valkyrie has hit the nail on the head.

Those opposed to abortion cannot justify their views because thay have not thought it through on rational, evidence-based grounds. Instead, they are using opposition to abortion to counter the rising power and influence of women in the 20th century.

Before the 20th century, no one, the catholic church included, gave a crap about abortion. In fact, it saved alot of priests' arses when they impregnated nuns and young parishoners.

Women in the 20th century were finally beginning to achieve rights and freedoms of men. Opposition to abortion is an attempt to keep women “barefoot and pregnant”.
2 January 2007
at 2:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

“It's also a scientific fact.”

No, it is not. Fertilization is but one step in a process of human development, such as implantation into the uterus and development of a nervous system.

However, what prompts you to say it is scientific fact? What is your evidence?
2 January 2007
at 3:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

A blastocyte is a ball of eight cells with the potential to become an embryo. My Gawd, are you that afraid of the power of a woman's rights? Keep spinning……………….

Faith is spiritualized imagination.
Henry Ward Beecher
2 January 2007
at 3:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Posted by right_thinker (anonymous) on December 28, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If this debacle with Tiller can work it's way out of the ultra-liberal Wichita crony-ized joke of a justice system, Tiller is in deep sh!t.

RT, grew up in Wichita (born and raised). You are sorely mistaken to say that the Wichita justice system is “ultra liberal”. In fact, it is quite the opposite…Wichita, for it's size, is an incredibly conservative city. Hate to say it, but you don't know what you're talking about here.
2 January 2007
at 3:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

I'm considering throwing in the towel on ridiculous issues like this. There's a saying that I'm starting to notice more and take to heart:

Debating on the Internet is like cheating at the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.

Against abortion? Don't get one.
2 January 2007
at 3:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Careful Bodaq. Comparing a LEGAL medical procedure that you happen to not agree with and a Holocaust is offensive to myself and many other people. I do have Gypsy family members that were killed in the actual Holocaust. I don't agree with breast implants as a general rule, I think it's a useless waste of money and medical resources that could potentially go to do some good, but I will certainly not refer to it as a the “Natural Breast” Holocaust or some other such loaded word that has no place in this debate.
2 January 2007
at 3:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

“Posted by PC_Conservativeman (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 12:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Murderers take human life, destroy innocent babies and call it choice. Take an unborn infant and compare it's DNA to any other human and it is distinct, its own.

The same can be said for a piece of my hair with the root on it or certain types of tumors….what's your point?
2 January 2007
at 3:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

boldaq:

That's just my point - you don't know if I ever did or ever will have an abortion - it is none of your business, nor the government's business - that is between a woman and her medical provider. The law says so - get over it. You know all of you screeching prolifers could do much much good in this world if you helped a child already born instead of attempting to shove your dogma down other's throats. Try reading to a child or something. Give to a charity, join the Peace Corps, love thy neighbor………….

BTW boldaq - give me proof of the scientific fact you speak of.

2 January 2007
at 3:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

I take great offense to your comparison. Hitler used racial grounds to exterminate Jews and other “undesirables.” In the reproductive rights movement, no one is out to kill all embryos. It is an insult to the memory of human beings murdered by the Nazis to equate them with embryos for anti-abortion propaganda.

propaganda

¢ noun information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view.

- ORIGIN originally denoting a committee of Roman Catholic cardinals responsible for foreign missions: from Latin congregatio de propaganda fide 'congregation for propagation of the faith'.
2 January 2007
at 3:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

“If human life begins at fertilization, what about human embryos created by nuclear transfer (cloning), which bypasses fertilization? Are these embryos not human life?”

Just because some do wrong, doesn't make the wrongs of other's correct. Whether right or wrong, why do you suggest that?

“If not, why the hubub about cloning to generate embryonic stem cells.”

I don't know. Why?

“If they are two separate lives, then life cannot begin at fertilization.”

Actually, they both began at fertilization. Your question would be the difference of two or one. If we could bud off a clone, would you suggest the clone is not human?

“If human life does not begin at fertilization, when does it begin? I do not know, but I do not think there is a single point at which human life begins. It is the culmination of a process that begins with fertilization and ends with a fully-developed human.”

You don't know, but can tell others when it isn't?
Fully-developed? When, at 18? 25?

You started out with some logical point events (zygote, division, implantation) which could be considered. Why not stick with them rather than to artificially make it a continuum?
2 January 2007
at 3:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

conman

Where are your facts? In your insults of others? You talk of humanity and then spew your neo-con agenda? I'm with logic - get lost, you are no longer needed here.
2 January 2007
at 3:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

“You started out with some logical point events (zygote, division, implantation) which could be considered. Why not stick with them rather than to artificially make it a continuum?”

Ok, gr. At which point in human development does a human life begin, and why?
2 January 2007
at 4:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

gr responded to the question of identical twins with “Actually, they both began at fertilization. Your question would be the difference of two or one.”

So, both individual human lives begin at fertilization, before the splitting of the embryo to form identical twins?

Does this happen in every embryo and then one life dies off if twinning does not occur?

Or do the twins share a single life?

Or does god know when a twin will form and put two lives in that embryo?

I hope you realize that this is nonsense.
2 January 2007
at 4:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

A thought experiment:

You are in a burning building and next to you is an unconscious adult human and a freezer full of 100 frozen fertilized blastocysts. You can only carry one, not both, to safety.

Which do you choose to carry to safety and why?
2 January 2007
at 4:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Logical fallacy, RT. Just because you support the LEGAL (again, I'll say it legal right) right to choose does not mean that you “really like abortion”. That would be like me saying as a supporter of choice about you that you must really like overpopulation and the at least 25% of children in this country who are living in poverty. And I doubt this is so.

PC_Conservativeman-that's an excellent, enligtened and not at all ignorant statement that you in no way addressed my argument by saying my point was “retarded”. That's incredibly creative and very much puts me in my place. Silly me for trying to draw logical parallels rather than playing only to the most instinctual and base of people's oppinions. Wow, you're really clever.

Also, “retarded” is definitely not the preferred nomenclature for stupid, because I am guessing that what's you meant. Trust me, I know plenty of actually mentally retarded individuals whose logic puts yours to shame.
2 January 2007
at 4:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

A thought, right_thinker? You have a thought? Congratulations. All of us here were wondering when you'd finally have a thought.

2 January 2007
at 4:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

thank you! Valkyrie for agreeing here that to equate a legal medical procedure to a Holocaust is not only stupid but irresponsible, especially in light of how many people in this country had family members who were affected by the Holocaust.
2 January 2007
at 4:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Bring those soldiers home though, by golly!
Apparently, RT, you think this is contradictory.

That's what interests me…..I was raised in Wichita, a very conservative place, despite RT's baseless assertion it is ultra-liberal. That being said, the conservative base that I often run into is anti-abortion, pro-death penalty and pro-government support in a war thousands upon thousands of people are dying in and by all accounts will not end until first quarter of 2008 at the earliest. Do you not see the contradiction in supporting a “culture of life” as people put it, while supporting a system in which people are not only executed for their crimes, but a system which is also proven to get it wrong, based on the over 150 overturned death row convictions since the inception of DNA testing….?
2 January 2007
at 4:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sublime (Anonymous) says…

The prayer is reprinted below as an encouragement and challenge for each of us to stand for the truth of the Gospel wherever the Lord gives us opportunity.

Heavenly Father, we come before You today to ask Your forgiveness and seek Your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, ” Woe on those who call evil good,” but thatÂ's exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values. We confess that:

We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word and called it pluralism;
We have worshipped other gods and called it multi-culturalism;
We have endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle;
We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery;
We have neglected the needy and called it self-preservation;
We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare;
We have killed our unborn and called it choice;
We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable;
We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self-esteem;
We have abused power and called it political savvy;
We have coveted our neighborÂ's possessions and called it ambition;
We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression;
We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment.
2 January 2007
at 4:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

RT

None of us “like” abortion, abortions should be legal, safe and rare.

Yourworstnightmare:

Wonderful philosphy test there. Here is my answer, however facetious it may be:

Save the cells! The skygod has blessed them all and watches over them in the freezer.
2 January 2007
at 4:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

sublime - your prayer really should be a private thing.

Faith is spiritualized imagination.
Henry Ward Beecher
2 January 2007
at 4:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

Posted by right_thinker (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 4:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh, I forgot (and shouldn't need to) remind everyone, nowadays, all military personnel who have died have done so voluntarily. I don't think a 40 week fetus inside a 14 year old girl was given any options.

Balderdash!
2 January 2007
at 4:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

What if that 14 year old girl was not given any options? Besides that, I am sorry, but an abortion at 40 weeks (the fullest of full term)…that ain't gonna happen. Stop trying to appeal to people's sympathies by implying that abortions are given at this stage on demand. They just aren't. That's the problem. Stop, for one second, trying to bring fallacious emotional calls into this.

Thanks for the vocab lesson, but I debated whether to use hypocrisy vs. contradictory and found that contradictory is a much less loaded word.

Posted by Culture_Warrior (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 4:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Abortion is wrong? The only ones aborting their young are the morally bankrupt. Why do you think the liberals are dying out? Two reasons, flawed ideology and failing to reprorduce. Let them die out, it is a service to the rest of us. The war for Americas soul cannot be won by the “neo-cons” or the “liberal socialists”. Both groups are the enemy.

The enemy of who? Religious warriors? This certainly, in my mind, adds fuel to that fire that people of a certain conservative bent believe that they are in a war to save our very souls. Um, yeah, I know plenty of liberals who chose to reproduce and plenty of conservatives who chose not to, so that's really pretty ignorant. I, in fact, cannot wait to have children, and I am liberal and I don't think that's a dirty word.

I don't want to have an abortion and have not, but I will NOT be forced to tell someone that they cannot have a legal procedure because someone else's Judeo-Christian ethic says so. Need I remind YOU that this is a legal procedure and we live in a country where religious separation from state affairs is given a lot of lip service, while it still creeps into nearly every debate that rages (abortion, gay marriage, etc).

I would also posit, RT, that while technically people have a choice to enter the military and potentially die, that does not change what many of us so called “dying out” liberals believe about this war—that we were bamboozled all along. I have friends who although they signed up to fight and potentially die, did so because that was the only way they could attend college, feed their families, etc.

But that's really neither here nor there.
2 January 2007
at 4:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Posted by sublime (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 4:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The prayer is reprinted below as an encouragement and challenge for each of us to stand for the truth of the Gospel wherever the Lord gives us opportunity.

Heavenly Father, we come before You today to ask Your forgiveness and seek Your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, ” Woe on those who call evil good,” but thatÂ's exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values. We confess that:

We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word and called it pluralism;
We have worshipped other gods and called it multi-culturalism;
We have endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle;
We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery;
We have neglected the needy and called it self-preservation;
We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare;
We have killed our unborn and called it choice;
We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable;
We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self-esteem;
We have abused power and called it political savvy;
We have coveted our neighborÂ's possessions and called it ambition;
We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression;
We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment.

See, now aren't you glad you live in a country that offers religious freedom? If it were another time, another country, you could have been hanged for that. Quite frankly, I probably still wouldn't mind that….

2 January 2007
at 5:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by sublime (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 4:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The prayer is reprinted below as an encouragement and challenge for each of us to stand for the truth of the Gospel wherever the Lord gives us opportunity.

===========

Sublime,

I may be wrong, but didn't “time-honored values of our forefathers” included beating wives and children, supporting slavery, exterminating Native Americans, and denying women a right to vote?
2 January 2007
at 6:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Aw, Heck; they're only fetuses!

kill'em all!

let god sort'em out!

Thanks.

Marion.
2 January 2007
at 7 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

All military personnel who have died have done so voluntarily?

Not really, RT…they enlisted in the service voluntarily, but how many of them really think they're going to die? Or do they think it will always happen to the other guy? People in that age group tend to think that way, you know.

Not to take anything away from the bravery of people in the military who face the possibility of death every day. But if those kids knew for a fact at the time of enlistment that they would definitely die because of it, I think enlistment rates would fall.

Yes, some would enlist anyway, even if they knew for a fact they would die. But most wouldn't.

Why do you think there were so many who avoided military service at all costs during the days of the draft and the Vietnam war? Including Bush, I might add…

No one, so far, has managed to prove that Tiller did anything illegal. Kline should go on with his life and get over his obsession.
2 January 2007
at 7:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Marion,

Do pro-choicers actually say that or are you just kidding (I hope)?
2 January 2007
at 7:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

YWN wrote: “A thought experiment:

You are in a burning building and next to you is an unconscious adult human and a freezer full of 100 frozen fertilized blastocysts. You can only carry one, not both, to safety.

Which do you choose to carry to safety and why?”

I heard that question posed on one of KMBZ's shows a few days ago, posed by someone with an incredibly rude and arrogant demeanor.
2 January 2007
at 7:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

The other day I came upon an article where the author also mentioned that legal abortion is “genocide” against Americans. I thought it was a bit odd and actually wrote him asking whether it was just a wrong choice of words, or did he really know of any planneed ongoing genocide against Americans (I have not heard back from him yet, but it only been a few days ago). With this recent mention of Holocaust by one of the posters I am now even more intrigued by this genocide-war crimes threory. Can anyone of pro-life posters clarify?
2 January 2007
at 7:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Culture_warrior, I realize you are being sarcastic, but we are not far from that situation. The AMA announced today their recommendation that all fetuses be tested for Downes Syndrome within the first trimester so that parents can make a decision about “continuing with the pregnancy.” The test produces false positives (for Downs syndrome) only 20% of the time. 20%!! No big deal.
2 January 2007
at 8:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

Isn't it interesting that after all of this babbling - not one prolife poster here can give clear, concise evidence of a scientifc nature that life begins at conception? Come on - someone give me some evidence!

Culture: Are you a member of the Posse Comitatus, League of the South or something? Your buzz words are frightening me here.

2 January 2007
at 9:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

hottruckinmama (Anonymous) says…

i was 34 when my youngest son (now 6) was born. my doctor wanted me to have one of those tests for downs and i told him “no”. i told him it didn't matter to me either way. i certainly would have had no intention of having an abortion no matter the outcome of the test anyway. my cousin has a daughter with downs and she is a delightful little girl. i think it made my doctor a little upset but i didn't really care. i don't really believe in testing for that kind of stuff with the intention of “doing something about it” if the test doesn't come out right. those tests are sometimes wrong anyway. and my son turned out just fine.
2 January 2007
at 9:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

What constitutes life is, at this point, purely conjectural, and has no particular scientific basis that is without emotional or agenda bias of one point or another. Me, I like Bill Hicks's particular viewpoint.

“That thing in your belly, it's not a human being, it's a bunch of conjointed cells. You're not a human… until you're in my phonebook.”

Bill Hicks, another dead genius.
2 January 2007
at 9:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by Culture_Warrior (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My apologies to all the pro-choice posters. I came across the following story. Apparently homosexuality is not a choice but a genetic defect. The research being done will someday allow women to abort defective fetuses or even easier, use a hormone patch to ensure the deviant behavior does not manifest itself.
=========

Wow, that is interesting. I didn't know animals could be homosexual, too. But why would homosexuality be considered a genetic “defect”? Because those individuals cannot reproduce?

I also read (somewhere, do not remember where) that early upbringing of the child (environment) may influence the future sexual preferences of a child. So, is it 100% genetic?
Wow, that is interesting. I didn't know animals could be homosexual, too. But why would homosexuality be considered a genetic “defect”? Because those individuals cannot reproduce?

I also read (somewhere, do not remember where) that early upbringing of the child (environment) may influence the future sexual preferences of a child. So, is it 100% genetic?
2 January 2007
at 9:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by Culture_Warrior (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

right_thinker, who can figure out the need to kill babies and save seals? A self destructive mental disorder?
==========

CW,

I would say: Because seals are actually already here, so they have more of an equal status to us. And because they contribute to keeping the ecological balance in their area.
2 January 2007
at 10:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

“Kangaroos usually have one young annually. The young kangaroo, or joey, is born alive at a very immature stage, when it is only about 2 cm long and weighs less than a gram. Immediately after birth it crawls up the mother's body and enters the pouch. The baby attaches its mouth to one of four teats, which then enlarges to hold the young animal in place. After several weeks, the joey becomes more active and gradually spends more and more time outside the pouch, which it leaves completely between 7 and 10 months of age.”—koala express

born alive at a very immature stage.

Would it be okay to grab inside a kangaroo doe's pouch, pull the joey off the teat and tear it apart? After all, it is immature, cannot live outside its mother's pouch.

But, like the baby seal, it is HERE.

What say you, PETA?
2 January 2007
at 10:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

I am not a member of PETA (yet), but I would say that unless there is a good reson, we leave the baby kangaroo alone. But if the mommy kangaroo does not want to carry it anymore and decides to abandon it, I think that she is well within her right.
2 January 2007
at 10:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moxxie_mama (Anonymous) says…

Just for clarification, because people seem to get them confused…morning after pills are not the same thing as RU486. RU486 IS the abortion pill. Morning after pills prevent ovulation. The old information and currently most believed is that it works by preventing ovulation OR, by preventing implantation of a fertilized ovum.

But the most recent studies are showing that fertilization likely never occurs, so even in the most broad definition of abortion, would not even be included in that. Unless you're one of those who think that life begins at the sperm.

And someone said that liberals and the morally corrupt are killing themselves off with abortion. HA. The ones who use abortion the most are the religious right, becuase they're also less likely to be on birth control.

“Catholics were 1% more likely to obtain an abortion than average. Data was prepared by Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, Storrs, CT, in 1995 from five Gallup polls. ”
2 January 2007
at 10:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

CW - twisting and spinning again I see. That question has already been answered here more than once, now answer mine. If you had an answer, wouldn't it be very simple to enlighten us all?

jonas: Hicks was a genius.

3 January 2007
at 12:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Culture_Warrior: you are conservativeman reincarnated. Who else would vomit out such baseless accusations that “liberals are dying out” or that the potential homosexuality of an unborn child ought to be changed because of its “deviant” lifestyle. Words cannot describe how much disrespect you show for humanity. You have no compassion, respect, reason, or intelligence of any discernible amount. Just quit now.

LJWorld, how can you stand by and let a troll like him continue posting his content? He obviously doesn't believe in it and posts it only to gain a negative reaction from people like myself. And he is also obviously Conservativeman and Patriotman reincarnated. Does this not break the rules somehow?

I've said it dozens of times, I'll say it again: Being gay is not deviant, nor is it anything to be ashamed of. Against abortion? Don't get one.

Newhere you'd be surprised how many cases of homosexuality in animals have been documented.
3 January 2007
at 7:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

“The mothers of gays are beside themselves knowing a simple patch someday will eradicate the defective, deviant problem they are so ashamed of.”

Too bad there isn't a patch to rid us of the ignorant bigots in the world. You're truly disgusting, Culture_Warrior. Hate comes back to those that give it, so yours is coming someday pal.

Idiot.
3 January 2007
at 8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

Posted by yourworstnightmare (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 4:01 p.m.
“I hope you realize that this is nonsense.”

Yep, what you said was nonsense when you knew full well what I was saying.
Both origins of life started the same time. And, I suppose you'll take off on the word “origins”, too.
Whatever - you know what I mean as quite apparent from your lack of addressing of “clones”.

ywn: “Ok, gr. At which point in human development does a human life begin, and why?”
Well, some logical points would be as you said, zygote, division, implantation.

“Which do you choose to carry to safety and why?”
You are in a burning building with a 200 pound mother and a one year old child. You can only carry one. Which one do you choose to carry and why?
And your point being…..?

––––––

Why try to make life a human as a subjective concept? It either is human or it isn't. There isn't some continuum where it gradually becomes human. If you are having trouble with this, imagine a board voting on whether you're human or not. Three out of five votes you're a living human, so you get to live. What if it's the other way. Wouldn't you rather have an absolute point of reference so it becomes 5 out of 5?

If they were voting on whether a baby “could live on its own”, you could have 5 different opinions. And, that could extend beyond 18 years of age. However, if they were voting whether it was fertilized, had cell division, was implanted, there would be no “opinion” but an absolute fact. To use gibberish of whether it “passed through the birth canal” just confounds the situation for those instances when a baby doesn't pass through the birth canal.

Life is objective, not subjective.
3 January 2007
at 8:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

So you're against abortion, CW, but you're also against gays.

And maybe someday, you hope there will be a patch so that mothers can choose to get rid of these little “deviants”.

Isn't that abortion?

Sounds to me like you're against abortion, unless it's for a reason you approve of, like getting rid of all the gays.

Sounds to me that if there were a test that would genetically identify a child that is gay during pregnancy, you'd have no problem with the mother getting an abortion to get rid of a gay baby.

You are a hypocrite.
3 January 2007
at 10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

I hope everybody had great holidays! Too bad they didn't last.

scenebooster,

I have a feeling that PC_Conservativeman is just toying with you, guys, to make you upset. If I were you, I would toy back with him in the same manner as he does, and you may actually have pretty good time chatting with him. I have talked with a few trolls or troll-like posters on other forums, and some of them are very friendly once you start playing the game, too. What I usually do, is I try to immitate their style of writing: if they write short sentenses, I do, too, if they use all caps, I do too, etc. The whole conversation becomes very amusing, the only thing to avoid is using strong or offensive words (even if they do), first because you can get banned, and second because using them can become a bad habit.
3 January 2007
at 10:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

“Culture_warrior
Are you being sarcastic,”

Being the comment was to tyco, I thought it was obvious it was sarcastic or showing him there might be a reason to not be for abortion.
3 January 2007
at 11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Tychoman,

The reason I asked is because someone once convienced me that homosexuality was “unnatural” because no other animals but humans engage in it. If that is not true, than I am reversing to my previous opinion that it is not unnatural.
3 January 2007
at 11:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kodiac (Anonymous) says…

newhere,

Homosexuality is a well-documented phenomenon in many species of animals including many species of primates, birds (such as penguins), etc. In fact, the biological world shows a broad spectrum of diversity when it comes to sexuality. You should check it out for yourself instead listening to others misinformed “opinions”.

3 January 2007
at 11:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Awesome, newhere.

gr, CW's mentally unstable enough that he might actually consider manipulating his unborn child's genetics if he's told that it has a predisposition to being gay. How very fascist of him. If he's being sarcastic, then he is WAY over the line. What he's been posting is hate speech.
3 January 2007
at 11:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Most in the media are pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-religion, anti-family, and for more and more big government and liberal policies at every level. Not all - but most.

The 1973 decision and its progeny legalized abortion on demand even in the late months of pregnancy. For the next 22 years media reports consistently stated it was only legal for 3 months or (sometimes) until viability. It took the U.S. Congress' Partial Birth Abortion Ban debate on C-Span to graphically show the nation this barbaric third trimester infanticide/abortion before the media finally stopped hiding the fact that late abortions were done and were legal.

We are called “anti-abortion” (a negative label), while they are “pro-choice” (a positive label). Large pro-life rallies, marches, picketing, etc., are ignored or grossly underestimated in size. A dozen “pro-choice” protesters, however, will get equal or often much more time on TV or space in print than even tens of thousands of pro-life people. Anti-abortion “fanatics” are contrasted with pro-abortion people with “deep commitments.” It is okay to identify those who oppose abortion as Catholics, as Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, or right-wing extremists. But who has ever heard of a pro-abortion person being identified as a Jew, an atheist, or a homosexual or lesbian, if such they were.

On religion, 50% denied any religious affiliation. Twenty-three percent were raised Jewish, but only 14% were practicing Judaism at the time. Only one in five identified themselves as Protestant, one in eight as Catholic. Overall, however, only 8% went to church or synagogue weekly with 86% attending seldom or never. They were largely male, white, highly educated, with high incomes. They voted heavily for McGovern and Carter over Nixon and Ford. They were committed to the welfare state, to redistribution of income, and were strong environmentalists and desegregationists, Eight-five percent agreed that homosexuals have the right to teach in public schools, etc.
3 January 2007
at 1:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 3, 2007 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Eight-five percent agreed that homosexuals have the right to teach in public schools, etc.

=======
May I inquire why should homosexuals have any less rights than non-homosexuals? What makes them less deserving of a right to teach in a school?

Intersting. What other rights did they agree that homosexuals can have?
3 January 2007
at 1:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Kodiac,

I apologize. At the time of that old conversation I did not have access to the computer or internet, so I had no real place to research. I have dealt with animals for many years but I have never observed any homosexual behavior among them, so I assumed that he was right.
3 January 2007
at 1:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Reading PC-conman's and CW's vomit makes me physically ill. I honestly can't believe their B.S. hasn't been removed yet or that they might actually believe the s*** they're full of.
3 January 2007
at 1:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Some are theorizing that the culture wars will be won not by issues or politics, per se, but rather by fecundity and demographics. They believe that liberal secularists will ultimately be defeated by their dwindling numbers. The theory is that several factors will contribute to disparities between populations that tend to be conservative and those that tend to be liberals, with conservatives having the edge. Here are factors that they point to:

Demographics point to higher birth rates among traditionally oriented families with a religious orientation. In the United States, fully 47 percent of people who attend church weekly say that the ideal family size is three or more children, as compared to only 27 percent of those who seldom attend church.

The centers of liberal strength are losing population while conservative areas of the country are gaining population. In 2004, President Bush carried 97 of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties. The fertility rate in the states that went for Kerry is 12% lower than in the Bush states. Vermont produces an annual average of 49 children for every 1,000 women of child-bearing age; in Utah, where 71% of the population voted for Mr Bush, the figure is 91.

The most overwhelmingly Democratic cities, like Seattle, Boston or San Francisco, are also the cities with the lowest percentages of children. In contrast, the Sunbelt reaching from Florida to Arizona is gaining in both business and population, and tilting increasingly to the Republican party. Even in California, the highest population growth is in the inland area which runs conservative.

The “Roe Effect”, which postulates that abortion rates are higher among women who tend to vote Democratic than those who vote Republican. It would seem intuitive that those who support abortion are more likely to have one. In addition, there is a racial aspect to abortion rates. Black women, for example, have a higher abortion ratio (percentage of pregnancies aborted) than Hispanic women, whose abortion ratio in turn is higher than that of non-Hispanic whites.

The shift toward an aging population due to the “baby boomers” will favor conservatives, as there is a general tendency for greater conservatism with age.
3 January 2007
at 1:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

“Most in the media are pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-religion, anti-family, and for more and more big government and liberal policies at every level.”

Your first sentance makes NO sense whatsoever. You're screaming about big government, and yet calling for more of it at the same time?!?!?!?

Typical right winger, liars all of them. Always say they want smaller government, and yet calling for more and more restrictions on private decisions.

Boldaq=Liar, hypocrite.
3 January 2007
at 1:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

I never “hoped” that my child would be anything, PC, except healthy and happy in life.

Whether or not she was gay didn't matter in the least to me.

3 January 2007
at 1:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq, you are in the ranks of CW and PC. Who else would believe that liberals are “dying out” or losing population. Did you not see the election back in November where, wow holy crap you won't believe this: Democrats took control of both houses of Congress? Wow, you three really are the weakest link.
3 January 2007
at 1:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

boldaq,

In our Goverment class at school we were studying just that the other day. However, the book said that most young people from conservative families tend to stay conservative until about 2nd year of college, when they become more liberal. Majority of students who go on to attend post-grad schools tend to vote liberal (according to the book, and I can try to look up the exact %). I am not sure whether conservatives are aware of those stats and what kind of measures they plan to take to minimize that effect.
3 January 2007
at 1:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Posted by right_thinker (anonymous) on January 2, 2007 at 5:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm pondering how in our lovely little modern world, I would at mininum, get probation and a stiff fine if I whipped up a nice mushroom and cheese omelette with a California Condor egg, but Dr. George “The Baby Killer” Tiller can inject saline solution into a uterus thus bringing a baby to a painful horrible death and walk the streets a free man, and make $4000 in the process.

abortions do not COST $4000….RT, you do this all the time….exaggerate to make a follish point
3 January 2007
at 2:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Posted by right_thinker (anonymous) on December 29, 2006 at 1:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, just wanted to say “Thank You” Mr. Phill Kline for approving my CCH application (just rec'd in mail today). It was a great Christmas present……”From the Office of Phill Kline” !!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

(What's up with all the stupidly lengthy posts today?)

PS: PC_Conservativeman, welcome! I'm sure you know but this board is dominated by a small but extremely vocal cell of very far-left, secular-progressive, liberal–for the most part athiest and homosexual (which is fine) but want total conformity to only their ideology.

God Loves you, Jesus loves you and I think you guys are all the best!!

RT, you are an IDIOT! Where is your proof that the people who post here are “largely homosexual” and “atheist”? To me, that just proves that you are full of something to equate liberalism with: homosexuality, vocalism, atheism….you are so freakin ridiculous.
3 January 2007
at 2:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

We are called “anti-abortion” (a negative label), while they are “pro-choice” (a positive label).

Boldaq-Actually, we (those who support choice) call you anti-abortion or anti-choice and you call your selves pro-life. Just like we call our selves pro-choice and you all refer to us as pro-abortion (believe me, I've heard it)…The positive and negative labelling goes every which way. Most media, I have heard, tend to refer to these groups by what they call themselves (i.e. pro life vs. pro-choice). SO stop boo-hooing.
3 January 2007
at 2:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Too bad there isn't a patch to rid us of the ignorant bigots in the world. You're truly disgusting, Culture_Warrior. Hate comes back to those that give it, so yours is coming someday pal.

Idiot.

Defender, agreed!!

Really is too bad there isn't a bigot patch.
3 January 2007
at 3:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

Thank you Crispian, I agree with your agreement!
3 January 2007
at 5 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

Posted by Crispian (anonymous) on January 3, 2007 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

“We are called “anti-abortion” (a negative label), while they are “pro-choice” (a positive label).”

These are emotional terms, are they not?
Rape crisis, birthing experiences, divorce law all got changed because women dared to speak the truth of their lives. If we can't hear women, then where are we?

The choice to have an abortion is a right. No one - not the legislators, not the president, not the churches - no one, should play politics with women's health. They do not have the right!

3 January 2007
at 5:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kodiac (Anonymous) says…

Reason,

I think Crispian was actually quoting boldaq and is advocating positions similar to your own.
3 January 2007
at 5:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Hear hear, logic and Crispian!
3 January 2007
at 5:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

Kodiac:

I know - I guess the way I worded my post made it seem like I did not agree with Crispian which is not true. This subject gets me a tad heated. :-)

I meant to convey that they are emotional terms for a reason.
3 January 2007
at 5:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Porter (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq-
You should cite your plagiarism, otherwise the information just looks like the other 67.6% of made-up statistics.
3 January 2007
at 5:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

Godot, I assure I do not listen to KMBZ. Believe it or not, it is possible to have original thoughts and not get one's beliefs from a radio or TV station like Limabugh or Faux news.

Right_thinker, what is the “agenda” you are referring to?

gr said: “You are in a burning building with a 200 pound mother and a one year old child. You can only carry one. Which one do you choose to carry and why?”

This is easy. Since both are human lives, the question becomes one of self-preservation. I would carry the baby because it would give me the best chance of exiting and saving my own life in addition to the baby's.

Now answer mine: You are in a burning building with an unconscious adult and a container of 100 frozen human blastocysts. Which do you carry to safety and why?

Show your work.
3 January 2007
at 5:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

gr, I'll even answer it for you.

I would carry the unconscious adult to safety, because the adult is a human life and the 100 frozen blastocysts are not.

What say you, big-talker?
3 January 2007
at 5:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

As to human life being an “objective” thing and therefore defineable at one crucial point: I would argue that defining life at a crux is subjective, applying an arbitrary beginning-point to something that is the result of a process.

All part of the fundamentalist fear of uncertainty and fear of the world. Fundies need certainty, even if it is false and subjective. Otherwise, they would pee their pants because of the uncertainty of the world.

I say grow up and quit being pu$$ies. Face reality like an adult human life.
3 January 2007
at 6:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

Right_thinker:
Sorry, I should have been more specific, knowing as I do that you write mindlessly and would not remember your own drivel.

“I've got to believe that given the ferocity of the fight on the left to preserve pro-choice, this is really not about choice at all, and obviously not about a childs life.

This is about an agenda–-P.E.R.I.O.D”

This “agenda”.

3 January 2007
at 7:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldgranny (Anonymous) says…

We have people posting on here that it is okay to kill an unborn baby at almost anytime before birth and for any reason. Women who claim to be mothers are saying it okay.
On another article we have people having a sh!t fit because a couple of chickens got painted!!
And then we sit around with are thumbs up our butts and wonder what is wrong with this country.
3 January 2007
at 11:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“Now answer mine: You are in a burning building with an unconscious adult and a container of 100 frozen human blastocysts. Which do you carry to safety and why?
Show your work.”

Let's cut to the chase, slight thinker. Prolife doesn't ask anyone to give up their life to save their child. What we're saying is that there should be a severe law against people like Tiller the Killer and Warren Hern who kill late term human beings for a living and parents, who seek to shirk their responsibilities in the most selfish and shameful way.
3 January 2007
at 11:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 3, 2007 at 11:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Let's cut to the chase, slight thinker. Prolife doesn't ask anyone to give up their life to save their child.

=====

Someone here said yesterday that abortion is NEVER an option, even to save the life of the mother. I am guessting, you would disagree with that?
3 January 2007
at 11:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“All part of the fundamentalist fear of uncertainty and fear of the world. Fundies need certainty, even if it is false and subjective. Otherwise, they would pee their pants because of the uncertainty of the world.”

Raskolnikov himself couldn't have said it better. You're your own worst nightmare.

If there is no God, then all things are permissable - Dostoyevsky
3 January 2007
at 11:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 3, 2007 at 11:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What we're saying is that there should be a severe law against people like Tiller the Killer and Warren Hern who kill late term human beings for a living
==========

Also, late term human beings - how late? I am not confused about your views, I thought you were against all abortions.
4 January 2007
at 12:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“In our Goverment class at school we were studying just that the other day. However, the book said that most young people from conservative families tend to stay conservative until about 2nd year of college, when they become more liberal. Majority of students who go on to attend post-grad schools tend to vote liberal (according to the book, and I can try to look up the exact %). I am not sure whether conservatives are aware of those stats and what kind of measures they plan to take to minimize that effect.” - newhere

Exactly right. By the second year of college the vast amount of liberal propaganda from leftwing profs has brainwashed a lot of naive students.

The “measures they plan to take” is called graduating, getting a job and growing up.

“The shift toward an aging population due to the 'baby boomers' will favor conservatives, as there is a general tendency for greater conservatism with age.”
4 January 2007
at 12:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 3, 2007 at 11:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
….. parents, who seek to shirk their responsibilities in the most selfish and shameful way.

=======
Also, could you clarify what are the responsibilities that you mentioned? As far as I know, I am not responsible for the child until it is born (it is hard to be held responsible for something that I cannot control, since it leaves kind of on its own, and I can't even touch it or see it let alone control it), and even after the birth I can always just leave it by someone's front door or in the hospital the minute is it born, so there is no responsibility, either (as far as I know). So, the only responsibility in this relationship is the one that I am willing to impose on myself, correct?

Also, would me giving birth to a child and then leaving it in a hospital be considered “shirking my responsibilities in selfish and shameful way”?

I have heard that childborth is rather painful and can affect my health negatively in many different ways. I am strugging to see what have the fetus done for me personally so that I owe it the obligation to go through that painful and potentially dangerous procedure?

Also, I do not see how avoiding painful experience can be “shameful”. People have been avoiding pain and suffering for centuries and only a few cultures required its people to go through pain to deserve to be “adults” or “warriors”, the rest of the world seemed to agree that pain is to be avoided. So, where is the “shameful” part in it?
4 January 2007
at 12:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“Also, late term human beings - how late? I am not confused about your views, I thought you were against all abortions.”

The monsters I speak of, Tiller and Hern, specialize in killing human beings 6 months to birth.

I'm against abortion-on-demand, as anyone in their right mind should be.

4 January 2007
at 12:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Just think, newhere, if you let the child live, you could beat him or her with a coathanger like Mommie Dearest. That way, you could avoid pain by inflicting it on the child but for a much longer time.

“So, where is the “shameful” part in it?”

You tell me, mother.
4 January 2007
at 12:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 4, 2007 at 12:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The “measures they plan to take” is called graduating, getting a job and growing up

=====

Not all. Or maybe not “unconditionally” conservative. Otherwise, how this election would turn out as it did? For example, my husband is over 50 years old, and he was voting Republican until recently (just as statistics suggest). However, after he learned that Bush started to mix together religion and government, he switched. He was very angry about it when he found that out and said he wished he knew that ahead of time or he wouldn't support Bush in 2000. This election he was delighted to see Dems gain numbers.

I think that there are those who are “unconditional” and “conditional” conservatives. The question is, will those post-grad students be “unconditional” and “conditional” conservatives?
4 January 2007
at 1:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 4, 2007 at 12:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm against abortion-on-demand, as anyone in their right mind should be.
====

I am sorry, I might be not well versed in this yet, but I did not know that there were abotions not on demand. Can you give me an example? I don't want to get confused and loose the point you are trying to make.
4 January 2007
at 1:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Multidisciplinary (Anonymous) says…

I haven't had time to read the posts, but how many people said this was a redundant miscarrige of justice?
4 January 2007
at 1:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 4, 2007 at 12:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Just think, newhere, if you let the child live, you could beat him or her with a coathanger like Mommie Dearest. That way, you could avoid pain by inflicting it on the child but for a much longer time.
=====

Beat his with a coat hanger to avoid pain? This conversation is going in a strange direction. Maybe I will call it a night.

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 4, 2007 at 12:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)”So, where is the “shameful” part in it?”

You tell me, mother.
=====
I am guessing that you are being sarcastic. I cannot answer since I am not a mother, but as a regular person, I cannot think of a reason why it would be “shameful” to want to avoid pain.
4 January 2007
at 8:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

I think we can all agree that RT doesn't add anything to the debate or conversation in general so he might as well be ignored. By then, he'll start begging to be provoked so that he can get himself kicked off again.

Fat lot of maturing you've done, RT.
4 January 2007
at 11:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

Kevin, is that you?
4 January 2007
at 11:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

No it's obviously Conservativeman AGAIN. Seriously, man, knock it off and get a life.

4 January 2007
at 1:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Apologies to right thinker. I mistook you for a lefty on one of my posts. Sorry for the insult.
4 January 2007
at 2:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

SC, seriously knock it off. Your idiotic tirades are nothing but a waste of time for the moderators to delete.
4 January 2007
at 4:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

SC, I've told you once I've told you dozens of times, stop referring to me as a woman. It's sexist and derogatory and my God I can't tell you how badly I want you to get bounced—AGAIN.
4 January 2007
at 5 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Crispian (Crispian Paul) says…

Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 4, 2007 at 1:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Apologies to right thinker. I mistook you for a lefty on one of my posts. Sorry for the insult.

That's funny. I love how liberals are seen as irrational, vehement conservative haters, yet, Boldaq apologizes not for insulting people but for insulting the WRONG people…..SO I guess it's OK then to insult people so long as they don't agree with you. I would posit it's not OK in general. Also, I was called “retarded” the other for making a succint and direct comparison between a full DNA strand being in a blastocyst to it also being in my hair or a tumor…hence what's the point? DNA alone does not equal a life. Yet, when I directly addressed PC_Conservativeman for referring to me as “retarded” he never answered. I think conservatives in general are simply scared to answer when someone makes a logical point versus simply an emotional appeal.

RT, why do you talk as if you know how ALL liberals think when clearly, you are not a liberal. That would be like me describing what sex is like for a man….
4 January 2007
at 6:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

I really enjoy the latest posts about “do-gooder communists”. Growing up and Russia, among real communists, it is really amusing to read some of this stuff. You guys crack me up. :))
4 January 2007
at 6:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

RT stop encouraging the troll to respond. The time has come for him to stop trolling these boards, violating the policies and giving us crap.
4 January 2007
at 6:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

That's sexual harassment. knock it off.
4 January 2007
at 7:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Where do you get the gall to say that because a ram exhibits homosexual behavior it should be destroyed? That is the most homophobic, violent load of BULL**** I have ever read on this forum! How DARE you!

4 January 2007
at 7:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldgranny (Anonymous) says…

So SE are you suggesting that someday we will be able to test for homosexual behavior in baby humans and have them aborted for if they show these tendencies? Because thats what it sounds like to me. Man you are one sick mf'er.
4 January 2007
at 8:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

What are your thoughts on torture, right_thinker? Government sanctioned torture, for example? Can a great nation participate in something like that? I hope you do not mind me asking.
4 January 2007
at 8:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldgranny (Anonymous) says…

But isn't the fact that we didn't use torture one of the things that sit us apart as a great nation right-thinker?
With all the things that those people have done to our boys over there-I think they deserve anything they get-I don't care what happens to them-but I do care how it reflects on our nation.
4 January 2007
at 9:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by right_thinker (anonymous) on January 4, 2007 at 8:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Torture them until they talk and torture them some more to see if they know anything else. Again, when were our enemies nice to us.

Torture–sure, torture away.
======

Hm.. Isn't what Saddam got execued for? That and for eliminating the “enemies” of his regime (not that we would ever do anything like that, of course). I guess he got executed for for nothing, then. A bit sad, I would say. I am guessing that some enemies dying during torture is OK as long as the torture saves some American lives, and also vindicates the fallen US soldiers. Am I right? Sanctity of ALL human life ends where our interest began, I guess. But whom am I to judge? I would not torture anyone, but I did kill a fetus. So I am not saying anything about anyone being selfish but myself.

But I was actually asking what do you think about torture against some American people? Just regular Americans?
4 January 2007
at 10:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

By “we”do you mean “Americans”? I am confused, someone here was from Italy or something like that. I am not paying attention, because I am busy with a few other things, I am sorry.

I do not know whether or not America had any business in any of those wars, I know almost nothing about the last 3 you named. WWII I know (I am from Russia after all), and I think that after Pearl Harbor US had to respond. Herasima (I am sorry for the spelling) was a proper and justified response to the slap of the face of American nation and it was a beautiful manifestation of American pro-life Christian values, so I am not arguing with that.

However, I was not questioning R_T about the appropriateness of involvement in any war, past of present. I was asking him what he thinks about torture.
4 January 2007
at 10:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

I am trying to look up the author of the saying “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”. Can anyone help? (I am not talking about anyone else, of course. Only about myself).
5 January 2007
at 12:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

SE I'm serious, stop mocking me immediately or so help me God you'll get bounced—AGAIN—so fast your head will spin.
5 January 2007
at 11:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksmoderate (Anonymous) says…

“S_C, since you're “not from around here” (wink, wink) I'll let you in on something.

A) your post makes zero sense (are you like a more dim, Italian version of Borat?).”

1 point awarded to Scenebooster!

5 January 2007
at 12:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

S_E,

You are right. I tend to answer the last question I read and move on, without responding to the question above the last.

The question was:
We should have left the Jews in concentration camps and allowed the germans to implement their final solution? By your reasoning we had no business in WWI or WWII, Korea, Bosnia, Kosovo, Etc. Hmm.

I addressed the war involvement (I said that I did not know about Korea, Bosnia and Kosovo, but that US had to get involved to respond to the Pearl Harbor), do you have any questions about that responce?

The concentration camps question puzzled me because I do not really see a connection between my question about torture and the fact that American (and Russian, I would add) soldiers freed prisoners from war camps. But if this question is not related to the torture discussion and it is just asked without any specific contest, then I guess my response is that I think that anyone helping the abused and the discriminated against (for whatever reason) is doing a good thing and I applause them. I do not approve of any inhumane treatment and discrimination, be it against Jews, Muslims, Germans, Japanese, Martians, homosexuals, transvestites (spelling?), fetuses, born, pro-choicers, pro-lifers, animals, birds, fish, or whatever. I think they all are equal to me and deserve the same respect as I give to myself. My thought is that if I ask them to respect me, I should make the first step and respect them as much or more as I ask them to respect me. I understand someone's need to kill me (in self-defence, for food, for money, etc). I would rather not be killed, and will try to make sure that I am not, but I would understand the situation. Plus, dying is a part of the cycle of life so to me there is no big difference whether it is going to be a bullet, a bomb, a car wreck, or old age. But I would not understand someone torturing me, because it is just an expession of one's mean spirit, not a necessity. So, the main thought is: I would not treat others the way I myself wouldn't want to be treated.

So, American soldiers freeing Jews? I am very proud of them. American soldiers totruring suspected terrorists? I am not proud of them at all.
Sorry for the long explanation.

And have this answered your question?

Now, my question about torture applied to Americans still stands. Remember, I asked that a while ago (that and about 7 other questions that I asked previously)?
5 January 2007
at 2:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Newhere I don't suggest responding to SE or SC anymore. Since they are the same moronic virgin sitting in his mother's basement laughing himself silly because he's gotten so many people here riled up. He obviously doesn't take anything here seriously and responding to him will just encourage him to mock and harass you (in every definition of the word).
5 January 2007
at 2:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Tychoman,

I actually enjoy my chit-chat with all three of them. My tactic is not to take myself so seriously and accept that fact that people do not have to act rationally to please me. Them being not like me is a big part of the beauty of life. In that light, almost all conversations are enjoyable. :)
5 January 2007
at 2:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Good luck sticking to that. I've been barking up that tree for 6 months.
5 January 2007
at 2:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Posted by signore_conservatore (anonymous) on January 5, 2007 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Torture is at times required.

If your daughter was kidnapped (lets say she is 10) by a pedophile and the pedophile is caught but won't divulge the whereabouts of your beloved daughter what next? Let's say for arguments sake she has 1 hour of oxygen left where she is being held. What then? The suspect is caught and without a body it would be nearly impossible to convict him/her. Do you resort to torture to save your childs life or do you just say “her life or death is just part of the cycle of life, oh well”.
=======
It is not “oh well”. It is that I think that torture is inacceptable solution to life's problems. To use various instruments to cause a live being (human, animal, whatever) to scream and struggle before my eyes in pain and dispair again and again and again until he or she “breaks” is painful to me. Treating another being like that would be a destruction of ME (as a soul), not my victum. Being the selfish person I am, I cannot allow that.

The incident with “panties” is humiliation, not torture. That was not done not to elisit info but for the amusement of the guards. I doubt that the professional interrigators who will be working with the prisoners to actually elisit information will use the panties and the leash.
5 January 2007
at 2:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Tychoman,

Thank you. The reason I think it is easier for me than it is for you is that you think it is important for you to change what they say, and I do not think it is important . The process of conversation itself is the pleasure.
5 January 2007
at 2:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

I'm not trying to change what they say, I'm outright trying to stop them from saying it. No matter how you look at it, it is harassment and discriminatory what they have posted in the past and I won't accept it. There's a limit and they break it with every key they press.
5 January 2007
at 3:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Wow. That really was fast. Thanks LJW!

5 January 2007
at 3:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Although next rightthinker and some other trolls are going to start whining and moaning about censorship on the boards, liberal bias of the media, etc. How many days before he's back? We might as well make some money off this :)
5 January 2007
at 4:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

Of course, I do not know what exactly S_C was doing here, but somehow I think he got what he was looking for. I think his hungry ego monster gets bigger and stronger with every such removal.

Tychoman, I am really impressed (with you and LJW). I didn't think your complaints would go anywhere. I was wrong. I think we all owe you a bit.
5 January 2007
at 4:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

Oh stop you're making me blush :)
6 January 2007
at 11:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Whether you're for or against abortions, the writing is on the wall folks. Phil Kline cares less about law enforcement & cares more about personal vendettas, like the one he has carried in that sick mind of his against Dr. Tiller. kline, get a life!
7 January 2007
at 12:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Kline isn't the only one who wants “Dr.” Tiller the Killer off the streets. Bill O'Reilly will put this monster out of the baby killing business and expose the corrupt, paid-off judges and politicians who protect him. Bank on it.
7 January 2007
at 4:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq, does O'Reilly have a license to practice law? he has no chance of getting Tiller off the streets any better than Kline. You & the other Kline lovers/Tiller haters get your heads out of la la land & wake up. Bank on this: IF Morrison, after taking office tomorrow decides to prosecute Tiller, at least he doesn't use politics as motivation, rather, he relies on facts. KLINE used hatred as motivation, therefore, his overconfidence has been & will always be (especially in JOCO) his weakness. eat my shorts, kline!
7 January 2007
at 5:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

Did boldaq just say Bill O'Reilly?
7 January 2007
at 6:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Yes, Reason, Boldaq referenced Bill O'Reilly!

7 January 2007
at 6:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Thank you Shadower. right_thinker, Kline hates Tiller, & abortion. He is a Republican, right_thinker, but there are many types of Republicans. There are the Republicans like Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island, then there are those like John McCain who do challenge the Republican base on bone headed ideas that are bad, & then there are Republicans like Phil Kline who thump the bible & use religion to promote their political agendas. It is the Phil Kline republicans that are Tiller haters & do not support women having a choice between having an abortion or not. They are the ones who want to blow up abortion clinics. They scare me.
7 January 2007
at 6:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

right_thinker & shadower, thank you both for providing a sort of balanced point of view. Thank you for partially backing me up as to why Kline is scary.
7 January 2007
at 7:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…

RT - I know I shouldn't be laughing, but at times you do exhibit intelligence, with a surprising good wit; and your last post was rather funny. Makes it all the more difficult to comprehend how you could be a right-thinker!
7 January 2007
at 7:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

H&c, eat your hearts out! We have a new duo: Right_thinker & Shadower! Applause please.
7 January 2007
at 7:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Alright, folks, this nail I am driving will rip people who support Kline to shreds: If abortion opponents like KLINE love to see abortion clinics blown up: Can you say Timothy McVeigh?
7 January 2007
at 8:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

I'm gone for 6 hours and I'm replaced? What the heck, man?!
7 January 2007
at 9:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Sorry, tychoman.
7 January 2007
at 11:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

I'm insulted. Bah. Fie on thee, posters. :) No really, I love this.

7 January 2007
at 11:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

tychoman, you're scaring me, (not!) Please explain.
8 January 2007
at 6:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Left wing whackos hate Bill O'Reilly for one reason - gut wrenching FEAR. We understand.

How many clinics did McVeigh blow up, rhd99?

dummy
8 January 2007
at 7:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq: Left wing wackos hate Bill O'Reilly because, as left wing wackos, they see it as their duty.

As For the rest of us, it may have something to do with the fact that he is needlessly divisive, over-powering, arrogant, and rude, and talks about things, such as the War On Christmas, that are blown way out of proportion, because, as a TV expert, sensationalism sells.

Or it may not. I suppose it would be silly of me to take a large group of diverse people and then randomly proclaim myself an expert of that whole group's motivations. Don't you think that would be silly, Boldaq?
8 January 2007
at 8:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

O'Reilly is not a politically correct talking empty head like the lefties on CNN and MSNBC. He'll debate anyone anytime. He doesn't just feed you propaganda. O'Reilly hashes it out with the opposition and let's the viewers decide who's FOS.

If you don't believe there's a war on Christmas, look around. A lot of stores won't even mention Christmas. It's “Happy Holidays” or “Seasons Greetings”. Saying “Merry Christmas” to someone on the street could get you a punch in the mouth.

And, if you haven't noticed, the L.W.W.'s have declared war on ALL Christians. Christian-bashing has become their favorite pass time.

The only thing being “blown out of proportion” is the left's rabid hatred of Christians. To deny that it's happening is beyond silly. It's stupid.
8 January 2007
at 9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

“Posted by boldaq (anonymous) on January 8, 2007 at 8:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

O'Reilly is not a politically correct talking empty head like the lefties on CNN and MSNBC. He'll debate anyone anytime. He doesn't just feed you propaganda. O'Reilly hashes it out with the opposition and let's the viewers decide who's FOS.”

At least, until he decides to cut their mic. Or yells at them to shut up.

If you don't believe there's a war on Christmas, look around. A lot of stores won't even mention Christmas. It's “Happy Holidays” or “Seasons Greetings”. ”

Holidays is a phonetic quickening of holy days, and is used to cover both Christmas and Chanukkah. Are you saying that even the jewish part of our Christian heritage isn't deserving of a little side mention.

“Saying “Merry Christmas” to someone on the street could get you a punch in the mouth.”

A picture is worth a thousand words, so just click the link.
http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0UADrAv…

“And, if you haven't noticed, the L.W.W.'s have declared war on ALL Christians. Christian-bashing has become their favorite pass time.”

Errrrr… wait, when did this happen? I must have missed this particular article. If you can link to the one you're talking about, that would probably help.

“The only thing being “blown out of proportion” is the left's rabid hatred of Christians. To deny that it's happening is beyond silly. It's stupid.”

No, it's common sense. What is both silly and stupid is to believe that a few talking heads that you encounter, either on TV or on the internet (or perhaps, in a senate seat), represent any more than the particular viewpoint of that particular person at that particular time, and the actions are just one amongst many times many. Do you think Bill O'Reilly tells you about the thousands upon thousands of Christmas pageants that get held all over the country, or the many stores who are still closed on Sunday and say Merry Christmas. Well, I suppose he might feature one, but you can bet if he did it would be shown in a way to make you believe it was the last vestige of goodness and light, held forth in a sea of liberal secular neo-progressive, etc.

Maybe the problem is that you get your view of anyone outside of your immediate social through online forums and television pundits. Since I don't know you I can't really make that assertion for certain.
8 January 2007
at 9:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

UKept (Anonymous) says…

boldaq,

If by debate you mean bouncing up and down, red-faced, shouting 'you're wrong, you're wrong!' then he's a master debater.

The problem is these shows (and these boards, for the most part) aren't about a reasoned exchange of arguments, but rather sensationalism and drama. And judging from the tone the latter half of your post, I'd say the right, for all it's whining about the liberal media bias, has got it's fair share of drama queens.
8 January 2007
at 9:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

“Wire-tap, check bank accounts, profile, do it all, I don't have a problem with it.

Torture–sure, torture away.”

Spoken like the true America hating, commie piece of crap that RT is. Why don't commies like you move to a communist country?
8 January 2007
at 9:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Hey, boldaq, bombing buildings, like abortion clinics is murder, dummy. Phil Kline & other whackos who support him want nothing better than to see Tiller dead. That's murder & Kline is an accessory to murder because his CLAN of anti-abortion BS artists want to blow up abortion clinics. cut the crap, Bill O'Reilly wannabe!

8 January 2007
at 9:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Oh, & one more nail in your side, boldaq, Christians DON'T support killing of anyone, let alone they don't hate anyone. That means blowing up abortion clinics. Sounds like you & Kline are a perfect couple. Talk about hypocrite, boldaq, you're the headline of hypocricy here. Live with it, right wing Kline supporting, Tiller hating, bible thumper. Have a nice day, everyone else.
8 January 2007
at 9:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

One more note here everyone, KLINE as AG is finished, today! take a hike, phil & supporters! hahahahahahaha!
8 January 2007
at 10:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“…Tiller hating…” - rhd99

Do you like Tiller? Why?
8 January 2007
at 10:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

boldaq, scenebuster asked you a question. answer it! why do you, boldaq, like Kline so much? I like Tiller because his view of life is balanced. He talks to people & listens to them. I can't say that about Kline, who talks down to his detractors & belittles them! Wow, what a man Phil Kline is, horse feathers!
8 January 2007
at 10:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

scenebooster, that's the thing. Like this whole Phil Kline propaganda, people who are like & support Philly Cream Cheese, like boldaq have no proof about illegal abortions, nor can they prove that we have victory coming in Iraq. Now, David Petraeus going out to Iraq is one heck of a way to be promoted to four star general, but at least he has experience going into this assignment. Now, at the risk of comparing apples & oranges, Phil Kline gets elected to Attorney General, & while he's there, does nothing to support consumer protection efforts, instead he's on a George Tiller fishing expedition which is illegal, given patient confidentiality laws that have been broken. Now, JOCO is a joke because they elected Kline to be the DA, when Kline has no prosecutorial experience going into the job. Choke on that, boldaq.
8 January 2007
at 11:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

By the way boldaq, you & other Kline supporters are being wire tapped.
8 January 2007
at 11:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“boldaq, you've been challenged on a number of points…”

Not challenged, harrassed.

I don't know Kiline but if he's against Tiller, I like him.

I could show you info about Tiller all day long but you childish whackos just stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and deny it. Tiller is a monster. He kills defenseless human beings for a living! Capeesh?

And it ain't over.
Special prosecutor Don McKinney has filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of Kansas against Sedgwick County District Attorney Nola Foulston and District Judge Paul Clark, on the grounds that they unlawfully usurped the authority of the chief law enforcement officer of the state, the Kansas Attorney General, and the authority of the Kansas Legislature, by improperly terminating a case lawfully filed by the attorney general.

Plus, Bill O'Reilly's on the case.

Choke on that.
8 January 2007
at 11:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Don McKinney is out of a job, as of TODAY, boldaq. He has no case. YOU have no case, instead just inuendos against Dr. Tiller, with no proof, other than illegal patient confidentiality breaches. Take your Bill O'Reilly claims, boldaq & stuff it!

8 January 2007
at 12:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kodiac (Anonymous) says…

“Successful coaches, like successful commanders in wartime, change plans frequently.” -RT

“You're not successful 'til you win–-so sort of like my conspiracy theory schpeel, how do you know if it is what it is until it's over and done? How do we know he won't be successful? Maybe he wont' be successful?” - RT

Quite the 180 there RT. First you imply W is successful and then you are telling Scene that it still remains to be seen whether W is successful.
8 January 2007
at 12:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Tychoman (Anonymous) says…

I can't believe this thread is still going.
8 January 2007
at 12:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Kodiac & others; in Iraq, the shuffle of commanders plus the shuffle of top uniformed officers in Washington, really doesn't amount to much. Now, having said that, putting Petraeus in Iraq is a good thing. The issue the Republicans will constantly be hounded by is this: Why did it take W. four years to realize that he needed to bolster the number of personnel in Iraq, when clearly retired General Eric Shinseki's appraisal of the situation in Iraq was right on? You see the pattern here, folks? Like Kline, it takes W. four years to realize that something is wrong, but that may as well be too late. W. realizes four years after the fact things need to change in Iraq. too late, mr. pres! Kline wanted Tiller investigated while running against Morrison for ks ag. in your face, kline!
8 January 2007
at 1:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Let me close with this: New faces & fresh ideas are prevailing in Kansas & throughout the nation as of today. Many people are taking oaths of offices for another term, while some are being sworn in for the first time. Yet, I am amazed that some are unwilling, beyond one's imagination, to admit that one side's ideas prevailed because the other side either neglected their duties or the ideas they tried to sell have been thrown into file 13 by the voters in November. Yet, has been wannabes like Phil Kline & his supporters don't get it. They can't sell their ideas to open minded Kansans. He used his office for personal gain to go after Dr. George Tiller using illegal means that he deemed necessary, & that includes breaking patient confidentiality laws through invasions of privacy. This was clearly a violation of the interpretation of the SCOTUS during Roe V. Wade. You who support Kline, (I won't mention any names, BOLDAQ), clearly showed that you have no respect for the law, & worse you have no respect for basic principles of freedom, liberty & privacy. Not only are you Un-American, but you are the antithesis of the American way of life. You disgust me & worse of all, you have no ethics. To you Kline supporters, forget you! Take your venomous rubbish that has poisoned our great state of Kansas & get lost!
8 January 2007
at 1:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Forgot one tiny little tid-bit from before, I mentioned the Un-American way of life. Those of you hypocritical Kline supporters who support bombing of abortion clinics are not only Un-American, you are below scum of the earth. You make me SICK!
8 January 2007
at 1:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Boldaq: “Not challenged, harrassed.”

Meh, let's not quibble over semantics. If you said something that was less ludicrously silly than “Say merry Christmas to someone and they'll likely punch you in the mouth,” then you might be worth a more specific challenge.
8 January 2007
at 2:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ihatejohntravolta (Laura Watkins) says…

the coach vs. commander-in-chief analogy frightens me. i'd hardly compare a football game to a war.
9 January 2007
at 10:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Logicsound, even without Mr. loser o'Reilly, Tiller can declare victory anyway. Those who have supported, in general what I have said on this particular message board about the ridiculous charges against George Tiller, thank you & everyone of your friends families, & neighbors for helping make Kansas a state to be proud of again. My final parting shot to the Kline lovers & Tiller haters is this: Your cronies lost. Don McKinney is out of a job. Phil Kline has NO authority whatsoever to go after Dr. Tiller, & I & other voters are proud to call Phil Kline LOSER! Oh, & one more thing, Kline lovers & Tiller haters, as a proud pro-choice voter, I DO NOT like the idea of killing babies myself, so get that through your heads!!! There are times that prospective mothers' health conditions could endanger their lives during pregnancy, & worse damage the health of their babies. You pathetic Kline lovers & Tiller haters, bombing abortion clinics is a crime, & if you think bombing George Tiller's clinic or any clinic like his, is going to solve any problems, may your pathetic lives in prison be reduced to guilt & shame! Everyone else, thanks again. Have a nice day!

9 January 2007
at 11:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“There are times that prospective mothers' health conditions could endanger their lives during pregnancy, & worse damage the health of their babies.” - rhd99

Fair enough. How do you feel about aborting healthy babies from healthy mothers?
9 January 2007
at 12:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

thank you, Scenebooster! Boldaq, YOU & the KLINE lovers & Tiller haters lost. What the mother does is between her, the family, the doctors & her God, It is none of the government's business, & most of all, it's none of your business! You & other illegal government intervention artists, go soak your heads!
9 January 2007
at 1 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Scenebooster, what you said earlier to boldaq bolsters my argument beyond recognition. Boldaq & the other Tiller haters & Kline lovers need mental evaluations. They are under the symptoms of classic denial when someone like “super phil kline” is shot down in the election. Their super hero lost because he lost the respect of the majority of Kansas voters. BOLDAQ, this is as plain as I can be: Kline lost, Don McKinney & other political hacks of Kline are OUT of a job. What a pregnant woman does is nowhere the government's business. it is none of your business either! Stop treating me & other pro-choice voters as though we advocate for baby killings. we don't! You & other advocates for bombing abortion clinics can take your hatred of Tiller & those of us who think that a woman has a RIGHT to make choices for herself & her family & shove it!
10 January 2007
at 12:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“You spout your Christian ideology all over the place…” - s'booster

You can discuss religion with someone else. I'm talking about abortion.

“why not leave this intensely personal issue to the individual and their God?”

When a human life is taken, it's everybody's business.
It's not the woman's choice you're worried about, it's your own. You want to retain the option of convincing your wife or girlfriend to kill your kid.
10 January 2007
at 12:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“Stop treating me & other pro-choice voters as though we advocate for baby killings. WE DON'T!”

Oh, but you do. You just “choose” to call babykilling 'choice', 'reproductive rights', 'a medical procedure' or 'abortion'.

“You & other advocates for bombing abortion clinics…”

I don't advocate bombing clinics. But, of course, it doesn't matter to you since pro-death types would rather talk about bombing, religion, Kline, the government or anything else but the ugly, brutal, shameful act of baby killing. Especially healthy babies from healthy mothers in the late stages of pregnancy - Tiller the Killer's specialty.

Tiller Is Going Down
10 January 2007
at 12:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

“When a human life is taken, it's everybody's business. “
So I assume you are opposed to the invasion/occupation of Iraq, opposed to capitol punishment, opposed to in-vitro fertilization, opposed to male self-pleasure (wasting all those potential babies-its in the Bible), opposed to menstruation, opposed to dying with dignity.

The pro-choice position is about women's right to control their bodies and their lives. Thats it.
10 January 2007
at 1:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

“The pro-choice position is about women's right to control their bodies and their lives. Thats it.”

Well, this discussion is about the 30 criminal charges against George “Tiller the Killer”, who is known world-wide for his late-term abortions, alleging he failed to follow Kansas law and performed abortions on babies that were beyond the age cutoff in state law. The charges also said he didn't have the proper medical diagnosis in the cases to legally allow the late-term abortions.
A women's first right is to be born.
10 January 2007
at 8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

World wide? Next time I'm in Italy or Amsterdam, I'll make sure to ask what their opinion of Tiller is. I'm sure I'll get some insightful answers.

When you exaggerate so much, what are we supposed to think about your supposed read on the actual facts of the case?

10 January 2007
at 12:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

Gee, earlier in this thread, it was about “the children”, until it was pointed out that “the children” who gave birth or were male weren't included.
11 January 2007
at 10:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Oh, Boldaq, how much did you bribe KLINE & Don McKinney? What's worse is you get the opinion of jacque chirac, who might have funded strippers at parties that Kline hosted that WE the taxpayers paid for. You're just as bad as Ruth Bader Ginsberg in citing international law as to how the Supreme Court should rule on issues that affect us here at home. you are such a hypocrite! Folks, let's get something straight here, Boldaq, Don McKinney, KLINE & all other right wing extreme nuts use fiction to determine what's right & wrong, but fails miserably in figuring out that everything the Kline right wing extreme nuts stand for top the charts in hypocricy. What worse, there arguments fizzle because there is no logic to their reasoning because everything they stand for is contradictory. What a stinken joke these people are. Boldaq, you are the weakest link. GBYE! Everyone else, have a nice day!
11 January 2007
at 11:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

Two independent judges have found probable cause to believe that crimes have been committed by the Tiller clinic. Thirty of those charges are summarized at: http://www.kansas.com/multimedia/kans….

Attorney General Kline filed those charges in Sedgwick County, but District Attorney Nola Foulston denied that he had jurisdiction and took it to District Judge Paul W. Clark who agreed with her assessment that she did not consent to the charges. Attorney General Kline then asked that the judge review his decision. District Judge Paul W. Clark dismissed Kline's request to review District Attorney Nola Foulston's throwing out of the charges against Tiller. Interestingly none of the charges or testimony were reviewed, only whether District Attorney Foulston had acquiesced to the charges. Her comment, “Our power and authority is to prosecute all of the crimes that occur within this county. You just can't walk in and make those things without having gone through the regular hoops.”

However, Kline states that he did seek her counsel and she did acquiesce only to reverse herself when the charges were filed. Kansas law states: “(i)f the testimony taken at an inquisition discloses probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed … the attorney general … may file such testimony, together with his complaint … against the person or persons alleged to have committed the crime … and a warrant shall there upon be issued for the arrest of such person … as in other criminal cases.” KSA 223103. (Remember that two independent judges found such probable cause in the aforementioned charges.)
11 January 2007
at 12:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

Kline was turned down for his request for unredacted records.
According to the DA of Sedgewick county, reporting laws were followed.
No successful prosecutions have occurred.
No known live birth records were requested. No known records were requested to search for STD occurrences in minors.
Consideration of the evidence was immaterial. The latest judge who ruled against Kline did so on procedural grounds.
Please provide evidentiary proof that Kline had permission to proceed.
11 January 2007
at 1:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

thank you deec:) Boldaq, your sensationalism about Kline's ethical investigations against Tiller show how short sighted people like you are. This case is closed, CHUMP!
11 January 2007
at 1:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Why is this case closed? Tiller disclosed all records. So, Boldaq, go back to your primitive Kline cave & get lost.
12 January 2007
at 12:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

boldaq (Anonymous) says…

I will assume Kansas Grand Juries are like those in many other states. If not, I'm sorry. But if so, at this stage, the defense does not present arguments. Only the prosecution does. Moreover, the standard of proof to obtain an indictment is not “beyond a reasonable doubt,” as at trial. Instead the standard is much lower, which can include basically “some evidence” of guilt. A common saying in the law is that a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. The fact that they did not indict, despite some palpable evidence of guilt, is disturbing on many levels and smacks of an “inside deal,” where less than the best evidence was presented.
12 January 2007
at 6:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Or… there was no palpable evidence of guilt, other than Kline shrieking that there was. I would say the lack of indictment shows an incompetent prosecuter, or a total lack of a case, or both.

12 January 2007
at 9:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

No, it's neither. The system worked. It produced a result you Boldaq & others hate. Too bad. Kline was incompetent himself. Amidst all the evidence he supposedly had, are you telling me that the prosecutor & that office in Wichita are all incompetent for disputing his claims? Look at what happened in Kline's office in Joco. KLINE is incompetent for firing a prosecutor with a high level of conviction rates, WHILE Morrison was in office. screw you kline!
14 January 2007
at 1:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Logicsoun04, thank you! End of line, kline krowing kreeps! See ya, see ya don't wanna be ya!
19 January 2007
at 2:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newhere (Anonymous) says…

rhd99,

In my opinion, your posts are very childish and petty.

Post a comment

Requires free LJWorld.com registration. Register or log in below.

Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

Post a blog entry

You have to be logged in to blog on LJWorld.com. Please log in or sign up.

Learn more about blogging on LJWorld.com.

Top ads RSS

Top jobs · Top rentals · Top transportation

Marketplace

Dash Salon Day Spa 785-856-1720

Find more businesses on Marketplace

Arts & Entertainment · Bars · Theatres · Restaurants · Coffeehouses · Libraries · Antiques · Services

Mangino's contract outlines probe November 21, 2009 · 39 comments
Blog: Palin Book Could Be Your Cheapest Source For Winter Fuel November 20, 2009 · 71 comments
Nation has right to ask ‘why?’ November 21, 2009 · 29 comments
Nothing to lose: Reeling KU huge underdog for a change November 21, 2009 · 17 comments
Poll: How much are you contributing to the United Way this year? November 21, 2009 · 10 comments
Palin stirs feminist ambivalence November 21, 2009 · 10 comments
Blog: We Noticed November 19, 2009 · 120 comments
Four decades in crisis mode November 21, 2009 · 11 comments
Mangino denies validity of former player allegations November 19, 2009 · 158 comments
On the street: Will you miss ‘The Oprah Winfrey’ show? November 21, 2009 · 13 comments

Mangino's contract outlines probe November 21, 2009
On target November 21, 2009
A sad story November 19, 2009
The cowboy way: Williamstown church ministry draws unique following November 21, 2009
Four decades in crisis mode November 21, 2009
Farmers' Turnpike reopens after four months of construction November 20, 2009
Lawrence couple excel in triathlons November 21, 2009
Meier mature, classy November 21, 2009
Center for East Asian Studies celebrates 50 years of accomplishments November 21, 2009
Commission votes against including gender identity in Lawrence's anti-discrimination policy November 19, 2009