In the beginning, the Roe v. Wade decision “was more about protecting doctors than empowering women,” Kansas City Star columnist Barbara Shelly wrote. She noted how Justice Harry A. Blackmun, who wrote the 1973 opinion, was concerned that physicians not face criminal charges for acting in the best interests of their patients. “The decision vindicates the right of the physician to administer medical treatment according to his professional judgment,” Blackmun wrote in his opinion. But, Shelly wrote, the decision “has not protected physicians from determined protest groups, overzealous prosecutors and cold-blooded killers.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- Phantom on Open thread 11/21
- Phantom on ACORN stole election?
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- janeeyre on Bad timing on mammogram recommendation
- Raptor on Open thread 11/21
- janeeyre on Open thread 11/21
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
92 Comments
Oh Hell,
Another Tiller thread.
Would you honestly expect Brownlee to come up with any commentary, interesting angles, etc…you know, like a journalist supposedly does for a paycheck…of something of than cutting & pasting someone else’s Tiller angle??
Yep, another Tiller Killer thread.
The Roe decision protects a doctors rights to pull a living and feeling baby through the birth canal to just inside the opening. This places the babies head in a handy spot to take the pliars (foreceps) and crack open the babies skull, insert the tube (cannula) into the cracked open brain, and suction out the brain materiel to ensure the baby is dead before any part of it is removed from the mothers body.
Return of the Tiller thread, the re-visitation of Tiller, Part 18, Chapter 20
Did ya’ll notice they managed to get it back on the front page today too, with the article on the Colorado late term provider?
Funny to me that the amazing angle Brownlee found was about how Roe was really all about protecting doctors, not women’s rights…huh…guess all the women’s rights advocates need to change their advertising materials, because according to them Roe was all about rights to privacy/body of women. So which is it Brownlee? Of course the other interesting ironies, like that Roe herself is actively pro-life. Or that Margaret Sanger (a flaming racist & ardent eugencist) was actually against abortion calling it “barbaric”. Huh..by their own definition, sounds like some friendly fire…shooting from the back of the column….pure unadulterated hate speech. Weird how those angles are nearly as interesting to Brownlee as a dualistic argument that just diminishes the whole purpose that women have been claiming Roe served since ‘73.
And the nose trouble crowd takes the field.
If you don’t like abortion, don’t have one.
I won’t Bluejay. But isn’t it refreshing to know that another good catholic, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, is joining the team?
Sotomayor upheld the Bush administration’s implementation of the Mexico City Policy, which states that “the United States will no longer contribute to separate nongovernmental organizations which perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations.” Sotomayor held that the policy did not constitute a violation of equal protection, as “the government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position, and can do so with public funds.”
Yeah ok BlueJay…
If you don’t like carrying concealed in a National Park, just don’t do it. Right?
Meanwhile, you will support the CHOICE of others to do so?
(You can’t even follow your own logic…)
The decision to terminate a pregnancy has a direct effect on exactly one person.
Allowing people like you to carry guns into the National Parks will destroy them for everyone except people like you.
BlueJay,
And once again, how will allowing people to carry concealed “destroy” the National Parks?
The decision to terminate a pregnancy has a direct effect on many people. The mother, the unborn child, AND the father. Nevermind those family members involved as well and the MILLIONS of people who believe that the unborn child is being killed as well.
I guess you forgot about all of them…
Awww, is another Tiller thread making the terrorist supporters upset? Perhaps you guys should tell your friends to stop killing people and these threads might go away.
Maggotpunk,
Killing people? So far the tally is 4 vs 40 million on killing people.
Why don’t you tell your friends to stop?
“I guess you forgot about all of them…”
No, they just have no right to make a woman’s decision for her.
And you do realize that in a feeble attempt to make me a hypocrite, you fully confess to your own flaming hypocrisy?
I suspect I know the REAL
reason why you are “pro life” Nathaniel. But your expressed reason is that abortion offends “God”.
Then let “God” stop it.
BlueJay,
I never attempted to make you a hypocrite here, but I am curious as to how you think I made myself one.
(I should enjoy your contorted exercise in logic)
BlueJay,
Instead of making up things, why don’t you focus on what I actually say?
I have never said that I believe abortion offends God or that is the reason why I oppose it.
It really doesn’t merit further exploration.
A woman’s right to choose is established in law and has been for more than 2 generations. That is not going to change. What COULD and should change is “pro life” people actually trying to help women choose life instead of trying to force it on them. But since most “pro life” people are dishonest in their motive, I am not optimistic. Rather I am confident that I could drop this pointless debate now and pick it right back up again in 10 years.
Nathan whines,
“Killing people? So far the tally is 4 vs 40 million on killing people.
Why don’t you tell your friends to stop?”
Oooh, 40 million people. Somehow I’m thinking you are lying again. You must be, you’re posting something. Are you upset because another one of your neo-Nazi buddies got busted?
Some of you for obvious reasons desperately want the Dr. Tiller story to go away. Some of you have been backpedaling as fast as you can ever since the good Doctor was murdered. Some of you who openly or indirectly advocated his death now want that personal responsibility you preach to be directed anywhere but yourselves. Believe me, that story won’t go away. We will keep the memory of his life, his service and his death at the hands of the antis’ hatred alive for a long, long time!
Maggotpunk,
You were the one who started “whining” about killing people.
Jed,
Preach it! LOL *Eyeroll*
Okay Nathan, starting naming some of those 40 million people that have been killed.
I’m thinking after the recent killing 40 million people would have been noticed. With those many deaths a lot of my side must be in prison by now. I’m wondering who has been doing all this killing and why nobody has taken notice?
Oh right, it’s because Nathan is lying again. Typical of a neo-Nazi, American hating coward.
Maggotpunk,
Irrelevant. Having a name is not what defines life. Nor is my knowing the names of those killed a requirement to know they were killed.
Okay, Nathan can’t name one person out of 40 million who has been killed. Proof positive that Nathan is a liar.
Maggotpunk,
Do you deny that nearly 40 million abortions have taken place since Roe v Wade? Are you really that ignorant?
Nathan has been punked and has been proven to be a liar. So he will just post with nothing but whining and excuses. So I will not respond since he will not post anything of substance. No need to feed the lying Nazi troll.
Some of you who openly or indirectly advocated his death
Do you have a link to anyone on this blog that can support this?
Maggotpunk,
LOL. You are hurting my feelings. Please stop. LOL
I have not lied anywhere here nor have you proven such.
You on the other hand? You have lied many times and every time run away like the coward you are rather than admit it.
Something tells me Brenda Landwehr or Norma McCorvey aren’t willing to resign their jobs and turn themselves in to the authorities to be tried for murder
Okay, Nathan can’t name one person out of 40 million who has been killed.
________________________________________
I’m pretty certain that at least one was named Joe and at least one was named Lakisha.
ah…maggot…..maybe you should tell your friends to stop kiliing babies and these threads would go away……….
bluejob…………and 30% of those 2 generations were terminated
maggot actually the number is greater than 50 million………..
Is it any wonder the anti-abortion group gets pi*sed off? Just look at the attacks on Nathan on this blog for DARING to take a stand against those advocating Pro Choice.
Nathan has been calm, cool, and collected. The Pro Choice group? Not so much. Attack, name-call, belittle.
maggot……..tiller did 60,000……………..they probably had names ……………..but i admit i don’t know them
hick,
“…………and 30% of those 2 generations were terminated.”
Count yourself lucky. That 30% would now be eating your slice of the pizza.
“American_Way” snivels –
“Attack, name-call, belittle.”
Like no CON poster to WE Blog have ever resorted to such tactics.
Kwitcher damned whining and stop trying to make the abortion issue a religious or moral or spiritual or partisan propaganda issue.
I’ve tried to engage in the only way this matter of public policy can possibly be resolved in a constitutional democratic republic.
Instead of cutting-and-posting lurid accounts of “baby” slaughter; “Pre-Born Porn.” Instead of quoting scripture. Instead ginning up vigilante violence and getting the twice-born to the polls….
Let’s talk about how public policy should be approached, how it should be written, how it should be enforced.
jed…..thanks..i really didn’t realize how “bright” you were………however why couldn’t i look to you to share your pizza?
or monkey
hick,
I already shared mine.
jed…..i REALLY doubt it……….you were probably 1st in line, grabbed what you wanted and hid the rest in the fridge……….have any coupons left?
Jed,
Then you too should count yourself lucky. Tiller would be eating your slice of the pizza…
Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one.
Don’t like gay marriage? Don’t get one.
Don’t like Jews? Don’t go to a synagogue.
Don’t like Muslims? Don’t go to a mosque.
Don’t like “liberal media?” Don’t watch it.
Don’t like Democrats? Don’t vote for them.
In the meantime, shut up.
I ask about public policy and get “pizza” snarks?
Thanks for your CONtributions.
mon/………what public policy do you advise…………….now keep an open mind……
MonkeyBaby,
Thank Jed.
ws…..don’t like prolife, don’t like rebublicans, don’t like christians, don’t like the 2nd amendment., don’t like bush,…………etc………..then shut up
Well, Hick, my positions do not interfere the rights of others. I don’t dislike Christians – my daughter and her family are Christian – but I am not Christian myself. I do not dislike Republicans, I just disagree with many of their positions.
And I support Second Amendment rights – I own a gun.
What happened, boy?
Did “Jed” make you post your snark to me about pizza?
“whichhick” –
I’ll type slowly so you can keep up –
What is your public policy goal?
What are your public policy proposals to achieve that goal?
ws….so what was your point
“In the meantime, shut up.”
Don’t like the first amendment? Scroll over.
mon……..i’m typing slow…..what is your public policy goal………….. you brought it up, but i asked 1st…….you surely have a prepared answer
Monkeyhawk
Posted June 17, 2009 at 11:46 am | Permalink
Let’s talk about how public policy should be approached, how it should be written, how it should be enforced.
________________________________
Quit hurting the Cons’ brains. Thinking is not what they do best. Witness the village idiot they elected president (twice!)
““American_Way” snivels –”
You know Monkeyhawk you can be anything you want on the blogs. Big man, name-calling, etc…
I can waste space using words like you do too. Any idiot can.
WS Clark,
One need not look very far into your positions to see where they most definately will interfere with the “rights” of others.
The abortion issue for instance.
Your stance does interfere with the rights of the unborn child. (i.e. you don’t think the unborn child has any rights)
Monk,
Their long-term goal is to turn our Constitutional government into a theocracy. Anti-abortioning is just a tool to that end, along with beating up on gay people, liberated women, atheists, agnostics and other people’s religion.
They promote (their) prayer in schools in hopes of destroying either the schools or the Constitution, both of which stand in the way of their power grab.
They of course say that this is god’s will, but each of them assume that they will be god’s personal spokesperson, and that anything they want to do will then be god’s will.
There needs to be a Supreme Court decision that protects all people.
Oh wait, that would mean reversing Roe.
Jed
Posted June 17, 2009 at 1:03 pm | Permalink
==========================================
Jed, lay off of the peyote.
jed……take ws’s advise…………
“village idiot they elected president”
I hear libs regurgitating this koolaid line quite often. It’s a funny. I get it. But as often as the uniformed keep re-winding the tape recorder and typing the same words provided to them by others, over, and over again.
I’m wondering if there is any documentation to substantiate the claim?
Or is it just a funny one liner that any monkey or someone of the lowest order in the classification of mental ret*rdation repeats? The words of a simpleton?
And wouldn’t that just be the pot calling the kettle a blockhead?
“American_Way” gives us –
“I can waste space using words like you do too. Any idiot can.”
And on that basis, you’re certainly qualified.
Imagine the outrage everyone shares now you’ve told them I audaciously am “…using words</b< (!)…” in a text-based forum.
I’m guilty, “American_Way.”
Interpretive dance simply wasn’t working out for me.
No one ever responded to my marriage-equality grand battement en cloche.
(Darned weak ankles.)
“RFL” proposes –
“There needs to be a Supreme Court decision that protects all people.”
Define “people.”
“American_Way” poses –
“…is it just a funny one liner that any monkey or someone of the lowest order in the classification of mental ret*rdation repeats? The words of a simpleton?”
I guess I’m the target du jour today.
Cite when I ever said something along the lines of “Shrub’s moved to Dallas. Crawford is missing an idiot.”
Except for just now.
Damn!
You out-smarted me!
You’re a sly and crafty adversary, “American_Way.”
Actually Monkeyhawk, my post had nothing to do with you. I was responding to satatom 12:58 post.
1. Overturn Roe v Wade
2. Recognize that the unborn child is a human life worth protecting
3. Stop abortion for conveinence
4. Prevent all abortions except those which are deemed life threatening to the mother.
That a good start on policy for you DumbestMonkey?
“Nathaniel” provides his agenda –
“1. Overturn Roe v Wade
2. Recognize that the unborn child is a human life worth protecting
3. Stop abortion for conveinence
4. Prevent all abortions except those which are deemed life threatening to the mother.
That a good start on policy for you DumbestMonkey?”
And your policies and strategies for achieving those agenda points, boy?
I’ll address your goals as soon as you present a policy-related process you have to achieve them.
Monkeyhawk seeks to know how to define “people”.
“People” is synomonous with Human Being.
To Protect all “people” means to protect the life of every person by law. Equal protection means every person is protected from all life ending acts by anyone.
This of course includes people who are not yet born but are still alive by all definitions applicable.
Alive: having life : not dead or inaminate
An unborn child unharmed in the mother’s womb can not be described as Dead. Alive is the opposite of death, therefore, an unborn child is alive and is in fact human. It is an alive human being and is therefore worthy of equal protection that American jurisprudence claims to uphold. American laws ensuring equal protection are based upon the 14th amendment in US constitution.
Therefore, Roe V Wade is Un-American and needs to be reversed to protect the life of every human being which likewise would remove the freedom to take life from every human being who may be so inclined.
Just a little side note about Jane Roe and most would be abortion seekers attempting to say anything to justify the need for an abortion:
In 1970, attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington filed suit in a U.S. District Court in Texas on behalf of Norma L. McCorvey (under the alias Jane Roe). At the time, McCorvey claimed her pregnancy was the result of rape, but she later claimed she had lied.
Don’t like abortion? You’re a hater.
Don’t like gay marriage? You’re a hater.
Don’t like Jews? You’re a hater.
Don’t like Muslims? You’re a hater.
Don’t like “liberal media?” You’re a hater.
Don’t like Democrats? You’re a hater.
“1. Overturn Roe v Wade
Unrealistic. Not going to happen in the foreseeable future. The last election guarantees virtually guarantees that Roe is settled law for the rest of your life. This reality may make you uncomfortable. But solutions to problems do not come from useless fight.
2. Recognize that the unborn child is a human life worth protecting.
I used to think so too. Then I found out that MOST “pro life” people do not care about the baby OR the mother one second after birth. Too, this would give the unborn rights superior to the woman carrying.
3. Stop abortion for conveinence
SAYS the person who thinks single mothers should be scorned? Parenthood is an AWESOME responsibility. You can’t inflict it on the unwilling and it would be most inhumane to try. So even if you accomplish the impossible, who raises the kids?
4. Prevent all abortions except those which are deemed life threatening to the mother.
Ignores history. Abortion was a reality before it was legal. In the information age, it would not be long before there was yootube video on how to do an abortion. This point is also illogical since you have already subordinated the rights of the woman to the rights of the fetus.
I am sorry for my cynical view as to most “pro life” people. But it comes from personal experience and observation over many years. I deplore seeing such resources and passion (honestly based or otherwise) WASTED when so much more productive good could come of it.
That a good start on policy for you DumbestMonkey?”
“American_Way” snivels –
“Attack, name-call, belittle.”
Like no CON poster to WE Blog have ever resorted to such tactics.
Kwitcher damned whining and stop trying to make the abortion issue a religious or moral or spiritual or partisan propaganda issue.
I’ve tried to engage in the only way this matter of public policy can possibly be resolved in a constitutional democratic republic.
Instead of cutting-and-posting lurid accounts of “baby” slaughter; “Pre-Born Porn.” Instead of quoting scripture. Instead ginning up vigilante violence and getting the twice-born to the polls….
Let’s talk about how public policy should be approached, how it should be written, how it should be enforced.
“Nathaniel” provides his agenda –
“1. Overturn Roe v Wade
2. Recognize that the unborn child is a human life worth protecting
3. Stop abortion for conveinence
4. Prevent all abortions except those which are deemed life threatening to the mother.
That a good start on policy for you DumbestMonkey?”
And your policies and strategies for achieving those agenda points, boy?
I’ll address you goals as soon as you present a policy-related process you have to achieve them.
“RFL” offers –
Monkeyhawk seeks to know how to define “people”.
“People” is synomonous with Human Being.
To Protect all “people” means to protect the life of every person by law. Equal protection means every person is protected from all life ending acts by anyone.
From “all “life-ending acts?
Capital punishment?
War?
“Justifiable” homicide?
Self-defense?
Just where do YOU draw the line, “RFL?”
That’s what public policy is supposed to be about: drawing lines.
You?
This of course includes people who are not yet born but are still alive by all definitions applicable.
By “all definitions?”
Sounds like you are a conceptionist.
But there are plenty of other definitions.
Specify your defintion.
Alive: having life : not dead or inaminate
An unborn child unharmed in the mother’s womb can not be described as Dead. Alive is the opposite of death, therefore, an unborn child is alive and is in fact human. It is an alive human being and is therefore worthy of equal protection that American jurisprudence claims to uphold. American laws ensuring equal protection are based upon the 14th amendment in US constitution.
Okay.
Let’s consider your concept of “An unborn child unharmed in the mother’s womb….”
What about those fetuses which — through genetics, bad luck, external violence, a hormone imbalance… — are actually “harmed” in the womb?
“…Roe V Wade is Un-American and needs to be reversed to protect the life of every human being which likewise would remove the freedom to take life from every human being who may be so inclined.”
What, exactly, is “Un-American” about acknowledging an individual’s right to her body?
“Just a little side note about Jane Roe and most would be abortion seekers attempting to say anything to justify the need for an abortion:
In 1970, attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington filed suit in a U.S. District Court in Texas on behalf of Norma L. McCorvey (under the alias Jane Roe). At the time, McCorvey claimed her pregnancy was the result of rape, but she later claimed she had lied.”
So what was McCorvey’s motivation?
And what’s her motivation today?
Free hotels and air travel? Speaker fees at Illegal Abortion Advocates’ meetings?
It leads to the oldest cliché in the movies:
“Was she lying then or is she lying now?”
Thanks for your input.
monkwuk……since you didn’t answer it is obvious you have no public policy (actually you are having a hard time finding out what someone tells you what to say)…….multi-tasking……….can’t handle?…dud
Roe v. Wade was an illegal federal edict based on a pile of lies, and not on our Constitution. It will be overturned and cited forever as the worst act of U.S. federal government ever conceived.
Monkeyhawk,
When are you going to post something relevant?
Monkeyhawk
Posted June 17, 2009 at 1:23 pm | Permalink
“American_Way” poses –
“…is it just a funny one liner that any monkey or someone of the lowest order in the classification of mental ret*rdation repeats? The words of a simpleton?”
I guess I’m the target du jour today.
Cite when I ever said something along the lines of “Shrub’s moved to Dallas. Crawford is missing an idiot.”
Except for just now.
Damn!
You out-smarted me!
You’re a sly and crafty adversary, “American_Way.”
American_Way
Posted June 17, 2009 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
Actually Monkeyhawk, my post had nothing to do with you. I was responding to satatom 12:58 post.
“Roe v. Wade was an illegal federal edict based on a pile of lies, and not on our Constitution. It will be overturned and cited forever as the worst act of U.S. federal government ever conceived.”
BlueJay sings…
“When you wish upon a star…”
I know it’s probably been a REAL long time parkay. But you need to see if you can find reality again and get reacquainted with it.
See? You are in parkay world.
Population: 1
And while there would certainly be millions of people who would join you in parkay world?
They’re still a minority and we still have rule of law.
“wichhick” tries –
“…since you didn’t answer it is obvious you have no public policy (actually you are having a hard time finding out what someone tells you what to say)…….multi-tasking……….can’t handle?…dud”
Nice little name-calling addition, there, at the end.
Frankly, my approach to public policy is pretty much the status quo.
You CONs are the ones wanting to change things.
To what goal?
How do you propose to achieve that goal.
wich hick is just another dumb Republican that couldn’t light a fire with a good match and dry kindling
dumb is as dumb is
AmWay, prove that abortions are still performed that way in Kansas today, and show exactly when the last abortion was performed that way.
God can you just imagine how pizzed off the antis would be if pro-choice people started assassinating their leaders?
I really like your site
I’d just like to thank you for taking the time to create this internet website. It has been extremely helpful
I have admire your unselfishness in taking the time to make this web site.
Nice work chief ;-)
I admire you on the willingness to share this info with others – good luck!
Nice! We rather appreciated the website
This is great, look forward to looking into every area. Thanks for being there.
U’ve got good pics, the site could use a tiny bit of work (no offense) its still awesome
Nice! We truly liked this work .
Logging into this website should be a requirement for anyone knowledgeable on earth these days…