Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post Reply
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

WICHITA, Kan. – A Kansas judge's decision to allow a confessed killer to argue that he believes the slaying of one of the nation's few late-term abortion providers was a justified act aimed at saving unborn children has upended what most expected to be an open-and-shut first-degree murder case.

Prosecutors have challenged the ruling that allows Scott Roeder to tell a jury that the fatal shooting of Wichita doctor George Tiller was voluntary manslaughter. A Tuesday hearing is scheduled to allow Roeder's defense attorneys to respond.

Some abortion opponents were pleasantly stunned and eager to watch Roeder plead his case. Tiller's colleagues and abortion rights advocates were outraged and feared the court's actions give a more than tacit approval to further acts of violence.

"This judge has basically announced a death sentence for all of us who help women," said Dr. Warren Hern of Boulder, Colo., a longtime friend of Tiller who also performs late-term abortions. "That is the effect of the ruling."

Story Link: Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence - Yahoo! News
mikeinie
Posts: 3130
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 3:43 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by mikeinie »

That is interesting and will draw a lot of attention to that case.

What defines a ‘late term abortion’? How many months is that?
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by gmc »

Wonderful, can't wait till an islamic terrorist tries a defence of justifiable homicide.
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

mikeinie;1281526 wrote: That is interesting and will draw a lot of attention to that case.

What defines a ‘late term abortion’? How many months is that?


Late-term abortion: Late-term abortion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
mikeinie
Posts: 3130
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 3:43 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by mikeinie »

Well, this will turn into a big abortion debate, but premeditated murder is just that.

The laws may be unclear regarding abortion, but it is clear about murder and it is not justifiable.

To say he was saving lives of future children is like trying to judge people on what you think that may do?

There is the age old philosophical question, ‘if you met Hitler in his youth, knowing what he was going to do, would you kill him?’
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

Thought I'd share this information on Dr. George Tiller:

ARLINGTON, VA, March 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Notorious partial-birth abortion specialist Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, KS, was caught on hidden video admitting to aborting babies a day before the mother's due date. Students for Life of America (SFLA) today released the video which was made at the Feminist Majority Foundation's annual Women's Leadership Conference held at the National Education Association (NEA) on March 9.

The video reveals Dr. Tiller showcasing massive and graphic pictures of children with fetal abnormalities that he had aborted, so as to make the case for late-term abortions as necessary medical procedure. SFLA's Executive Director Kristan Hawkins, who videotaped the conference and interviewed Tiller clandestinely, commented on the gruesome pictures of aborted children Tiller showed, saying, "One had an extra arm: could not that child had survived and received corrective surgery? Was violently killing the child the only way to go?"

Story Link: Dr. George Tiller Admits to Performing Abortions the Day Before Delivery | NowPublic News Coverage

While I agree the murder of the doctor was wrong, why was he allowed to kill these babies in the first place? Who died and left him God to decide?
mikeinie
Posts: 3130
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 3:43 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by mikeinie »

I don’t agree with his practices, I think he himself should have been charged with manslaughter of those children if that was the case. But his other guy had no business taking the law into his own hands and killing him.

Also the mothers who paid for the services should also be charged.
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

mikeinie;1281556 wrote: I don’t agree with his practices, I think he himself should have been charged with manslaughter of those children if that was the case. But his other guy had no business taking the law into his own hands and killing him.

Also the mothers who paid for the services should also be charged.


I agree with you 100% on your statement. :)
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Ahso! »

Jazzy;1281553 wrote: Thought I'd share this information on Dr. George Tiller:

ARLINGTON, VA, March 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Notorious partial-birth abortion specialist Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, KS, was caught on hidden video admitting to aborting babies a day before the mother's due date. Students for Life of America (SFLA) today released the video which was made at the Feminist Majority Foundation's annual Women's Leadership Conference held at the National Education Association (NEA) on March 9.

The video reveals Dr. Tiller showcasing massive and graphic pictures of children with fetal abnormalities that he had aborted, so as to make the case for late-term abortions as necessary medical procedure. SFLA's Executive Director Kristan Hawkins, who videotaped the conference and interviewed Tiller clandestinely, commented on the gruesome pictures of aborted children Tiller showed, saying, "One had an extra arm: could not that child had survived and received corrective surgery? Was violently killing the child the only way to go?"

Story Link: Dr. George Tiller Admits to Performing Abortions the Day Before Delivery | NowPublic News Coverage

While I agree the murder of the doctor was wrong, why was he allowed to kill these babies in the first place? Who died and left him God to decide? Its a bogus claim. Wheres the video? And do you have any idea who NowPublic Media is? I can assure you the credibility of both is in question.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

Yeah... I love that logic. "You murdered a baby so I get to murder you."

Blasted idiots. Two wrongs don't make a right. Send them back to kindergarden.:-5
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

Jazzy;1281553 wrote:

While I agree the murder of the doctor was wrong,


Well, good for you, you have a conscience.

why was he allowed to kill these babies in the first place? Who died and left him God to decide?


Didn't you mean to say "abort these fetuses?" Or did you deliberately mean to be inflammatory and biased?

As to who gave him the right. I did. And every other citizen of the United States. We voted for our representatives, and they followed our MAJORITY WILL and made it a law.

The real question is, "Where do you get off thinking that you get to break laws, and make your own, just because you don't agree with the majority of your fellow Americans?":thinking:

Don't you like Democracy?:mad:
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

Saint_;1281581 wrote: Well, good for you, you have a conscience.





Didn't you mean to say "abort these fetuses?" Or did you deliberately mean to be inflammatory and biased?

As to who gave him the right. I did. And every other citizen of the United States. We voted for our representatives, and they followed our MAJORITY WILL and made it a law.

The real question is, "Where do you get off thinking that you get to break laws, and make your own, just because you don't agree with the majority of your fellow Americans?":thinking:

Don't you like Democracy?:mad:


If you read the article, he broke laws before he was murdered: Tiller, who currently faces 19 criminal charges for illegal late-term abortions in the state of Kansas, at first feigned ignorance of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, a federal bill signed into law in 2002 that protects born children from murder and illegalizes infanticide. However when questioned further about the measure he spoke of his ideological objection to the legislation, saying, "Let's say you have 15 or 16, you had 1 slip out with a heartbeat; that is not a viable fetus, but that is born alive or has a heartbeat. Then you have to take that non-viable fetus and rush it directly to the hospital against the woman's wishes."

Isn't that democracy at it's best? Are saying you gave him the right to do this? :thinking:
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

OK... I'll say it more clearly.

Abortion is legal. It is the Law of the Land and the Will of the Majority. And darn good thing , too. It is better to abort a million zygotes than to allow one neglected, unwanted, and loved baby to be born. You don't like it? Tough. I don't like everyone walking around with guns, but I accept that it's the law.

How's that?;)

Besides, like I've said before, the whole argument is moot. When the population of the planet reaches 50 billion this century, forced abortion and sterilization will be the norm. This argument won't even be remembered. China's already there. :-3
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

Jazzy;1281588 wrote: he broke laws before he was murdered


Which does not give anyone the right to take the Law into their own hands. No matter what. Should we allow everyone to do just that? "Hey, you double parked! That's breaking the law, I get to murder you now!"

With this logic, we'll all be back in the Wild West lynching whomever we think broke our idea of the law. Total chaos. Only a fool would condone that.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Ahso! »

Jazzy;1281588 wrote: If you read the article, he broke laws before he was murdered: Tiller, who currently faces 19 criminal charges for illegal late-term abortions in the state of Kansas, at first feigned ignorance of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, a federal bill signed into law in 2002 that protects born children from murder and illegalizes infanticide. However when questioned further about the measure he spoke of his ideological objection to the legislation, saying, "Let's say you have 15 or 16, you had 1 slip out with a heartbeat; that is not a viable fetus, but that is born alive or has a heartbeat. Then you have to take that non-viable fetus and rush it directly to the hospital against the woman's wishes."

Isn't that democracy at it's best? Are saying you gave him the right to do this? :thinking: Jazzy, Your second article has serious credibility issues. Just because you found it on the internet does not automatically qualify it as credible. Again, wheres the video? If you can't produce the video the entire story falls apart.

You really should be more careful regarding sources.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

Saint_;1281591 wrote: Which does not give anyone the right to take the Law into their own hands. No matter what. Should we allow everyone to do just that? "Hey, you double parked! That's breaking the law, I get to murder you now!"

With this logic, we'll all be back in the Wild West lynching whomever we think broke our idea of the law. Total chaos. Only a fool would condone that.


As I stated in an earlier post, this man should not have been murdered and the person who did that, I agree had no right to take the law into his own hands by killing this doctor.
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

Ahso!;1281593 wrote: Jazzy, Your second article has serious credibility issues. Just because you found it on the internet does not automatically qualify it as credible. Again, wheres the video? If you can't produce the video the entire story falls apart.

You really should be more careful regarding sources.


The video was there when I posted the second article but now has been removed. I searched for it on YouTube but all links to the video have been disabled. Let me see if I can find a site that hasn't disabled/removed this video. :) If I can't then I agree, Ahso, I guess this will go south on me.
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

Jazzy;1281599 wrote: As I stated in an earlier post, this man should not have been murdered and the person who did that, I agree had no right to take the law into his own hands by killing this doctor.


Come on, Jazzy. You say that, because you know the logic, but your whole demeanor is that you think it was justified. He had it coming, right?;) Why else would you use words like "murder babies?"

Well, I've been in threads like this before and the truth is that there is no middle ground on abortion. It's too emotional an issue. So I honestly don't hold those feelings against you.

Besides, I like you. You're intelligent and well-spoken.Just because we don't see eye-to-eye on controversial issues doesn't mean I don't seriously respect you.:-4

My last post in this thread: The judge is wrong to allow emotional arguments in a logical courtroom. The ends NEVER justifies the means. If it did, it would be OK to murder a thousand people to find a cure for cancer.

And that's all I have to say about that.....:rolleyes:
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

Found the video:YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

“Dr. Tiller addresses a feminist conference at the NEA”

This video or group may contain content that is inappropriate for some users, as flagged by YouTube's user community.

To view this video or group, please verify you are 18 or older by signing in or signing up.

Ahso, the video link was there in my posted article link (my post #6) the video is back up and live if you care to see it. Warning *Graphic Video*
User avatar
Jazzy
Posts: 2962
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:17 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Jazzy »

Saint_;1281604 wrote: Why else would you use words like "murder babies?"




Watch the video and that sould answer your question. ;) I uphold my opinion that nobody had the right to murder this doctor.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Ahso! »

Jazzy;1281622 wrote: Watch the video and that sould answer your question. ;) I uphold my opinion that nobody had the right to murder this doctor.Did you watch the video, Jazzy? Can you tell me in what context he was talking because its rather difficult to make out what Tiller is saying. What is interesting is the people who edited the video conveniently did not offer text to what Tiller said except where it supports their case. And if you watch very closely, you can see here and there where the video was most probably edited.

The best I can make out what was said was that Tiller was describing the procedure of an injection rarely used in the case of a nonviable fetus. He even says its so rare it should not even need to be discussed. It seems to be one of those extreme cases where the religious right wants us to think is happening all the time and is making more out of than is necessary. Perhaps you could shed more light on it. I wish a full transcript was available. Also, I would note that I doubt Tiller knew he was being taped in that interview.

Unless the people who made that video want to release the entire transcript it lacks credibility. But if you're certain what is said in the video you could try to construct a transcript yourself. Why was this story not in any other more recognized media? they are not all liberal as some would have us believe.

Have you checked into NowPublic Media? You may want to.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Ahso! »

I think I have a better grasp of it now that I've listened a couple more times.

The student is trying to corner Tiller on this Born Alive infants Protection Act and using the split of Obama and Clinton to see who he'd support and what he thinks.

What Tillman does is say that anyone who would deliver a non viable fetus alive is abhorrent and hes been against that practice for 30 years and then goes on to describe this injection to ensure the non viable fetus has no life signs prior to exiting the mother because if it does, even though its not viable, life saving measures must then be employed, even though it is against the wishes of the mother. He gets into the: "who is the patient" side of the argument at that point.

He does not as far as I can tell admit to aborting babies on the prior day of delivery. He says he has had to administer this injection at that point, but listening to the conversation closely Tiller clearly states that the fetus is not viable and may only have a heartbeat and no brain activity, thus the reference of the "living as a vegetable for up to 4 years."

Anyone have a different take on it?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by gmc »

How about if the headline was " Anti abortion terrorist uses voluntary manslaughter as a defence "

or "christian fundamentalist terrorist claims uses voluntary manslaughter as a defence"

or "Ialamic fundamentalist terrorist uses voluntary manslaughter defence " on the grounds their action was necessary to save the lives of their fellow muslims.

would you still think it a valid defence?

It was a terrorist act was it not?
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

gmc;1281828 wrote: How about if the headline was " Anti abortion terrorist uses voluntary manslaughter as a defence "

or "christian fundamentalist terrorist claims uses voluntary manslaughter as a defence"

or "Ialamic fundamentalist terrorist uses voluntary manslaughter defence " on the grounds their action was necessary to save the lives of their fellow muslims.

would you still think it a valid defence?

It was a terrorist act was it not?


Ouch. that's some stinging logic.:-3
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by gmc »

Saint_;1281842 wrote: Ouch. that's some stinging logic.:-3


As an alternative if it was because of his religious belief or if you prefer god was telling him is that a valid defence? If it is disallowed then does that mean your courts deny the existence of God?

It's not my country but this could be quite cathartic for you all.
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

gmc;1281864 wrote: If it is disallowed then does that mean your courts deny the existence of God?


Noooooo.... it just means that if you are going to use God as a defense, He needs to come to court and testify for you.:)

It's not my country but this could be quite cathartic for you all.


No catharsis, please. I broke up a fight yesterday, and Night School starts tonight so I'll be working 13 hours today. I've got plenty of drama already, thank you.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by gmc »

Saint_;1281867 wrote: Noooooo.... it just means that if you are going to use God as a defense, He needs to come to court and testify for you.:)




But now you're mocking religious belief are you not? Besides if someone uses that as a defence since the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt do you not need to prove the non existence of god for a prosecution to have any chance? If you dismiss it out of hand as being nonsense then you deny the existence of god and the reigious right will have a field day i would imagine.

Kansas law defines voluntary manslaughter as "an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force.


So is the defendants religious belief unreasonable? Obviously it is by definition but if the defence is accepted is it not a green light to every religious terrorist in kansas to attack all those they believe threaten society?

Which is superior-the word of god or the laws of man?
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

OK, GMC. I am not mocking God at all. I am very devout. But, as you well know, His interference and effect in our lives is at best mysterious and at worst completely unfathomable.

That is absolutely no help at all in a fact-based courtroom. We do the best we can, but we must rely on what we can actually prove using our limited senses. To allow people to bring the Will of God into the courtroom opens up all kinds of obvious problems.

Is your interpretation of the Bible the same as mine? Is that person really innocent, or are they just telling us that God said to do the crime to save themselves. Unless someone can actually converse with God and get a concrete answer that can be shared with all in open court, then we'll never know.

Render unto God that which is God's. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. It's certain that mankind's court system is the sole province of Caesar.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by gmc »

Saint_;1281966 wrote: OK, GMC. I am not mocking God at all. I am very devout. But, as you well know, His interference and effect in our lives is at best mysterious and at worst completely unfathomable.

That is absolutely no help at all in a fact-based courtroom. We do the best we can, but we must rely on what we can actually prove using our limited senses. To allow people to bring the Will of God into the courtroom opens up all kinds of obvious problems.

Is your interpretation of the Bible the same as mine? Is that person really innocent, or are they just telling us that God said to do the crime to save themselves. Unless someone can actually converse with God and get a concrete answer that can be shared with all in open court, then we'll never know.

Render unto God that which is God's. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. It's certain that mankind's court system is the sole province of Caesar.


I was talking in general terms rather than about your specific beliefs and have no intention of getting personal about it. I am not devout-as you probably gathered-I am just bringing up points for discussion out of curiosity.

I didn't mean you were the one mocking god but rather a general point that if a belief you are doing god's work is disallowed as a defence does it deny the existence of god? does religious belief render him incapable of making a rational decision about his actions-he is not in his right mind.

Render unto God that which is God's. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. It's certain that mankind's court system is the sole province of Caesar.




It's an age old debate-our jury system-and yours- stems from the days when tribesmen-and women-would it around and decide what to do about someone committing a crime but someone doing god's work? If his belief system means that his act was not a crime but entirely justifiable who gets to decide that that belief system is reasonable or not? Should he be in front of a religious court?

It was a terrorist act-yet he will be a hero to some.

YouTube - Should Bill O'Reilly/Fox News be Blamed for George Tiller's Murder?

Mind you outside of the states this is not of much interest-apart from this forum I would be completely unaware of it.
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Saint_ »

gmc;1282103 wrote: I was talking in general terms rather than about your specific beliefs and have no intention of getting personal about it. I am not devout-as you probably gathered-I am just bringing up points for discussion out of curiosity.


Oh, well Ok then.

I didn't mean you were the one mocking god but rather a general point that if a belief you are doing god's work is disallowed as a defense does it deny the existence of god?


The question itself seems rather flawed to me. The God I worship does not ask His followers to do deeds that would need defending. In other words, do all the good you want in the name of God, but don't commit a crime and say , "I was doing God's work." To me, He never works that way.

does religious belief render him incapable of making a rational decision about his actions-he is not in his right mind.


Psychologically, "hearing voices" is a symptom of paranoid schizophrenia or even psychosis. So perhaps yes, but only if the person states, "God told me to do it."

My point is this: We must have law. Those laws are set by the majority will in this country. Just because you fundamentally disagree with a law is NO reason to disobey it. For example, I am adamantly against gun ownership. Should I be allowed to go around murdering any gun-owner? The same defensive argument could be used. Guns murder people, even children at a rate of 10 a day.

If that logic were true we would have no country.
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:36 am

Some fear Kan. ruling may spur abortion violence

Post by Nomad »

Some fear Kan



I dont mind telling you I do.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Post Reply

Return to “Crimes Trials”