Archive for Tuesday, May 8, 2012

House bill bans indirectly subsidizing abortions

May 8, 2012


— The Kansas House on Monday approved a bill designed to prevent the state from subsidizing abortions even indirectly through tax breaks, but the measure’s chances in the Senate appeared uncertain.

The bill was adopted by an 88-31 vote. The measure would prohibit Kansas taxpayers from claiming abortion expenses under a deduction for medical costs when filing their income taxes. It also would deny tax breaks to abortion providers, such as an exemption to the sales tax that nonprofit groups claim when purchasing goods.

The House has a strong anti-abortion majority. Abortion opponents also appear to have a majority in the Senate, but that chamber hasn’t reviewed the legislation.

Senate Majority Leader Jay Emler, a Lindsborg Republican, said it was unlikely that senators would approve the House bill without taking a look at the measure in committee first.

“It’s a pretty extensive piece of legislation,” Emler said.

Senate President Steve Morris, a Hugoton Republican, said he would decide later in the week what to do with the bill and how it will proceed as the session nears the conclusion of its 90-day limit on Friday.

Mary Kay Culp, executive director of Kansans for Life, praised the measure’s passage and said concerns raised by critics were unfounded.

“This common sense bill simply insures women have access to medical information compiled by Kansas health department professionals, protects human dignity in civil law, prevents Kansas taxpayers from subsidizing abortion, and poses zero threat to medical school accreditation,” Culp said.

Rep. Lance Kinzer, a leading House supporter of the bill, said he thought it stood a good chance of passage in the Senate if there was enough time for the chamber to consider it. The House debated the bill before it broke for the weekend, and he said that the strong vote was “largely expected.”

“It is certainly our hope that the balance of the week or so that we have left that the Senate will take it up,” said Kinzer, an Olathe Republican. “If they do, given the past history, the likelihood that it will pass would be strong, but I also know we’re short on time. We’ll have to see what happens.”

Critics charged that legislators had overreached in passing the bill, saying that it takes the decision about a woman’s health out of her hands, while creating unknown tax code consequences for businesses and residents.

“Access to scientifically accurate sex education will also be diminished, women will be provided a false guarantee of financial support, and we will see blatant state-level government intrusion, dictating what products the private insurance business can and cannot sell,” said July Burkhart, founder and executive director of Trust Women.

The measure also would prevent state employees, including doctors-in-training at the University of Kansas Medical Center in Kansas City, Kan., from performing abortions on state property or state time.

The Medical Center worried the accreditation of its obstetrics and gynecology program would be in danger, and lawmakers added a provision saying its medical residents could do abortions off-site, on their own time, for a year. But the Medical Center wants a permanent exception.


Mike1949 6 years ago

Again, the Kansas House Attacks women's rights and freedom of choice. The laws we have in place work just fine. I guess dictatorship has many faces!

KS 6 years ago

Women's rights are still in place. They are just not going to be subsidized by the taxpayer. You want an abortion? Pay for it yourself.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

They aren't being "subsidized by the taxpayer". I suggest you do a little research.

Paul R Getto 6 years ago

Hmmmmmmmmmm.........can we apply that logic to our BS endless wars? Those who want one can pass the hat until there is enough money to fight another day.

tomatogrower 6 years ago

Paul, the conservatives don't even want to pay for the wars they support. Don't make me pay taxes, but, hey, I support wars and the military. Don't make me pay taxes, but, hey make sure my roads are smooth. No such thing as a free lunch, but they sure want it don't they?

mom_of_three 6 years ago

but they want to prevent the medical school from teaching it. That's so ridiculous!

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

No, it is ridiculous that you want the taxpayers to fund abortion training, killing and dismembering the unborn should not be funded by big government!

chootspa 6 years ago

How about we want women having a miscarriage to not die because their doctors didn't learn how to handle the situation in medical school?

Brian Laird 6 years ago

"You want an abortion? Pay for it yourself."

Then by that logic then churches shouldn't get tax breaks either. "If you want to go to church, pay for it yourself".

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

Just because you do not agree with them does not make them dictators! Forcing taxpayers to fund abortion related activities is the real tyranny.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

Taxpayers aren't funding abortion. In fact, this law is taxing it.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

There should be no tax-deduction for any kind of expenses related to killing and dismembering a unborn child in the womb. This type of thing has been characterized by liberals as a subsidy on the national level.

jafs 6 years ago

You'd rather have the government tax the procedure and get money from it?


kujayhawk7476 6 years ago

Naturally. The right-wing whackos ride again! Throw the bums out...every conservative House and Senate member and the worthless governor need to go! Our state is becoming a laughing stock. Btw, I'm a registered republican, but I'm beginning to wonder why.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

This state was a laughing stock when liberal Sebelius was in office. Remember her when she hosted George Tiller the late-term abortionist for a reception in his honor at the governor's mansion? Remember her when she helped to get Tiller to funnel millions of dollars to ruin the rebutation of Phill Kline a very good Attorney General? Remember when they raised the State sales tax even after promising that no taxes would be raised. Remember when they inserted the liberal agenda into almost every area of State government? Remember that Sebelius is still working her agenda on the nation, now from Washington, limiting our freedoms and expanding the Federal government! Remember all thos things before you even begin to suggest that conservatives are the problem--no liberalism is the problem--RINO''s are the ones that need to go!

Carmalee Winebrinner 6 years ago

That's odd.

I thought Kansas was a laughingstock at that time because of the "Intelligent Design" fiasco.

And Phil Kline didn't need any help to ruin his reputation. He was the one who disobeyed direct orders from a judge. He was the one who took home private medical records and copied them for distribution to his anti-choice buddies. He was the one who violated legal ethics and nobody twisted his arm. The Kansas bar is about as right wing as you can get, and they ruled against him.

Kathy Theis-Getto 6 years ago

kj Keep telling those lies people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it. Wash, rinse, repeat... Wash, rinse, repeat..................................

Pastor_Bedtime 6 years ago

To you Bob Dole is a liberal. To you Phill Kline is a hero, alongside Tiller's murderer. And ferret-faced Kline did a fine job smearing his own name. Wasn't he disbarred? Maybe his Liberty Univesity experience means he's qualified now to take the role of Morality Czar. RINOs indeed.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

I do not and have never support the use of law breaking or violence as you suggest. I do support holding people accountable at the ballot box.

KS 6 years ago

Normal people have got it. When you grow up you will understand.

Paul R Getto 6 years ago

Now, now, KS. Be nice. FHNC is just playing a part in this grand play. I think his main objective is to make sure quotation marks are not forgotten. We could make this site into a Jacobean dramatic production. For example, FHNC could play Sir Benjamin Backbite and, perhaps, our own Nancy Boy could play Lady Sneerwell. Just a thought, and don't feed the trolls, which--sadly--I am now doing. Need to take own advice......

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

This is not...get that? NOT...denying taxpayer funding of abortion. On the contrary, it's direct taxation OF the procedure; the only healthcare procedure that has been directly targeted for taxation. In fact, this taxation applies even when the procedure is being done to save the life of the mother, putting women in the position of being taxed for having their lives saved. Imagine having taxes charged if this were a coronary bypass operation or even a heart transplant. Imagine paying taxes on chemotherapy drugs. This legislation also mandates codified fraud by the state, requiring all abortion providers to tell their patients that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer. This "link" was debunked by no less than the American Cancer Institutes and it's a "link" that has been rejected by the World Health Organization. Finally is that portion of the bill that permits, absolves and protects any physician that withholds critical healthcare information from a woman about her own health and the health of her fetus if that physician feels that information will be used to abort a pregnancy. This puts women in the position of having their health and the health of their children at very grave risk. Prior to Brownback taking the governorship of Kansas, the state ranked ninth in maternal mortality and morbidity in the US. This is actually pretty good. Since then, the state has been steadily sinking. This is not good. Now, somebody, please tell me, there is no "War on Women" in this state.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

The rejection that you speak of has only come because of the intense lobbying of the abortion industry. The fact is that there have been study after study that indicate negative health consequences to abortion related to breast cancer. It is amazing that those who worship at the altar of abortion on demand refuse to admit that there might be just a little bit of risk or some possible negative effects from abortion. Sad that to them abortion seems to have become a sacrament.

Carmalee Winebrinner 6 years ago

None of those "studies" you are referring to have survived examination by peer review. They are all as worthless as the paper you last used to wipe your backside.

My life was saved by an abortion. I discovered I was pregnant for the first time at 10 weeks, and my tube ruptured at 11 weeks. My blood pressure at my house was 70/50. By the time I got to the emergency room, an automatic BP monitor could not get a reading. I needed emergency surgery and 5 pints of blood. And now you have the nerve to tell me that I make this operation a sacrament?

Well, perhaps I do. IT SAVED MY LIFE.

Which is more than I can see coming from any of the measures in this piece of BS bill heading to the State Senate.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

Abortions to save the life of the mother have been excluded from all of these laws. Your circumstance would not have been effected.

Liberty275 6 years ago

This comes down to a left/right issue. I come down squarely on the left and am pro-abortion, right until birth. That said, you women's health rights advocates abandoned us in our fight for private property rights during the smoking ban, you abandoned our ability to decide whether to wear seat belts and handed the choice over to government, you helped shoved thru a parking garage attached to a library for downtown business owners and a bus system we don't need. Further, you cheered when American idiots were taken to court for nothing more than speaking there opinion.

I'm as pro-abortion as any of you, but it's good to see you get a little bit of what you sat back and watched them do to other Americans. Hopefully now you will wake up an realize the government isn't your friend and reflect on those times you laughed when other people's rights were destroyed.

They are coming for you now. In my opinion, you are getting what you deserve.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

So, because in your paranoid delusions of believing that women are responsible for the fact that you have to wear a seatbelt and can't smoke in a bar anymore you think they should die for that? That's a pretty harsh punishment, don't you think?

Liberty275 6 years ago

You list off your beliefs regarding the smoking ban, the T, seat belt laws and phelps. What are they?

I know you had nothing to do with them, but I don't recall any of you hardcore leftists taking a stand on the side of freedom regarding those issues. The libertarians (who are pro-abortion) did make noise, but the left cheered the government and traded freedom for a miniscule blotch of security.

jafs 6 years ago

I support the smoking ban, for public health reasons.

The T was put to a vote - I would have voted against it, except that my wife, who works with dd folks, explained that the T-lift would suffer if the vote didn't pass. Otherwise I wanted to vote against more funding for it.

I generally oppose seat belt laws, except that I'm concerned about parents not wearing their seat belts, who wind up killing kids - if people want to kill themselves, that's their business.

Phelps is complicated - I generally support his right to speak, but think that there are other issues, involving where and how he does so. There's a certain point at which speech is also action, and can veer into harassment, or intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Liberty275 6 years ago

Jafs, you have honest opinions, and I appreciate that even when I don't agree with them. But you are not who I was talking to. Your philosophy isn't based on talking points passed out by the political party that promises to give you what you want in trade for supporting the oppression of others, a special interest group or sheer hatred for the guy you didn't vote for.

Just keep being Jafs. This argument isn't for you.

jafs 6 years ago

That's the nicest thing you've ever said to me :-)

mom_of_three 6 years ago

There is no such thing as pro-abortion.
Its called pro-choice - the ability to choose what an individual wants to do with their bodies.

And I was against the smoking ban. Its should be up to the individual owner what to do with their property

Liberty275 6 years ago

I'm pro-abortion, on demand, during all stages of pregnancy because what a woman does with her body is no business of anyone except her, and if she is aborting a child, the doctor.

If you need a euphemism for abortion, then feel free to use one. I can do without it.

If I missed your opposition to the smoking ban, I'm sorry. I'm old and can't remember everything that everyone writes. I mostly had the likes of cait, merril and bozo in mind when I posted. You should hang out with Jafs.

mom_of_three 6 years ago

If what a woman does with her body is her business, then its pro-choice. Because she is CHOOSING. She can choose to have one or not. Choice. If she wants to give it up for adoption, then its her choice.

I don't need a euphemism for abortion, because I am pro-choice - the right for women to choose. and if THEY choose abortion, then they would be PRO-abortion. Not me.

Liberty275 6 years ago

You are pro choice? OK, What if she CHOOSES to smoke meth? How about if she CHOOSES to rent out her body for sex? How about if she CHOOSES to route the vacuum hose from her car's exhaust into the passenger compartment and listen to some tunes as she dozes off?

There's an old cliche that say's "libertarians are pro-choice on everything". I tend to agree. I'm pro-choice on everything.

I have a wide definition for "pro-choice". "pro-abortion" is a more specific subset of that definition. This thread is about abortion and not the wider concept, hence I use the more specific phrase.

We agree on whether a woman can terminate a pregnancy, and you are right, it is a choice. A libertarian would never force or coerce another person to do anything, including terminating a pregnancy.

I'm not sure how much we agree on the other bits and pieces of being "pro-choice" although your opposition to the smoking ban fits in nicely.

It isn't a big deal. You use the words you deem appropriate, and I will too. We have no argument.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

It's all about the words isn't it? What difference does it make if one calls himself pro-abortion or pro-choice the result is the same thing. A legal system that allows for the dismemberment and killing of the unborn. The pro-life community wants to build a life-affirming society in which each member is welcomed and nourished from conception to natural death. This has been the traditional Christian position on the issue of abortion for over 2000 years!

mom_of_three 6 years ago

Pro choice is not the same as pro abortion.
I dont think I could ever have one. BUT I am not about to make that decision for someone else. Its their choice.

Carmalee Winebrinner 6 years ago

Yes, it is all about words. The pro-life community is not pro-life. It is ANTI-CHOICE. They would go so far as having women thrown in jail for a MISCARRIAGE. This is already happening all across the U.S. already! They would, and indeed have stated they would, refuse an abortion even to save the life of a mother. One of their spokesmen has specifically stated that he believes an ectopic pregnancy is survivable. In their perfect world, I would be dead. I never wanted to have an abortion, but I wanted to LIVE. It would have done absolutely NO GOOD for me to have said "No, save my child!" We would have both died.

One of the biggest single reasons (besides the inalienable right to decide what to do with her own body!) why abortion was legalized was because so many women were getting injured and even dying from botched abortions. In larger cities, hospitals had whole wards filled with women healing after the butchering that was called back-alley abortions.
Keeping the procedure illegal didn't slow the machine down one darn bit.

And if the "pro-life" community wanted to build a life-affirming society, then why are they so hell-bent on dismantling all of the social safety nets to keep people alive and well?
No welfare. No food stamps. No WIC program. No Head Start program. No reduced fee lunch program. Keep that pregnancy going till it's born, then good luck feeding it and raising it to adulthood! Take the log out of your eye!

Liberty275 6 years ago

"It's all about the words isn't it?"

Not so much. I reserve the phrase "pro-choice" to mean the individual liberty to make all decisions regarding one's body. Pro-abortion is a subset pertaining only to abortion. Lots of abortion advocates abandon choice when it comes to other things a woman might do with her body. They aren't pro-choice, they are pro-abortion. If they need the prettier word to insulate themselves from the ugly business, that's OK, they can use it and I'll know what they mean.

In the end you are right. It makes it legal to dismember and kill an unborn... child, human, baby, parasite, fetus... choose whichever word you want.

It's an ugly procedure that ends in the death of an innocent entity. It's a horrid thing to support. But suppressing personal freedom in general is even uglier. Abortion is the antithesis of of our species' goal, making it a crime against the collective of humanity. Even so, if we are all to be individuals instead of numbers or part of some lowest-common-denominator collective, we must refrain from trying to control the actions of others (with the caveat that everyone affected by that action can and does consent).

As for God, if you are lucky enough to talk to him and he told you right from wrong then good for you. He doesn't seem to want anything to do with me so I have to rely on my own judgement.

chootspa 6 years ago

Ha ha. You got us. We all have exactly the same opinion on each and every regulation, and therefore, women bleeding out when their doctors don't know how to handle an emergency D&C is exactly the sort of punishment we deserve for wanting to keep from breathing in second hand smoke when we eat pancakes.

Liberty275 6 years ago

I didn't get you. You got yourselves. If you had fought against laws and ordinances that curbed liberty, and your elected representative listened to you, a neanderthal like brownback and the right wing thugs that passed this insipid and probably unconstitutional law might never have been elected. You pushed, the other side pushed back. Newton's third law of politics.

chootspa 6 years ago

Or, you know, you're making a crude generalization and missing the point with a totally off-base analysis.

Michael LoBurgio 6 years ago

kansas teaparty republicans strongly defend individual freedom, but that freedom doesn’t include a woman’s right to decide her own healthcare needs.

77% of anti abortion leaders are men 100% of them will never get pregnant!

Teapartys are for little girls!

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

I disagree with your statistics--the most pro-life people on earth--are women and mother's who have had children. The backbone of the pro-life movement is the strong Christian women like Sarah Palin and other's who have walked the walk on the life issue and still stand strong!

tomatogrower 6 years ago

Ladies, before getting a OB/GYN, draw up papers for him/her to sign that demands that they will fully disclose all medical conditions found during all tests and that if they don't disclose everything, they agree to be sued for malpractice. I'm sure there is a sympathetic lawyer out there who could draw up the legal papers. If the doc refuses to sign, find another doctor. Those women in Western Kansas don't have many options to find another doctor, but many of them voted for these fools, so I don't feel very sorry for them.

Hooligan_016 6 years ago

It's amazing we have gotten to the point where it might be necessary to draw up a contract between a patient and their physician to receive the care you may or may not need.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

First of all these are not --"fools" --they are pro-life legislators and they are doing the right thing for Kansas. What you are talking about with all of this liability is not the pro-life issue but the medical malpractice issue which you should really lay at the feet of the trial lawyers! By the way the trial lawyers in Kansas tend to support Democrat liberals whenever they have the chance--lacking that they support Rino's--not the conservatives!

jafs 6 years ago

You miss the part of these bills that makes it ok for doctors to withhold information, and mislead their patients.

If they didn't include that sort of thing, there'd be no need to get a doctor to sign such a statement.

tomatogrower 6 years ago

So kjayhawk, you think it's ok for a doctor to withhold the information to a pregnant woman that she has cancer, because she would have to decide to get treatment for cancer or continue her pregnancy? Some women would make the choice for the pregnancy and take her chances. Others would decide to save her own life and terminate the pregnancy, but it is her choice, not yours, and not her doctor's. It is immoral for a doctor to withhold information to a patient, and if they want to do that, they should go into another business. Let them become preacher, maybe. Of course, unless they get on TV, they can't make as much money, can they?

Maddy Griffin 6 years ago

$400? Where? Abortions R Us? Hey GOP. Where are the jobs??

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

The state doesn't need no stinkin' jobs when they can rake in all that cash from taxing abortions.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

"Senate Majority Leader Jay Emler, a Lindsborg Republican, said it was unlikely that senators would approve the House bill without taking a look at the measure in committee first."

Given that this was a "gut and go" of a bill already passed by the Senate, I'm surprised that Emler said this. There is no "taking it to committee". All the Senate has to do is affirm it.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

Seriously, do these people think we're stupid? I know a lot of people aren't familiar with the dirty tricks our legislature plays on people but gimme a break.

somedude20 6 years ago

We already pay for the rich to get richer and for (non-human) corporations to make greater profits, so why would the cost of health care be more of a burden? If a female can write off the costs of having her baby, then the costs should be written off when she needs to have an abortion

"• In Kansas, 61,900 of the 553,596 women of reproductive age became pregnant in 2008. 68% of these pregnancies resulted in live births and 17% in induced abortions"

jafs 6 years ago

That's a very good point.

And, since they oppose social programs, it's almost certain these folks will wind up criminals, and we'll get to pay for their housing, etc. in jails, which is very expensive.

So much for "pro life", huh?

chootspa 6 years ago

There's already an association between legal abortions and drops in the crime rate, so yes, it's very likely the crime rate will go up in the future. Good job.

JayhawksandHerd 6 years ago

That's OK, I'm sure Governor Sam and company will just call on their private-sector buddies to build more jails. If we're really lucky, we'll get to subsidize them.

Joe Hyde 6 years ago

The Kansas legislators who get so heated up committing repeat assaults on women's reproductive rights keep doing it in the "male superior" position.

What about stopping repeat abortions from being performed on each woman targeted? Do these legislators have the courage to tack a rider onto this Bill whereby the state of Kansas shall identify the male who impregnated her and compel him to undergo sterilization by means of vasectomy or castration, then deny any tax write-off for the medical procedure the male is forced to undergo?

If they're unwilling to equally penalize the male citizen whose sexual activity is partly responsible for the abortion being performed, then their failure to do so reveals these legislators to be just a mob of women-hating cowards.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

I disagree with your characterization of the issues involved.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

Norma McCorvey never had an abortion and in later life became a lesbian.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

I should reword that. Norma McCorvey never had an abortion and in later life came out as a lesbian, thus negating the necessity for ever having one. So what's your point? That she changed her mind? Whoop-de-do. Lots of people do.

chootspa 6 years ago

She prayed the gay away, too. I guess she changed her mind about everything.

chootspa 6 years ago

She prayed the gay away, too. I guess she changed her mind about everything.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 6 years ago

This is the slippery slope. These republican terrorist facists are out to emulate the National Socialist party as it was conceived in Germany in the 1930's. Over the top you say? Study the ravings and rantings of Rush Limbaugh and then study Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi probaganda minister. These tea baggers want to get government out of our lives, so they say, but in reality, they want to establish a facist state governmnet that had dictatorial rule over all of us. Think not? Keep voting for these facists and see where we end up. No one will invade the U.S. to drive out the facists as we did in WWII for Europe.

gudpoynt 6 years ago

Damn, there goes another big tax write off for us.

If we paid taxes that is. Which we don't.

But me, my girlfriend, and her 3 kids from 4 different fathers need all the government help we can get. The state helps pay for our 2br basement apartment, as well as our medical bills, which so far this year have consisted only of one trip to Health Care Access a couple days after Lil' Dwayne got bit by a brown recluse. He's fine. Pretty gnarly scar, but he thinks it's cool.

gudpoynt 6 years ago

We had the special T bus come pick us up because I have a disability pass due to my excessive weight... 415lbs and counting baby!

After the boy got all patched up, we got a ride over to your house and stood on your lawn.

Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

Real "pro-life" there, guys. Real "pro-life".

gudpoynt 6 years ago

Precisely. Personal responsibility.

When one person lacks it, like me and my girlfriend, another person's surplus whooshes in to fill the void.

Currently, my girlfriend lacks the personal responsibility to see a pregnancy to term. She whines that raising 3 kids without a father or steady income is hard enough.

So it's a good thing that we have a veritable fountain of personal responsibility pouring down on us from the state legislature.

Now, the next logical step, is for them to impose upon my girlfriend the personal responsibility to not get pregnant in the first place, which of course requires limiting access to contraception in every way possible.

Also, they are sure to bequeath the personal responsibility of securing enough resources for her to adequately provide for the children she already has, in addition to those that are sure to be on the way soon. Naturally, they will accomplish this by eliminating the EIC, increasing restrictions on foodstamps, fewer after school programs for her kids, etc. etc.

Don't you see? Sometimes the only way to compel someone to pick themselves up by their bootstraps is to threaten to take away their boots. Sometimes women need to be compelled to have babies before they learn how to not become pregnant. And sometimes the best way to prevent women form becoming pregnant is by limiting access to birth control.

Confused? I am not surprised. I wouldn't expect a self-professed "woman", such as yourself, to understand it. Suffice it to say, Professor Rockchalk and the rich white men and women in the KS legislature he supports, know which way the moral compass points. It points in a direction that no vagina ever could.

Some people here feel that Professor Rockchalk's commentary could best be valued in units of cow pie (4 C.P. = 1 B.S.). But although they may wince when he opens his gaping, virtual cakehole, there is no denying that he hits the remarkably phallic-like nail on its ever so sensitive head.

After all, me, my unwed girlfriend, her 3 kids, and our quintessential government mooching lifestyle are living, breathing stereotypes that fulfill all of the self-righteous fantasies that his insurance-covered Viagra allows him to have.

gudpoynt 6 years ago

That's my Rockchalk, doling out personal responsibility until it hurts. You are a good, good man.

Have you ever thought about being a professional personal-responsibility-giver-outer?

Alas, I don't dare get a job. That would disqualify me for so many great government handouts, and then I would cease to be the perfect stereotype for all of your astute and poignant rants -- worth 1 cow pie each (or 1/4 B.S :-)

Liberty275 6 years ago

"3 kids from 4 different fathers"


Cait McKnelly 6 years ago

I'm just loving the misogyny dripping from your posts and the replies to them.

Carmalee Winebrinner 6 years ago

Four links-what was that formula someone listed earlier?
Four pieces of cow-pie equal one piece of B.S.

You have to apply through your congress person to get listed on a tour schedule. Here's the link from Senator Moran's office:

jafs 6 years ago

Thanks - I figured it was something like that, but didn't want to take the time to research it.

kansanjayhawk 6 years ago

I'm really growing tired of liberals in Kansas just using name-calling and calling people "nutcases" or another term. This really does not further the debate on these issues! The focus should be on the fact that the law is being changed to eliminated any tax payer financing or support of abortion! No one should have ever had any kind of a tax deduction for killing a child! This legislation will bring important reform to an area that has needed work for years--the Tiller years are over--the era of late term abortion is over. We now must begin building the culture of life!

jonas_opines 6 years ago

A quick glance at this very thread alone shows that the name-calling is quite inherent to both sides. So why are you only growing tired of it coming from the liberals?

jafs 6 years ago

You're not really interested in debate - your mind is clearly made up, and generally speaking you must repeat yourself over and over again saying the same thing, using a lot of exclamation points!

gudpoynt 6 years ago

sometimes you have to debate really loud because other people are trying to debate over you!!! Duh!!!

You claim your arguments are "rational", but we enlightened soldiers of Christ can read the subtexts of your "rational" lines. They are written all over the walls you have built between yourself and the grace of God, and they go a little something like this:

"Down with culture of life!!! Long live culture of death!!! Murder babies!!! We are the claws of Satan!!! May our grip on the currency of human souls never loosen!!!"

The true meaning of your truly misguided intentions are as plain as blood stains on an Angel's wing. The only way to "debate" such a vile argument as yours, clearly poisoned by the Devil's sly whispers of doubt and skepticism, is to drown it out with the one true word of God.

And the best way to do that is to relentlessly advocate the Truth with as many exclamation points as possible, and use it to clog public Internet forums like a high-efficiency toilet after a cheesecake binge.

The Truth can be hard to digest, and hurt like hell when if finally comes out. But you will find, it is solid as a rock.

jonas_opines 6 years ago

Nope. I have, on a number of occasions, challenged the same crap coming from the left side of the forum, in particular when those posters say the same thing as above, that they're "tired of the name-calling". But I'm sure, given your inability to see past what you want, that you somehow managed to not read those.

"You're not really helping, just in case, through some twisted and tortured logic, you thought that you were." Directed at ragingbear, for anti-religious, pointless rhetoric

April 25, 2012 at 12:41 p.m

"When comparing the Big 3, so to speak, I usually find at least a few things in Will's columns that at least provoke a little bit of sound thought, and I often agree with a number of his premises and conclusions. He actually seems to think about things before he writes them."

April 12, 2012 at 10:10 a.m.

"Yes, it would be nice if both sides of this (Trayvon Wilson) incident would try and calm down their listeners and followers and ask them to allow the legal system to function, rather than inflame them in one way or another.

Of course, that's not good television, and they have advertising dollars to think about first.

April 12, 2012 at 7:50 a.m.

It's the kind of crap that Math (R) and FHNC (R) and Observer (L) do on here All the Time -- laying out labels for large and potentially all-encompassing demographics, that can then be fitted or not fitted to anybody depending on the conveniences of the moment. It's cowardly."

April 11, 2012 at 11:29 a.m.

"The Koch brothers are NOT at all unique in either being involved in politics or trying to buy politicians. (Neither, for that matter, are Republicans unique in being bought and influenced by powerful groups or corporations).

So why does this one group get so much attention? Perhaps it's just that they're from Kansas?"

April 11, 2012 at 6:47 a.m.

"Dancing on graves is never pretty, and the fact that other people do it doesn't make it any more so." (Andrew Breitbart thread)

March 2, 2012 at 9:42 a.m.

jonas_opines 6 years ago

Ah, gee. No response.

/surprised //not

Pastor_Bedtime 6 years ago

So you really don't trust your women to behave in the way you believe your scripture demands, and will need to control them with law. And you as an individual will place your "christianity" over your fellow American's private decisions. Your goals don't end with eliminating abortion, as your other posts show. Birth control is also a no-no to you. I'm sure "adultry" will also be a government priority too. It's nice to know that we have a new self-appointed leader whose big government will do all our thinking for us. Thank God I and other taxpayers get the privilege of funding your vehicle of domination.

JayhawkFan1985 6 years ago

The American Taliban strikes again!!!

Amy Heeter 6 years ago

Ha! Soon all the children will live.

Kathy Theis-Getto 6 years ago

Cait - could you respond to our favorite artichoke please? I don't think I can take it today. It is a beautiful day here, my handsome husband's birthday and I just don't want to spoil it all.

overthemoon 6 years ago

Where is the information on the 'other bill' passed by the Senate. Its MUCH worse than the one reported on.

oldbaldguy 6 years ago

this what happens when you have defacto one party rule. i suspect when this is challenged it will be ruled unconstitutional. having said that, i do not agree with abortion for birth control, gender selection or taking out downes babies. you get the government you vote for.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.