Late Term Abortion "Doctor" Murdered

[mrtrebus]

That's your opinion....not a fact.




I thought you just said you don't believe in God...why are you thanking Him again?
You must be one of those people that denounce God, but the second you're going down in an airplane you're screaming "Oh God, please Jesus save me!!!"
There's no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole :1orglaugh

I was being sarcastic by deliberately using the phrase thank god. Obviously it was a tad too subtle for you!!

 

[mrtrebus]

He was gladly accepting to destroy babies past (well past, I hear) the twenty one week mark. Do the math: that's more than five months a baby is alive on their own at that point. And sucking their brains out...that's a class act there. I don't endorse it, but he desesrved what he got. :ban:

"gladly"?!?

 

[Jane Burgess]

Abortion is legal so what that doctor did was not wrong. You may think it was morally wrong, but he didn't deserve to be murdered. If we killed people based on morals, I think a lot of us would be dead.

 

[Nester6]

That's your opinion....not a fact.

I absolutely agree with this post. I doubt or care if god exists and formal religion for me is bull. However, there is right and wrong. It is my belief that any abortion EXCEPT to save the immediate life of the mother is the ultimate selfish crime, legal or not. Whats worse, Tiller was executing live,viable babies in the most heinous manner possible. Sub human in my book. Yet, no one had the right to take his life either.

 

[Facial_King]

Perfect time for this classic!!

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28817

 

[Ceska]

...There was a consensus with other doctors that to carry the fetus to full term was a threat to the life of the mothers. He was acquitted of charges that he violated Kansas law in March of this year. He was not regularly performing late-term abortions simply at the whim of the patient.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/28/nation/na-abortion-trial28

Good post. Thanks for the article.

But something is unclear.
From the article you posted, the consensus required was not restricted only to "a threat to the life of the mother" but also can include "mental or emotional harm" to the mother.

The consulting doctor must agree that continuing a pregnancy to term would cause "substantial and irreversible harm" to the woman, including mental or emotional harm.

This is a much reduced requirement compared to "a threat to the life of the mother."

Isn't the whole situation emotionally harmful?
Is "emotional harm" something that a medical doctor can determine accurately? Can anyone determine it's degree accurately? How?
What would be the criteria used to distinguish qualifying "emotional harm" from the emotional turmoil that would likely (understandably) beset any person wishing to take part in an elective abortion procedure?

Here is another article which, like the LA Times link you provided, indicates that depression or emotional reasons were sufficient for procedures performed by Tiller:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236279,00.html


Yet other articles (Wall Street Journal) seem to imply that the threat to the mother has to be a bodily one (much easier to differentiate from a purely elective abortion than a subjective evaluation of the emotional states of depression).
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124379172024269869.html

The WSJ doesn't explicitly state that all of Tillers abortions fell under this requirement, only that "Dr. Tiller cited that reason for aborting hundreds of viable fetuses over the years at his clinic."

 

[wormwood9]

Roeder is just another fucking terrorist! No different from Islamists who seek to effect their view by violence.

Some peoples "Terrorists" are other peoples soldiers. There is no such thing as universal right or wrong. Suicide bombers are "terrorists" to Israel, but nobody else. They are heroes to other Palestinians. Or how the U.S. government drops a nuclear bomb on Japan from miles up in the air, and those guys are war heroes, but when they fly their planes into our ships, and sacrificed their own lives for their people, they were "cowards" You seem to be self-righteous like them.

 

[Ravenholm]

Abortions are sometimes needed in cases of rape and people that realise they are not parent material and want out of it. Not everyone can handle being a parent. Being a parent brings HUGE responsibilities and the need for maturity. Just about everyone can have kids. It doesn't mean they can look after them. And some might realise this when it is too late [being pregnant]. And so Abortion comes into play before the child is born.

As for condoms needing to be used, well, condoms are not always reliable. And about this so-called morale bandwagon some jump on as far as being against Abortion. In some cases, as I stated at the start, it is needed. For the lives of some would be worse without it. And there is enough fucking misery in the world just now without creating more.

So what if someone gets pregnant then realises it's a HUGE mistake. No one's perfect, they are, after all, only human. The types of people I can't stand is the likes of Andrei Chikatilo The Rostov Ripper and those that attack and kill people that perform Abortions and also aim their aggression at people that go for Abortions.

 

[zaxxon]

How many of these same people who support the murdering of the Doctor also walk around with the philosophy that people are on their own after they're born. It's like after you're born, you better not ask for a hand-out.

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

How many of these same people who support the murdering of the Doctor also walk around with the philosophy that people are on their own after they're born. It's like after you're born, you better not ask for a hand-out.

Maybe, But I know at the Mission dowtown where I live, the only real organizations that contribute to the homeless there are the "religious wackos," as you would probably lable them. Lib Org's don't show up to help out like they do. Makes you wonder...:dunno:

 

[Facetious]

^ ^ zaxx

I don't know that anybody advocates the killing of the so called "doctor" but when you stick your neck out into as controversial arena as partial birth abortion your life is in your own hands. It's just like when 4 cops got shot and killed by a parolee thug in Oakland about 2 months ago, the story was posted and there were those here who weren't the slightest bit compassionate about the matter 'cause, for whatever reason (maybe we have parolees and / or excons here lol) they hate all cops so they :shrugged: in their posts by saying "oh well, the cops knew the risks of being a police officer" :dunno:

Same thing goes for the babykiller

Would have this doctor killed a 7 month old fetus if the mother did not want a c section birth ? By what margin would he carry out his deeds ?

 

[Hot Mega]

Some peoples "Terrorists" are other peoples soldiers. There is no such thing as universal right or wrong. Suicide bombers are "terrorists" to Israel, but nobody else. They are heroes to other Palestinians. Or how the U.S. government drops a nuclear bomb on Japan from miles up in the air, and those guys are war heroes, but when they fly their planes into our ships, and sacrificed their own lives for their people, they were "cowards" You seem to be self-righteous like them.

A terrorist is any individual who uses illegal violence against innocent people or property as a means to effect change or terrorize.

 

[Jagger69]

Good post. Thanks for the article.

But something is unclear.
From the article you posted, the consensus required was not restricted only to "a threat to the life of the mother" but also can include "mental or emotional harm" to the mother.

This is a much reduced requirement compared to "a threat to the life of the mother."

Well, whatever the qualification for legality were, he evidently did not go outside their bounds (besides, who can say what level of mental or emotional harm we are talking about here. One of the girls was 10 years old....!!!).

Your point is well taken however. Thanks for the clarification. Still doesn't change anything.

:thumbsup:

 

[Jason z]

^ ^ zaxx

I don't know that anybody advocates the killing of the so called "doctor" but when you stick your neck out into as controversial arena as partial birth abortion your life is in your own hands. It's just like when 4 cops got shot and killed by a parolee thug in Oakland about 2 months ago, the story was posted and there were those here who weren't the slightest bit compassionate about the matter 'cause, for whatever reason (maybe we have parolees and / or excons here lol) they hate all cops so they :shrugged: in their posts by saying "oh well, the cops knew the risks of being a police officer" :dunno:

Same thing goes for the babykiller

Would have this doctor killed a 7 month old fetus if the mother did not want a c section birth ? By what margin would he carry out his deeds ?

Facetious just shut the fuck up!! Do you know how retarded you sound from what you just sad? A babykiller? Its because of fuck nuts like why women don't have the same rights as men. It doesn't matter if it's a life or not it is the woman's choice to choose. Make abortion illegal and next the gov. will be telling women they can't be on birth control.

 

[E-Ann-Hilden]

^ ^ zaxx

I don't know that anybody advocates the killing of the so called "doctor" but when you stick your neck out into as controversial arena as partial birth abortion your life is in your own hands. It's just like when 4 cops got shot and killed by a parolee thug in Oakland about 2 months ago, the story was posted and there were those here who weren't the slightest bit compassionate about the matter 'cause, for whatever reason (maybe we have parolees and / or excons here lol) they hate all cops so they :shrugged: in their posts by saying "oh well, the cops knew the risks of being a police officer" :dunno:

Same thing goes for the babykiller

Would have this doctor killed a 7 month old fetus if the mother did not want a c section birth ? By what margin would he carry out his deeds ?

Contraversial to some people's beliefs and opinions, but it should not be in the arena of death threats or worry for someones life.

It is perfectly legal in the U.S., Go pray or protest or vote in politicians that share your views, use legal means for your views. Go for it seriously! If it goes the otherway via legal means, we all will have to live with it.

He was MURDERED! Left a friends and family behind due to this. Which is not justifiable in this case at all and by a fringe nut job that even the pro-lifers have distanced themselves from. You say "baby killer" others say it is a very strong infringement on their personal choice on reproduction.

Regardless, I feel that others have no business telling others how to live their life, plain and simple. Your rights and beliefs stop at my nose. Same the other way.

 

[Ceska]

Well, whatever the qualification for legality were, he evidently did not go outside their bounds ......

Your point is well taken however. Thanks for the clarification. Still doesn't change anything.

:thumbsup:

Agreed. It doesn't change a thing about his murder being a tragic and horrible act.

However, it does complicate our ability to claim "He was not regularly performing late-term abortions simply at the (request) of the patient(s)."

Legal or not.

 

[Facial_King]

Also, in case nobody else has pointed it out, it's lame to put the word doctor in quotation marks, as the thread-starter did in the thread title.

He finished medical school and was licensed to practice medicine, so that actually makes him a doctor, whether you like how he chose to practice it or not.

 

[Demoman]

so it's ok to kill a guy because he "kills" fetuses?

god religious people are stupid...

Why do you automatically assume he's religious? I'm not a religious person, but I have my qualms about abortion. Granted I won't go around killing doctors in abortion clinics, but still. And on top of that, why are they stupid? Because they value a life you feel is insignificant simply because it isn't developed enough to be considered a human being in your eyes? I don't agree with the assailant's decision to take the law into their own hands like this as do I also see it as a huge contradiction to what they believe in, but what you're doing isn't that much better: writing off all people with a religion as extremist fundamentalists who force there opinions down people's mouths.

I am so sick of atheists and their elitism. Most atheists will be quick to come down on organized religion for forcing their beliefs down their throats, but many atheists I seen are no better than the religious fundamentalists they bash.

 

[mrtrebus]

I am so sick of atheists and their elitism. Most atheists will be quick to come down on organized religion for forcing their beliefs down their throats, but many atheists I seen are no better than the religious fundamentalists they bash.

This may be true, but its invariably a response to religious people who condemn anyone for not believing what they do.
I know plenty of religious people who are tolerant & see their faith as a personal thing, they don't bang on about gays/abortionists/atheists etc going to hell. I'm fine with them as they are with me & my atheism.

 

[Demoman]

Yeah well I'm sure you've heard that little phrase your parents and your teachers and your creepy scoutmasters with the tight brown shorts have drilled into your brain when you were a little kid after you threw sand into Jimmy's eyes because he stole your Transformer. You know, the one along the lines of "two wrongs don't make a right" (yeah and three rights make a left; I know the joke already). Bagging on Christians for bagging on non-believers and whatnot isn't necessarily going to get them to shut up.