Abortion Doctor Gunned Down at Church

[Kitschum]

Should we be on the look out for these anti-war terrorist organizations?

I even heard about that.

Have they released information on who did it? It could just be regular Muslims and then I guess they'd be technically correct in describing them as anti-war, as in anti some specific wars.

(Third time I try to post this. This forum is so ****ing ****)

[DinoDoc]

Out of curiosity, what specific sets of medical disorders appear as late in the pregnancy as the ones Tiller ended as a matter of course in his practice?

[MrFun]

Who is that question directed at, DD?

[SlowwHand]

Probably whomever can answer correctly.

[DaShi]

This is a prolife newspaper?

No, it is not. It is also not the source of your claims.

Thank you. I do feel it is a private matter, which is why I was arguing that it should be dealt with on an individual basis rather then taxing everyone.

Whether you feel it is private or not is only relevant to your own behavior. The point is that you acted against your own beliefs for the sole purpose to try to harm someone. Very christian of you.

[Gatekeeper]

You would be wrong. The majority of late-term abortions, just like all other abortions are done for reasons of convenience. Only about 1 percent of all abortions involve some form of disability or deformity, most of which are relatively minor

And, of course, the "other side" would cite statistics that are likely polar opposites to yours. So, in the end, if I want information that's anywhere near the truth, I need to find a nonbiased source. Probably governmental in nature. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure that Planned Parenthood, et al., don't release that sort of information due to HIPPA and other privacy concerns.

You touch on a subject close to home. I was a 'special needs' child. I am very thankful that my parents chose to have me knowing the risks that I might inherit a disability. None of us can predict or plan for a pregnancy where the child is disabled. The choice is simply, are we willing to accept what gift God has given us, or will we reject the gift altogether?

Everyone's life circumstances are different. You were fortunate to wind up with parents who did a more than capable job of raising you, Ben. Other children, perhaps, were not as fortunate. What is society to do in those situations?

I would not be willing to pay a dime more in taxation for the provision of these services.

Fair enough.

I would be more then willing to provide whatever assistance these families required personally, rather then taking money from other people by force.

That's an admirable trait. Unfortunately, it's obvious that a lot of other people do not share it, otherwise the abortion rate would be much lower. As a whole, society fails. However, individuals within the same said society can shine like supernovas. It, however isn't always enough for one man, woman or child to do what's right when it's not reciprocated by society as a whole. And that's a crying shame, because the folks who made a big difference in *my* life were those who led by example, and lived their values.

The solution, as always, is private charity. People should be willing to step forward with their own wallets to help people in these situations.

Yes, they should. But they don't in a lot of cases. I imagine it comes down to whether something has an immediate, discernable impact on their lives. After all, folks are more likely to lend a hand if a family member or friend is in dire straits — but that's not necessarily true if the suffering/need is more distant. And it's not just the abortion issue that this is seen in. Just look at the hunger in other parts of the world, such as Africa and parts of Asia. It's seemingly a chronic condition. It could be solved or greatly reduced with a concentrated effort, but it usually doesn't materialize. Again, because I think people don't identify with suffering/need unless it's closer to them.

Yes, it is black and white. I'm a survivor. The choice is either life or death for the child. There are no shades of gray, no nuances, no 'indeterminate state'. Life or death.

We shall agree to disagree, then.

Gatekeeper

[Kuciwalker]

Everyone's life circumstances are different. You were fortunate to wind up with parents who did a more than capable job of raising you, Ben.

[MikeH]

It makes plenty of sense if you think the guy is a serial killer and by killing him you'd be preventing many more deaths.

Which, really, is the correct belief if you are anti-abortion.

Well I guess it makes sense to blow yourself up to kill infidels if you are a muslim extremist nut-job.

Why should we give Christian extremist nut job beliefs any more credibility than we do them?

[Krill]

Not sure if this point has been made.

Kansas law makes it illegal to abort after 22 weeks without risk to the mothers life.

22 weeks is not truely viable. It is only partially viable, and then the majority of times with damage to the foetus. I'll try to find the facts this afternoon or tomorrow, bit busy with my last exam in an hour and a half though.

24 weeks is about the limit to give good odds to survival, and IIRC, 28 weeks and after the baby has good enough odds on survival to (IMO) not allow abortian except in cases that risk the mother.

Taking the above into account calling a abortion on a 23 week old foetus "late term" is politicizing the use of the word and removing scientific meaning from it.

[Patroklos]

Everyone's life circumstances are different. You were fortunate to wind up with parents who did a more than capable job of raising you, Ben. Other children, perhaps, were not as fortunate. What is society to do in those situations?

Why, obviously shovel them into furnaces. Ever wonder why so many children enter orphanages and so few leave?

[MrFun]

Another thought. Those who use words like "convenience" to describe or talk about a woman's decision to get an aboriton do a serious injustice to the emotional turmoil that goes in a woman's decision-making process to get an abortion. I'm betting that most women who do get an abortion do not make their decision lightly.

[MrFun]

Why, obviously shovel them into furnaces. Ever wonder why so many children enter orphanages and so few leave?

Here comes Pattycakes, to save us from barbarism and savagery (as if anyone here is arguing to shovel children into furnaces)!

[Arrian]

Despite that I feel that his murder was wrong, I feel no loss for this particular abortionist. The use of late term abortions as birth control is an abomination.

I agree that aborting late term (@ 22+ weeks?) for "birth control" reasons is ****ed up. However, based on the testimonials up over at the Daily Dish, it appears that women carrying fetuses with terrible defects (as in guaranteed short life lived in agony or guaranteed ~10 years of vegetation) traveled to Kansas for Dr. Tiller's services. How they stack up as a percentage, I have no idea, but for those women it wasn't "birth control."

I have a good friend whose wife just recently gave birth to twins. One of the two had a chromosonal defect and died a few hours after birth (he was ~2lbs, defective heart, defective brain, you name it). The other twin was healthy. If the scenario had been different - if the healthy twin wasn't there, I can't figure how the law should prevent a woman in her situation from deciding not to carry to term.

In other situations, I think the focus should be on reducing demand via birth control and adoption.

-Arrian

[Patroklos]

Another thought. Those who use words like "convenience" to describe or talk about a woman's decision to get an aboriton do a serious injustice to the emotional turmoil that goes in a woman's decision-making process to get an abortion. I'm betting that most women who do get an abortion do not make their decision lightly.

Its irrelevant as to whether it was done for convenience or not.

Here comes Pattycakes, to save us from barbarism and savagery (as if anyone here is arguing to shovel children into furnaces)!

Whats the difference? From what I can tell MikeH seems to think the decision for abortion has to do with the quality of life of the child. Note he seems to be oblvious to the debate as to what is a child and what is not, which of course is the real crux of the debate.

If we can abort children because their prospective quality of life is objectionable to the arbitrarly standards he just made up, why can't we run a clearing house on the orphanages of the world?

[MrFun]

Its irrelevant as to whether it was done for convenience or not.

Whats the difference? From what I can tell MikeH seems to think the decision for abortion has to do with the quality of life of the child. Note he seems to be oblvious to the debate as to what is a child and what is not, which of course is the real crux of the debate.

If we can abort children because their prospective quality of life is objectionable to the arbitrarly standards he just made up, why can't we run a clearing house on the orphanages of the world?

1. You're ignoring my point about the fact that for most women, it's emotionally difficult for them to go through an abortion. So many other men seem to think that it's a light-hearted decision for a woman to choose to get an abortion.

2. I disagree with MikeH on that - I don't think quality of life of a child should be a factor on whether or not to get an abortion except for SEVERE conditions. Even then, if such conditions can be determined in the early stage of pregnancy, I would be opposed to a woman getting a late term abortion later on.