Comments on: Getting at what Klineâ€™s trying to get at

By: Paige

Paige — Sun, 18 Sep 2005 03:39:37 +0000

I had an abortion at Tiller’s when I was only 13.I had been raped and I was 33 weeks pregnant.I am angry that he did not contact law enforcement to report a crime he knew had taken place.My rapist victimized once and Tiller did it again by destroying any evidence of the crime.

By: Jed

Jed — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:44:30 +0000

My mother went down to support Tiller in ‘92, and if she were still alive would be right there with me today! I’m proud of her, too!

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:20:00 +0000

oh, and congrats on volunteering at a clinic.

I’m sure your mother is very proud.

now I just feel ashamed.

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:19:25 +0000

I misspoke.no ‘release’the privacy policy.so my facts are correct.sorry for the mis-step.

By: Jed

Jed — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 20:58:39 +0000

Pointy,At the clinic where I volunteer, no such release is requested. The privacy policy does state that when the court subpoenas records, the clinic may be forced to hand them over.That’s a far cry from the blanket release you’re trying to imply exists.Get your facts straight! Oh, I forgot, you don’t want the facts straight, ’cause you make up your own to fit your argument.

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:06:29 +0000

does MIGHT = probable cause?

because if MIGHT = probable cause, I would agree with you.

unfortunately nobody else would agree with us.

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:05:01 +0000

I should say ‘they’ did sign an authorization.so did youso did Iso does everyone

know your facts.You don’t know me, so I may or may not be a moron. But the facts remain (facts above)you all still have not shown any FACTS that support your position.I respect your position, but in the arena of ideas, politics and law, you have to have facts.on this, there is no dispute.

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:03:20 +0000

the did sign an authorization.if you check when you first open up your medical records, you will see you must sign a document that states the hospital (or whatever) may turn over your medical records to law enforcement in an investigation (that is not the exact wording but the consent is there).

By: Vlad

Vlad — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:57:53 +0000

Pointy, of course I amuse you. You’re a moron and it doesn’t take much. Small things occupy small minds.See pointy, you just don’t get it. The liberal posters on this board are busy making sound points, and they’re just not comfortable about sinking to the level you republipukes do sometimes. I on the other hand, have no problem playing in the mud. So while my liberal friends make the points, I’m here to get you muddy.

Problem? Call 1-800-screw-you.

By: Jed

Jed — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:21:12 +0000

Hey Pointy,you wouldn’t happen to be another of Hank’s and Nathan’s playmates, would you?Yes, there are certain people and organizations that can see your health records, provided they have YOUR SIGNED PERMISSION to do so. And yes, law enforcement can subpoena medical records by showing cause to believe that a particular person is likely to have broken the law, and that those records are necessary to the case. This is not a carte blanc to look over (and share) the records of a whole class of people on the grounds that one or two MIGHT have done something questionable! What Kline is doing is not sanctioned by the law and shouldn’t be by the people.Oh, and I don’t find you amusing, just disgusting.

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:50:03 +0000

what same arguments am I reverting back to?you are the ones who bring up the same ole ‘fundamentalist’ argument, the same old ‘extreme right argument.’ its all so boring.and Vlad, you are insulting and a complete idiot. folks like you amuse me.if you want to be that way, fine. at least I sleep at night.

think about this point on access to medical records, which is what the kansas supreme court case is about:

different broups can gain access to medical records for a variety of purposes:

Insurance companies can request medical background information before authorizing a policy; buy information directly from hospitals for use in setting coverage levels.

The government may request access to health records to verify eligibility for Medicare, workers’ compensation or other assistance.

Employers may request medical information for insurance purposes.

Marketers may buy information from health-care providers to learn more about consumers.

LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN SUBPOENA MEDICAL INFORMATION FOR INVESTIGATIONS.

This is not extremism. This is where we are today in the law.You can argue motivations, conspiracies, et al.but the point remains.

This information was not recieved via a gop website or some right-wing blogger. This was gained from the Kansas City Star. Not exactly a conservative publication.

why is this case so special that the abortion clinics should not abide by the above precident?

By: Tara C

Tara C — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 04:16:36 +0000

By the way, I first heard about this story a few months ago, and now I can’t remember all the details…isn’t he trying to subpoena records of late term abortions AND abortions of girls under 16? Correct me if I’m wrong.

What makes this so bad is that everyone and their mothers knows exactly what this is about. Kline is pro-life. We know. He’d rather that abortions be illegal. I have no beef with that.

But a half-hearted attempt to be “concerned about child rapists” is just an insult to all of us. We see right through you, phoney.

By: Jed

Jed — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 02:44:26 +0000

Pointy,I keep reverting back to the same arguments because you fundies keep refusing to answer any of them!

By: Vlad

Vlad — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 02:24:32 +0000

Looks like either Hank is posting as Nathan, or vice versa. Triple X busted him over on the Pat Robertson thread.

By: Vlad

Vlad — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 01:52:34 +0000

Oh Poinsy….You haven’t proven otherwise.What’s your point?

No hate and angst, I just feel sorry for your pathetic delusion. There, there…it’s not your fault. The gop makes a habit using small-minded people like you; you’re the striength of their party.

By: Sum1

Sum1 — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 23:48:38 +0000

Rucker admitted in his statement that “at this juncture” they hadn’t subpeonaed any other facilities, only abortion clinics.That shows his focus only on one subject. Male sexual abuse victims would fall completely through the cracks he’s left open. Sex abuse is a subject that would be worthy to tackle.If he was really interested in helping minors with sexual abuse he’d have a wider scope.

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 23:44:27 +0000

so much hate and angst. I feel bad for you Vlad.

anyway, you haven’t PROVEN to me how this actually takes away a woman’s right to chose and abortion.

By: Vlad

Vlad — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:35:15 +0000

Capt. Poinsy, I’m insulting? You’re blind. I gave you your answer twice and in typical republican fashion, you go off on a tangent.” I thought this was a thoughtful forum.”Have I dissapointed you? I’m crushed!

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 21:48:14 +0000

OK. Vlad is just insulting.and Jed just reverts back to the same old hack arguments.

if anyone really wants to get into the issue, feel free to post.if you want to rant unreasonable assertions, then go ahead.

I thought this was a thoughtful forum.

oh well. too bad.

By: Jed

Jed — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 20:47:27 +0000

If it’s about abortion, there are straightforward legal means to amend the constitution. Being sneaky,lying bastards goes against the religion that they intend to promote, and is an admission that they don’t have the support to do it legally, and so must resort to subterfuge. Immorality is necessary and acceptable to make everybody be moral against their will? Come on!

By: NoJoCo

NoJoCo — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:51:52 +0000

Yes, it’s about abortion. I’m glad he’s pushing it!

By: Vlad

Vlad — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:06:52 +0000

By the way, NoJo, did you know your wife calls you “shrinky-dink”?

By: Vlad

Vlad — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:05:41 +0000

What “reproductive rights” are being attacked (or stopped) by a normal judicial/law enforcement procedure?”

OK, gotta spell it out for the right-wingnut:The right of a woman to have control over her own body. Let’s not be foolish. This is ALL about abortion, otherwise, the idiot would be going after hospital and school records.

NoJo…The Baby Impaler? Ask your wife what I “Impaled”.

By: NoJoCo

NoJoCo — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:58:22 +0000

Vlad, The Baby Impaler

By: captain_poindexter

captain_poindexter — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:53:54 +0000

you can call folks names, Vlad, maybe you have personal problems, I don’t know.

But the question still remains.

What “reproductive rights” are being attacked (or stopped) by a normal judicial/law enforcement procedure?