Onward Christian Soldiers! - Kansas abortion doctor killed.

[Palehorse]

Technically, we are both projecting onto doctors what we "think" their excuses are for not taking care of these situations "privately" in the hospital. So I don't agree it's just about whacknuts. . .

I do not know about you but my "opinion" is based upon first hand knowledge. My sister is an administrator for a major metro hospital in Chicago. That is the ONLY reason the hospital does not perform elective abortion.

. . .Viability can't really be THE deciding factor, though... because lots of folks are not viable without life-support equipment, and we don't let them lay there and die.  In fact, society jailed Dr. Kevorkian for attempting to "allow" extremely ill people to decide for themselves they didn't want to live.

So... defective, suffering adults weren't allowed to end their own lives, but defenseless babies can be snuffed if the mother makes that decision. . . .

Apples and oranges; in one case it does not achieve the definition of "life" (fetus/parasite; no union of the two entities), in the other life has already been initiated and established (terminally ill). "In my opinion".

[Exterminator]

One of the deficits here is that documentation from Tiller's own website, as to his philosophy regarding the "health of the mother" as it pertains to mental, physical or... financial, has been removed from public viewing. A lot of this was posted at the Woodward News, which has also been removed from the web.

Why does it not surprise me that your proof is mysteriously missing?

Whether the fetus is healthy or not, I fail to see any proof provided that abortion is the easier way to assist an ill mother.

I can't give you any specific examples but the AMA has supported a position banning late term abortions of viable fetuses unless the life of the mother is in extreme danger.  This would indicate that your position of this never being the case is bullshit.

[Exterminator]

Furthermore, the left falls flat on its face when it makes the case against the death penalty for murderers and rapists, but then says we must allow the mother to end her own baby's life because of an inconvenience or illness.

And the right doesn't do exactly the same thing by claiming to be pro-life at the same time it advocates the death penalty and war?   

[Freethinker]

And the right doesn't do exactly the same thing by claiming to be pro-life at the same time it advocates the death penalty and war?   

Certainly that argument could be made. But if someone is genuinely guilty of heinous acts, they are not innocent... like an infant. So there's a big difference in the alleged hypocrisy of both stances.

Why does it not surprise me that your proof is mysteriously missing?

As missing as yours? LOL. What I'm saying is that Tiller's website, where info about his philosophy regarding the need for abortion, can't be Googled by anyone, because it has been taken down. Either way, it wouldn't be proof of anything. Just an opportunity to read and discuss his philosophy.

[Freethinker]

I do not know about you but my "opinion" is based upon first hand knowledge. My sister is an administrator for a major metro hospital in Chicago. That is the ONLY reason the hospital does not perform elective abortion.

Again, that would be HER opinion as well, as I doubt very seriously she knows what is really in the heart of every physician there.

Even so, THAT itself is not a good excuse.

IF society thinks abortions are okay, then privacy is key here, and keeping the procedure between the doctor and the patient... instead of sending her off to an abortion clinic that is surrounded by zealots. The abortion clinic itself provides fuel for the hatefulness.

But society hasn't decided anything. A minuscule few on the supreme court made that decision.

[Freethinker]

I can't give you any specific examples but the AMA has supported a position banning late term abortions of viable fetuses unless the life of the mother is in extreme danger.  This would indicate that your position of this never being the case is bullshit.

Apparently not. And I quote from you, "the AMA has supported a position banning late term abortions of viable fetuses unless the life of the mother is in extreme danger."

Hello... IOW, if the mother can get two doctors to say her life is in danger, then the abortion of a viable (or healthy) fetus can take place.

And I ask... what possible illness could a mother have that would make an abortion of a healthy fetus safer than delivering early and putting the baby in a premie unit, or doing a c-section?

[Exterminator]

Apparently not. And I quote from you, "the AMA has supported a position banning late term abortions of viable fetuses unless the life of the mother is in extreme danger."

Hello... IOW, if the mother can get two doctors to say her life is in danger, then the abortion of a viable (or healthy) fetus can take place.

And I ask... what possible illness could a mother have that would make an abortion of a healthy fetus safer than delivering early and putting the baby in a premie unit, or doing a c-section?

Why would they use that wording if such a possibility didn't exist?

[Palehorse]

. . . and keeping the procedure between the doctor and the patient... instead of sending her off to an abortion clinic that is surrounded by zealots. The abortion clinic itself provides fuel for the hatefulness. . .

I do not disagree in basis with this statement, however one look at what transpires at every clinic around the country and no hospital administrator or manager worth their salt would ever endorse the elective abortion procedure on campus, for the very reasons previously stated. And then there's the free speech thingy. . . so society must endure the zealots despite the fact they are wrong.

Hospitals long ago cast aside the philanthropics and today are nothing more than an extension of American business; each hospital's performance being gauged largely by profit level rather than compassion and caring for those in need. Performing of elective abortions on campus is widely (and correctly) viewed as a deterrent to business and profits simply because of zealots like the one that killed this doctor. (Who violated no laws and was legally performing an endorsed procedure).

The actions of the perpetrator in question in this case is a perfect example as to why hospitals stopped performing elective abortion for the most part, and it is what perpetuates the existence of clinics for elective abortion. Hospitals do not want to assume the unreasonable risk the actions of such zealous groups and individuals present.

And if you think a hospital administrator is "out of touch" with the opinions of doctors, you may want to speak to one on the subject one day. Doctors are very opinionated and do not shrink from sharing their opinions in a very direct manner.

Sure there are doctors that will not perform terminations, just as there are doctors that will not perform brain surgery, surgery in general, etc., etc., etc. Their reasons are their own, but it does not and should not negatively impact the ability of others to do so within the confines of the laws of the land.

[mcgonser]

I found it interesting that the Dr. was one of only three that perform late term abortions. Also that this Dr. had performed over 60,000 late term abortions. I do know Dr's personally and know that they do not believe in abortions except for the safety of the mom. It just seems that if this practice was so accepted by the medical field, there would be more doing them. JMO

[Palehorse]

I found it interesting that the Dr. was one of only three that perform late term abortions. Also that this Dr. had performed over 60,000 late term abortions. I do know Dr's personally and know that they do not believe in abortions except for the safety of the mom. It just seems that if this practice was so accepted by the medical field, there would be more doing them. JMO

McG, that 60k figure is propaganda put out there by the zealots. That figure is very much inflated and incorrect.

As I implied earlier, I am sure you will find doctors on both sides of this issue and that statistically it would be representative of the division within society in general however, it is still legal and necessary.

[Locutus]

McG, that 60k figure is propaganda put out there by the zealots. That figure is very much inflated and incorrect.

Actually, wasn't that figure thrown out there by the king of liars Bill O'Reilly? 

He would have had to perform upwards of 32 abortions a week, every week, and would have had to have started on day one when the Supreme Court ruled about 36 years ago.

I say again from my signature line:

One of the gravest dangers to the survival of our republic is an ignorant electorate routinely feeding at the trough of propaganda.

[Freethinker]

We don't really know what the numbers are, do we? Because any requests for statistical information is met with shrill cries that providing such would be an invasion of privacy, even when the government is only asking for data independent of the patient names?

[Exterminator]

So why not just make some up?

[Locutus]

We don't really know what the numbers are, do we? Because any requests for statistical information is met with shrill cries that providing such would be an invasion of privacy, even when the government is only asking for data independent of the patient names?

Perhaps we don't know the exact numbers, but do the math.  He would have had to have performed abortions at the rate I stated above every day with no time off ever since the Supreme Court ruled.  It's propaganda at best, and an outright lie at worst.  Billy O feeds his sheeple this kind of crap night after night after night and they keep coming back for more.  And even worse, I think he does it to incite. 

[Locutus]

So why not just make some up?

They don't need to do it themselves when they have Bill O'Reilly doing it for them.