This is just another clear cut example of faith based terrorism. Like flying planes into skyscrapers, this kind of lunacy is impossible without a devout and unwavering belief in unsupported and unjustified absurd notions about the nature of reality. Like the 9/11 hijackers, this terrorist believes he will be going to a fantastical place called heaven. In the U.S., there is nothing that is shielded from criticism like religion. We must be able to talk openly and honestly about the differences between faith-based and evidence-based approaches to understanding the world. The least religious democracies are the most secure, happy, and healthy places on Earth.

"Dr Tiller is a hero ..." - Carla

So, how many babies do you have to kill to be labeled a "Hero" of the political left?

I would imagine, killing, say 2-3,000 you would at least get a Carla Axtman Swimsuit calendar.

Dr. Tiller killed no babies. Dr. Tiller performed therapeutic abortions, among other medical procedures. These are human rights and constitutional rights guaranteed to women. His name will be celebrated among the heroes of the poor when his killer's is long forgotten or worse.

Um, I am leftist pro-lifer so please take note your stereotypes cast aspersions on your own kind. As I have been fighting against abortion, the death penalty, poverty, police brutality and fighting for gay marriage, immigrant rights and women's rights for over 15 years I have noticed how often liberals like to claim that to be 'one of them' you have to be pro-choice on the issue of abortion. For you to usurp the banner of liberalism for yourself while disparaging others who work diligently on many shared social issues shows that you operate under measures of contempt and disdain for those people who stand so close to you on almost every other issue.

That noted, this sophomoric screed from an abortion apologist is par for the course on how this issue makes both sides irrational in their depiction of the other side.

As John Scott unsurprisingly ignored my question on the other post, I'll ask Rarian:

I am interested whether you support making contraceptives readily and freely available as well as providing thorough sex education to ensure proper usage of contraceptives?

-tl (in sw)

The idiot should have used a coat hanger instead of a gun! Tiller the baby killer will not be missed!

Thanks for proving my point, throowrocks. You make it a lot easier with crap like that.

Ahh to be a non-theist and to be spared the hatred and contempt that fills the hearts of so many of the "enlightened" ones.

While I am against abortion in most cases except when a woman's life is in danger, I was sickened by this act of terrorism. I take offense to the suggestion that all pro-lifers applaud this murder as justified. I do think that prior to his death, Dr.Tiller was too liberal in his interpretation of those cases that justified late-term abortions. For this reason, he was brought up on criminal charges (although he was declared "innocent" by the court system.) Our government should make birth-control more readily available for those who can't afford a baby so this procedure isn't used as a barbaric form of "birth control". Millions of innocent unborn babies are unwanted & aborted each year and people like myself grieve over their needless deaths too. Dr.Tiller may have been a kind and helpful Dr. but many people are against late-term abortions in all but the most extreme cases. Many people (including me) think his interpretation of "extreme" cases wasn't strict enough.

Left-right-up the middle or down each side, it really is totally irrelevant. To uphold those who kill only serve to prove the point that you also are accomplices to that act.

The murder of George Tiller is a crime. In Kansas, Dr. Tiller followed state and federal law and performed a medical procedure to save the life of the mother. Today, regardless of how one defines one's political identity it is of paramount importance to recognize that it is the rule of law that must be upheld.

This means that Mr. Roeder should spend the rest of his life in jail. It also means that Mr. Obama must prosecute those responsible for crimes in the Bush administration. Those who authorized torture specifically. Further, it seems to me that creatures like Bill O'reilly and his clones must be stopped. Zero tolerance applies here.

First, and most important Obama must grow a spine.

So, let's see if I get this correctly. Those of you that contend that Dr. Tiller was a hero for "saving people in desperate circumstances" need to ask yourselves: "When does this fetus, product of conception or any of the other multitude of terms used to avoid calling it a b_ _ y become a person?" We are talking a mere few inches between partial birth and total birth. You can justify this gruesome act of abortion with the head out of the womb as "choice." Would it suddenly be a crime in your view if the remainder of the "fetus" were out of the womb while the procedure was done?
I find the murder of Dr Tiller abhorant along with the procedure he so proudly performed. One violent act doesn't justify another. Sadly, those of you who consider yourselves "progressive" in support of the procedure need to get a grip on reality.

If only the "pro-lifers" cared about ALL LIFE and not just the unborn this world might be a better place.

Apparently, Gary Hammond does not believe that there is a law requiring more than one doctor to verify that the mother's life is at risk in order to perform the procedure for which Dr. Tiller has been murdered.

Gosh, Gary, is that based on faith? You apparently hate women. Why? What is wrong with you?

Gary Hammond, we have laws and doctors and medical boards to decide the questions you ask. Thus women consult with their doctors in the context of those laws.

I understand that you are frustrated that those laws are not what you think they ought to be.

I understand your frustration in some sense as, believe me, this society is not configured as I think it ought to be.

Nevertheless, your kind of rhetoric is not very helpful. Simply, you don't get to decide. Women get to decide. That's the law.

Thanks for the post, Carla.

Uh, John Griffin, why put quotes around "innocent" when you said that he was "declared 'innocent.'"?? Because really, a jury's declaration of "innocence" is a lot like saying he's innocent, just like a jury's declaration of "guilty" is a lot like saying he's guilty. Only he was innocent.

The sky was "blue" yesterday. Snow is "cold." Dr. Tiller was "murdered." As in, he was a person legally declared to be living (unlike a fetus), and killing him is therefore "murder." See?

Thus far it is evident that progressive does not mean tolerant of other viewpoints especially when it forces one to answer the simple question I asked earlier of when it is considered a person. Does no one have the ability to answer the question? No, in your view I am the intolerent one because I have challenged your thinking.

It has nothing to do with hating women Marv. So Mr O'Reilly is a creature. So much for your tolerence of other viewpoints. It's your way or else.

Joe Hill, rhetoric? A simple question is rheoric? Afraid to tackle the hard question I guess and pass it off to Dr's and Medical Boards? Heavens a three year old's intellect will declare it a child.

and Carla, you bring up the rarest of cases as if they are the norm and I need the grip on reality. Sorry, reality stares me in the face when I look at the gruesome act. I'll agree with you on one point, the murder of Dr. Tiller was truly disgusting.

and finally a question for mp97303: In what way do you think 'prolifers' do not care about ALL LIFE?

Meh. The is spinning this much the way the south spun Harper's Ferry in 1859: trying to paint all, or even a substantial number, of abolitionists as nuts.

The actions of this modern day John Brown do not impune the pro-life movement anymore than John Brown's did the abolitionist movement.

I have a hard time imagining even 80% of the pro-choice (notice I have the decency to use an official label, unlike Carla), normal people like my girlfriend, who consider Tiller anything other than a sick killer himself.

Yes, that doesn't justify taking the law into one's own hands, but your statements Carla are just sick and revolting. Tiller? The man brought up on criminal chargers in Kansas... a hero?

In that case, OJ Simpson is a saint or something.

Gary, if you are allowed to be intolerant and outspoken on this passionate issue, why is it you cry unfair to receive the degree of firepower comin' back atcha that you put out? I think the laws of physics would be of help to all in this discussion. It's a riled up topic. I am curious - tell us about your moments of actually viewing the gruesome act [sic]. Whose hand were you holding to get her through? Whose tears did you wipe as you stared into the disposal bin? Just curious if you are speaking theoretically [ummm sorry, RHETORICALLY] or if you have ANY direct experience with the issue and reality beyond your lonely XY thoughts in the night?

The Operation Rescue site was down most of last night and this morning getting scrubbed of, I assume, posts advocating the murder of Tiller. Let the FBI sort out the IT issues, but take a moment yourself and trip with the Wayback Machine to see what the OR site looked like, say six months ago.

The upshot is donations of all denominations are piling up at Operation Rescue and other wackjob organizations as their fundraising-d'etre reaches it's zenith.

Pissed about this? What will shut them down? What happened in Portland, Oregon in 1990? Berhanu v. Metzger. It's up to you angry people to fund lawyers like Morris Dees who will sue the sh*t out of Terry and his ilk.

Otherwise the terrorists win.

From the Meriam Webster dictionary:

Choice 1: the act of choosing : selection <finding it="" hard="" to="" make="" a="" choice="">

My dear departed mother used to have to remind her friends at NOW (then National Organization of Women now The National Organization FOR Women) meetings that choice was the all inclusive position that allowed her to reject her male doctor's advice to abort and and continue with a risky pregnancy.

That's one of the things I love the most about the Gary Hammonds of this world (and they are legion).

They don't need no steenkin' doctors or law books to tell them the differences among zygote, fetus, and baby. They just KNOW. It's that inner light. It's truthiness. It comes from the gut. Why a three year old could tell you.

And if some doctors and some constitutional lawyers and judges rule differently . . .

The Tillman murder was another example of Right wing domestic Terrorism like OK City. I doubt those who use incendiary terms that inspire guys like this will ever take responsibility for their contribution to Tillman's killing. There is room for people to debate this issue and to work to minimize Abortions But never to kill those who disagree with you.

"Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in "hard cases" are estimated as follows: in cases of rape or incest, 0.3%; in cases of risk to maternal health or life, 1%; and in cases of fetal abnormality, 0.5%. About 98% of abortions in the United States are elective, including socio-economic reasons or for birth control. This includes perhaps 30% for primarily economic reasons"

See http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

Doesn't really seem that Tiller or any of his contemporaries were helping desperate people in "horrific" situations. And sure, many of you might argue that it's a woman's right to end a pregnancy (even if it is because of socio-economic reasons). But even those who cannot speak here in the United States have rights (at least those who aren't in a womb)! We wouldn't kill a deaf or blind person or any other person who might be deemed defenseless. Why does it have to be different with a baby?! Killing a baby is a crime. And if 98% of babies are aborted for trivial socio-economic reasons, we are losing a multitude of healthy, promising individuals who could greatly contribute to our posterity. Sadly, abortion's availability has created a new source of birth control. And from what I have heard of personal accounts, women's health is not in the interest of those at abortion clinics. There is no therapy for the emotions that linger years after a baby is taken.

Tiller was shot to death. How many of the babies he took endured more horrific deaths? How many babies struggled with their last breaths and felt pain? Tiller is one man; but the babies he killed would populate a city. I am relieved that no more babies will die at his hands.

I only hope that our country will awaken to this crime, just as they have in the crimes against slaves and the mentally ill, and give rights to life for those who have no voice.

As a passionate pro-life American woman, I think what happened to Dr. Tiller was absolutely horrible and indefensible. The man who committed the crime should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Violence is not the answer to ending abortion and bringing about a culture of respecting all life, born and unborn, in this country. Although I believe what Dr. Tiller did to thousands of defensless babies was horrible, he did not deserve to be murdered and I grieve for his family, as I grieve for the babies he aborted.

Also, I take offense at the assertion made by many in the media over the last 36 hours that pro-lifers and anyone who speaks out against abortion is some how responsible for this horrible act. Their are hundreds of pro-life organizations and tens of millions of pro-life people in this country and I can think of only one that condones violence. I have been active in the pro-life movement for a number of years and I have never come across anyone who condones violence. Yes, there are some deranged people out there, but as a whole the pro-life movement in a peace loving movement. Blaming pro-lifers for this murder is like blaming everyone who is against the war when a military recruiter is attacked.

Carla, interesting you should say "you don't get to choose to murder people". That is exactly what the pro-life movement is about. The circumstances that women find themselves in when they visit Dr's like Tiller are tragic and we should support them and care for them with compassion. However, no matter what the circumstance, the humanity of the baby does not change. It is still a viable human being with a heart beat, that does not deserve to be killed in the gruesome ways that it is. Just like Dr. Tiller did not deserve to be killed.

Liz and TrishDish: Thanks for your contributions! As you can see we are seeing the blatant disregard for the ultimate issue, the Baby. It's all about "choice", their choice-their way. Choice in the pro-abortion community dosesn't really mean the possiblity of choosing LIFE.

You would think as 'progressives' they would at least address my question of when "it" is a person. Nothing progressive about their inability to have a clear discussion and answer a simple question. Progressive is just a euphemistic term for Left Wing Extremist. Another term to hide under, to see who they can fool today.

See the way in which Carla wants to turn my discussion of tolerance around? She would rather paint me as the intolerent one by attempting to infer that my mentioning of it refers to tolerating a murder.

Gosh, Carla, you posted this discussion. Can't you take the lead, show some responsibility and once again answer my "inflamatory question" of when that fetus becomes a person. Maybe you would rather fall into JoeHill's world of letting "doctors and some constitutional lawyers" tell him the difference. Sadly, you will all probably pass again.

Gary,

I'll bite. I believe a fetus becomes a person at birth. But the question is moot.

You will never convince me that life begins at conception (or anytime prior to birth), and I will not convince you that life begins at birth. Call me or anyone who agrees with me names and show me graphic photographs and I will not be swayed. Nor will you be swayed by my arguments. Moreover, making abortions illegal, stigmatizing or penalizing girls or women who get pregnant (regardless of circumstance), or harrassing medical professionals who offer the legally protected procedure of abortion will not reduce the number of abortions performed. What will reduce the number of abortions is reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies.

So why don't unite to support proven strategies for reducing unwanted pregnancies: - free and available contraception including the "morning after pill" (which, regardless of what anyone says is not an "abortion pill") - good sex education to ensure proper use of contraceptives

What say you, Gary?

-tl (in sw)

Liz, while I agree with you on this, "what happened to Dr. Tiller was absolutely horrible and indefensible", have you been an adoptive parent or a foster parent?

Do you accept the possibility of saving a mother's life by abortion, or does the woman's life become secondary at the moment of conception?

Are rape victims crime victims, or women who should be required to carry pregnancies to term?

"Abortion stops a beating heart"? At what point does the heart start beating? Certainly not at conception.

Would you be willing to take in a child if parents could not afford to feed another child?

Have you ever done volunteer work with Special Olympics or Games for the Physically Limited? Or just used words to praise those who do?

I can remember verbal and other attacks against anyone who didn't vote and speak the Right to Life "party line".

I don't take that from anyone, regardless of their cause.

(Look at some of the blog posts from the 2008 primary and you will find people here who were just as verbally nasty about a primary battle as any anti-abortion activist ever was.)

It is not a simple issue. I have known women who worked with disabled kids who told anti-abortion activists "come down to where I work and volunteer, and if you last 3 weeks, I will gladly listen to anything you say". Generally, the activist didn't last that long as a volunteer.

I once had a conversation with a young man who said "Isn't it great that --- is prolife?" and I responded "Webster wasn't making a statement on abortion when he defined the prefixes 'pro ' and 'anti', so tell me what constructive things that person is involved with that make him prolife".

Next time I saw the young man, he had joined Court Appointed Special Advocates because he decided I had a point about the meaning of pro-life.

My point is this: I admire people I know who have adopted hard to place kids. They have the right to any opinion on abortion they wish to have.

I have no use for the folks who blockade clinics or engage in violence, or even stand on a streetcorner with an anti-abortion sign or go to a rally. A rally of 7000 people just means 7000 volunteer hours wasted.

Many of us were fed up with the nastiness long before the century changed. I know there are many quietly anti-abortion law abiding citizens who believe all life is precious.

But just as famous activists from other causes make everyone from their cause look bad, Randall Terry can't be blamed on anyone who believes women have the right to make their own medical decisions. Perhaps the shunning process set off by this murder will help silence his rantings.

But don't expect those of us who have known someone threatened by an anti-abortion activist (or even someone who was the victim of rude treatment like the marchers around a Planned Parenthood clinic smashing the edge of someone's garden), or the subject of phone or other harassment simply because they were the landlord for Planned Parenthood or other women's clinic which did not have the RTL seal of approval.

This murder just brings back all those bad memories from the previous century. I'm sorry Liz, but you haven't encountered the same people I have " as a whole the pro-life movement in a peace loving movement."

There are families of people who work for Planned Parenthood or other women's clinics. Sometimes they have been threatened to the point of law enforcement taking action. Should all OB GYN facilities be required to get a "pro-life" seal of approval so they won't be vandalized?

Truly "prolife" individuals spend their time caring for others. I've known a family with a child born early, a family with twins born really early, and a college friend who died in childbirth.

I've also seen statistics that the Senators who got contributions from Right to Life in the 1980s were more likely to vote for Reagan's budget cuts to programs for women and children than Senators who did not get such contributions.

Every movement at one time or another needs to take stock of whether the actions of all their members are furthering the cause. Now is the time for the anti-abortion movement to do some soul searching.

Groups like this have been around for decades: http://main.nc.us/wncceib/CHOICEact31305.htm seeking common ground on abortion issues.

Sometimes they were a way to pick up the pieces after a national anti-abortion group came to town to protest, disrupted the community, then moved on. Locals decided maybe they should get to know each other over dinner or whatever.

Also, see if someone can find the 1985 Wisconsin law called THE ABORTION PREVENTION AND FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY LAW OF 1985.

I once had a pen pal in Wisconsin who sent it to me. It is 9 pages of details, worked out by a group forced into common ground by politicians tired of the back and forth. 9 pages of details that are a good starting point to get beyond the slogans and start dealing with the nitty gritty issues involving abortion. It includes sections on what to do if teens become pregnant.

Now, if after such soul searching the movement can say things like "we understand that in the 21st century women have the vote, hold office, and are not willing to surrender their medical decisions to total strangers, but maybe we can come to common ground on how to deal with teens who have sex before marriage", then we can start a dialogue.

But until then, be aware that the same sentiments which drive ordinary folks to say "Do you really expect me to ever vote for that person who ran the nasty ad?" cause people to be suspicious of any abortion opponent who doesn't show the good works of those like Mark Hatfield and Hubert Humphrey.

"His name will be celebrated among the heroes of the poor" - Joe Hill

You're right Joe! I heard that after the abortion, patients get a framed, autographed picture of Dr. Tiller they can hang in their home. Along with a pack of sugar-free gum. What a great guy.

"Anyone who believes this is somehow justifiable is demonstrating themselves as no better than human refuse" - Carla

You mean like the human refuse that Dr. Tiller threw in dumpsters behind his building?

The woman is said to be in 'desperate circumstances' as she seeks an abortion.

If a man were about to puncture the back of your skull and suck your brains out with a vacuum, are you also in 'desperate circumstances'?

This is partial birth abortion folks.

The baby is delivered, except for the head, and as his body dangles outside of the birth canal, he is killed in the manner described.

All that Tiller had to do was allow the head to emerge and the mother would be free of the 'burden'.

But no.

He had to kill in order to get the big bucks. And make no mistake, his abortion practice was very lucrative.

LT wrote:

"At what point does the heart start beating? Certainly not at conception. "

In the first month, before most women even know they are pregnant, their baby's heart is beating already.

At conception, the baby's DNA is distinct from his mothers' DNA.

It's not 'the woman's body' that we're talking about.

It's another body. The baby's.

Joe,

Do you believe that the law should require you to risk your life in order to save the life of another person?

If you were in a situation where you could save one newly-born baby or 20 fertilized eggs, which would you choose?

tl (in sw) wrote:

"I believe a fetus becomes a person at birth. But the question is moot."

Is it possible that the baby is a person 24 hours before birth?

What magic is there about the process of birth that makes the baby a person?

What if the baby is removed by C-section early and doesn't go thru the birth process? How does the baby become a person then?

The question isn't moot. It is THE question of the whole abortion issue. When does the child become a living human being?

If the baby isn't living before birth, is he (or she) dead?

If the baby isn't a human being before birth, then what species is he (or she)?

You cannot pretend that this is not THE central issue, because everyone knows it is.

The basis of Choice is that everyone minds their own damn business.

You want to have 6, 10, 22 kids? That's your choice. I sincerely hope you can financially afford it and have a lot of help, but regardless of that fact, you have a legal right to have as many kids as you want and are able to physically bear. It's YOUR choice.

You want to have an abortion? Again, you have that right under our current laws. Some may hold personal or religious beliefs that would deny you that right, but again it's YOUR choice.

I've never seen anyone screaming at a woman on a sidewalk outside a clinic, telling them they should/must have an abortion. And I've noticed that the extreme anti-choice crowd doesn't give a damn what happens to the kid once it's born.

For many (not all, but many)in the anti-choice crowd, this issue is about control over women's bodies and sex, not about babies. This is shown by the fact that frequently these folks also argue that no one should have access to birth control or sex education which leads to more unplanned pregnancies and abortions. If the goal is to "stop the killing of babies" and a simple sex ed class or pill might prevent that, why wouldn't they be in favor of it? Because it's not really about the babies, it's about controlling what other people do with their bodies prior to conceiving the baby---ie birth control and sex.

Make all information available in an intelligent, accessible manner....then everyone leave everyone else alone and let everyone make their own choices. Focus on working with and helping the people already in the world, including newborns and young mothers/families who need assistance. Work on getting health care and education for everyone. Work on improving the way we fund our infrastructure, technology and our future businesses. Work on helping people develop their communication skills and tolerance so we can end conflict and war. Work on helping each other instead of tearing each other down for making personal choices which are none or your personal business. Then everyone will be truly Pro-Choice...and truly Pro-Life.

tl (in sw): Now that you have so wonderfully defined when life begins and I quote "I believe a fetus becomes a person at birth." So, I am just wondering, how do you define BIRTH?! Because babies are often "born" (brought forth from the womb) in abortion clinics and left to die in dumpsters. Do you term birth as being initiated by baby? Because that rarely happens in today's society. Most births are induced or require a c-section (hmm...a medical process like abortions, eh?!).

Too bad that you are so set in your ways that you will never consider when life begins. That's a tragedy. More sad, is the thought that there are countless others just like you.

And you are right, I am not swayed by your arguments, because I don't think they are really arguments, you do little to convince me. However, you you are right in saying that "what will reduce the number of abortions is reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies." This is common sense. But, people's values are going to have to change and we have to move from a "quick fix" mentality, not just find a pill that will do the trick. We have a president who believes as you do, that pregnancies and babies are mistakes that he wouldn't want Sasha and Malia to have a baby that would hold them back, which is the reason for 98% of abortions (socio-economic reasons). I wonder if he ever considered the fact the he was a "mistake" baby? After all, he was born six months after his parents married and was only two when they separated. How available were abortions in the early 60s, when Obama was born? Not as available as they are now, that's for sure. If they would have been widely available and easy to get, would Ann Dunham have chosen to abort Obama? Our current president was worn in the middle of the civil rights movement to a white, Kansas mom and a black, Kenyan father. Controversial? In many ways. Yet, she did not go on to abort Obama and Obama became President. What I am getting at is this: controversial, "mistake" pregnancies have happened. I have heard statistics jumbled around, some reasoning that 97% of babies are unplanned regardless of whether the individuals are already married. The situation has been the same; but the way that people have dealt with it has changed. When abortions became widely available more people opted for them (duh). But, when they weren't available, women like Ann Dunham adapted. I can't imagine what a difficult task it was for Obama's mother. Even Obama felt the pain. Yet, he has grown and been made stronger. How many future presidents have been aborted? How many scientists? How many counselors? How many friends?

Sex education may help; but honestly, I think most people in their 20s (the age of most mothers who choose abortion) understand where babies come from.

Sadly, people don't value life, which is what leads to the taking of life, whether it be from gunshot or abortion clinic bed, or Presidential podium.

Those who think a person like Gary Hammond can be reasoned with are mistaken. It's unfortunate, but debating with a person who believes in what boils down to popular fairy tales is a complete waste of time.

Ms Harmon,

Anyone who believes that 'sex ed classes' will lead to a decrease in unplanned pregnancies hasn't been paying attention for the past several decades.

But that is a separate issue than abortion. The abortion issue is what is the status of the baby in the womb?

Do they have a legal right to protection of their life?

Many states now are adopting laws to prosecute a killer for 2 murders (instead of 1) if he kills a pregnant woman and the child dies also.

How can this be if the unborn is not a human being? How can he be charged with a second murder?

Exactly, Joe. A baby is alive when it is still in the womb. That's why doctors search for a heart beat within the first few months. It's just like with adults: Tiller was likely pronounced dead when there was no heart beat and he could not be revived. And though I believe life begins earlier than a heart beat, most legal abortions are performed in stages after a heart beat has been established. Often, women don't even realize they are pregnant until they are several months along. It is just ridiculous to think that some people don't believe that a life begins until a child is born. I mean, how can you even say that when the child is ALIVE by medical standards (beating heart)?! And if a pregnant woman is killed along with the child in her womb, it should be considered two murders, because two beating hearts were killed.

WEEK 5: BABY'S HEART STARTS TO BEAT

Carla wrote:

"Do you really need me to get into the difference between medical waste and live, healthy people?"

The baby was alive until killed during the abortion procedure.

Referring to dead babies as 'medical waste' is horrible.

Many people give more dignity to their deceased pet than you are willing to give to a dead child.

When an animal is put down, we try to use the most humane means possible.

Abortions are painful, grisly procedures that are designed to fatten the bottom line of the abortionist.

Look up saline abortion and read how the baby dies of chemical burns as he inhales poisonous solution.

Look up other abortion procedures where a scalpel is used to slice the baby limb from limb.

Look up partial birth abortion where the baby is delivered, except the head, and as his body dangles outside the birth canal a scissors is shoved into the base of the skull and his brains are sucked out with a vacuum.

That's what you're defending, Carla.

You ought to educate yourself on it.

To you, human bodies are 'medical waste', eh?

I hope the whole world reads and understands what liberals like you are all about.

Obama voted 3 times to allow living babies that were fully born (completely out of the womb, no longer 'part of the woman's body') during botched abortions to be left to die unattended.

Do you support that too?

HEY FBEAR:

Don't assume that abortions are performed in dire circumstances where the mother's health would be compromised. That's what the people running abortion clinics want you to believe. The number of women that die from childbirth these days is extremely few. However, the percentage of babies who die because their mothers aren't socially or economically prepared is 98%. Arguing the use of abortion for rape/incest/health reasons is some sort of sheepish blanket to cover up the murder of millions of lives. It's really childish and incredibly dishonest. And it never fails to puzzle me how they succeed in selling their lies.

Carla, Carla, Carla! Of course the women who are "speaking out" in applause of Tiller are going to be publicized! You spin this argument as if Tiller took all the unhealthy babies and did away with them, so that they wouldn't be a burden to women and society. But I assure you that there were more healthy babies that Tiller did away with than not. Have you researched any to support your arguments or do you take the isolated situations where some woman or a handfull of women come out to say that they are glad Tiller did what he did? Because I assure you that there are an equal amount of women who had abortions at the hands of Tiller that would differ. And I would bet my life that Tiller took babies that were perfectly healthy during his career.

Gee, I am sorry that you consider the debate of what is medical waste and healthy a "waste of time." I mean, if doctors only aborted the medically wasted, there would be a 98% reduction in abortions and Tiller's business wouldn't have been as lucrative. It's too bad that you won't waste your precious time, but don't give a damn about wasted lives.

Maybe someday you will change your mind like Norma McCorvey.

As a man I am by definition superior to all women and must make all medical decisions for them. This has been decreed by an invisible yet infallible sky god.

Carla wrote:

"Your perception of "horrible" is out of whack IMO"

Perhaps you should find out what someone believes before you accuse them, Carla.

If the mother's life is truly endangered, abortion should be an option IMHO.

Part of that process should be the unbiased opinion of another physician who has no financial ties to the abortionist.

It was concerning this very issue that George Tiller was in danger of losing his medical license at the time he was killed. The Kansas Board of Healing Arts was investigating him for his illegal skirting of this requirement of Kansas law.

You should choose your heroes more carefully.

If the mother's life is truly endangered, abortion should be an option IMHO. Part of that process should be the unbiased opinion of another physician who has no financial ties to the abortionist.

Yes, as I have already noted, women are Breeding Machines whose wombs are the property of men. Said Breeding Machines need the permission of Truly Enlightened Males to make medical decisions. These Truly Enlightened Males are customarily in contact, either directly or through an Infallible Intermediary, with an omniscient sky god. Occasionally Truly Enlightened Females also communicate with this sky god, but only with permission from the Truly Enlightened males.

We also all know that George Tiller was becoming fabulously wealthy in his medical practice.

By the way, Joe White, is "Abortionist" a medical specialty? I don't recall seeing it in the list of medical specialties in the Yellow Pages. A whole page of listings in the Portland phone book for gynecologists, however.

Joel Dan Wells wrote:

"...need the permission of Truly Enlightened Males to make medical decisions....."

Both physicians can be female, I wouldn't care.

btw Joel, did you know that women can be physicians? Why did you assume it referred only to males?

No no no, Joe, it's all those other millions of Truly Enlightened Males, collectively, who need to give permission for The Weaker Sex to make medical decisions. You know, like those Truly Enlightened Males who decree that abortion is only acceptable if the mother's life is endangered.

Can Blue Oregon not moderate these vicious posts advocating further violence against doctors? I read this site for its insightful posts and intelligent commenters. I do not read it in order to find sub-human rants justifying the murder of medical professionals. Can't you delete the kind of garbage posted by "trishdish" or "Joe White?" In fact, it's probably a good idea, as the hatemongers who advocate for violence against Ob-gyn practitioners are likely violating the law when they threaten them online or in person or otherwise show support for the murder of doctors.

Photo of some "Christians" at Tiller's funeral.

David Hickson,

Show where I have justified Tiller's murder.

I haven't and I don't.

But that doesn't make Tiller a saint, or a noble person.

He wasn't.

It is pure ignorance to assume that the medical establishment would not perform an abortion on a woman to save her life. Since when is an abortionist a HERO? It is a rare case that the abortion is necessary to save the mother's life. You have a warped sense of morality.....IMO.

It is an acknowledged fact, even by Planned Parenthood , that the overwhelming majority of abortions are done for convenience reasons, not to protect the mother's life.

Even with an overly broad 'health reasons' option, the convenience reasons are still over 85%.

I am in the genetics community and for those of you that don't understand the difference between Dr. Tiller and early-term abortion clinics, I would like to offer some insight. Dr. Tiller was one of 2 or 3 physicians that were able to help women in desparate situations. They DID NOT perform abortions at a whim . . . much like many false, unsubstantiated reports would lead you to believe.

I have had the life-changing and mentally opening experience of knowing the women (and their families) that have lost their dream of having their baby. I was there to deliver the news that this dream wouldn't be, and that either the baby or the mother could suffer and/or die. These situations are relatively rare in comparison to the number of women getting pregnant and having babies everyday. But 2% of all women getting pregnant would be more than 2 doctors could ever handle . . . if 98% of abortions are really elective. What I learned from my job, is NEVER to judge before you yourself have been in that situation, because I guarantee you, you have no idea what you will do until you are forced to make that decision yourself (even if you are positive you will). I have seen strong pro-life couples (whether for religious reasons or due to personal beliefs) faced with these situations that have made very different decisions when in these dire situations. I have never met anyone who was excited to go to Dr. Tiller . . . but he was there to gently help these families through a horrific experience. People that wanted a baby, that were losing their dream . . . and being chastised for this by people who don't understand what they are talking about. Another motto I live by . . . don't talk all-knowing about things you do not fully understand. I have met Dr. Tiller and he is a kind and gentle man that forged on under much adversity. Sure he made money . . . as do all physicians, but that doesn't make him a bad person. And, I don't know about you all, but getting my clinic bombed and 2 gunshots in my arms in previous years would have been enough to give it all up . . .

Families who have been forced into these desparate situations have lost a great physician and good soul to help them through the process. Dr. Tiller honored the memory of each baby, allowed the parents to hold the baby, view the baby and give the baby a funeral (whatever the parents wished). These babies were not "tossed in the trash" and the loss of their life was not an "elective" disregard for life. I was touched at how Dr. Tiller and his staff helped the families embrace the life and death of their babies, and helped them make the decision that was right for them and helped them preserve the memory of their much loved baby . . . a baby they had lost.

Well I don't get is why everyone blaming Dr.Tiller!!! Women choose to go to him! They act as if he went after women to get abortion! it's not his choice, its up to the mothers. This man is gone now, let him rest at peace. what I don't get is why is everyone saying thing after he's gone. Why not when he was still here with us, to debt with us! Why judge a book by it's cover? If you was to know him you might like him! What I don't get is if you have a problem with what he does or who he is. Why didn't anyone went up to him and ask why? and get to know him. Just because you read about him or heard of what he does, doesn't mean you know him. Do you believe everything you read? do believe everything you hear? If you did a research on Dr.Tiller, why didn't you just went up to him and give an interview instant? How can anyone say his work is bad when you don't even try to listen to what he had to say. I don't see anyone putting their opinion in child abuse or child harassment. OR drug dealers on the street. I don't hear anyone voicing their voice when it comes to street Ganges? There is so many other bad things going on the world and everyone decides to all voice their opinion on Dr.Tiller. AFTER HE IS DIED!!! That's funny!!!

i'm curious to know how anyone posting here knows the types of medical procedures that Dr. Tiller was performing. is that not privileged information? furthermore, and this is for either side of the debate, how can you know the situations leading up to an abortion? i'm sure, as Carla has pointed out, that there are women coming forward to tell their experiences with the doctor, but what about all the others?

personally, i find the notion of late term abortions to be pretty difficult to accept except under VERY extreme circumstances. i wouldn't hold Dr. Tiller in too high regard if there were obvious and provable "convenience" late term abortions that did not involve some life and death circumstances. my guess is that that doctor-patient confidentiality would make that pretty hard to answer, meaning both side are clutching at straws.

i have lots of questions regarding this whole debate, but no time to put them in a reasonably short post so i'll end with this thought - my mother always used to tell me that if men were required to bear children then we'd have much fewer people on this planet. i've always agreed with that sentiment (men really are babies), and would put it forward in this debate thusly: all other things being equal, if men were the ones bearing children would this even be a debate?

Trishdish, you don't have to agree to anything other people think. But if you really believe that is the case are you doing something about it??? Are you having a baby for every babies that dies? Are you fund raising money for mother who needs support? What are you doing that makes you feel that what Dr.Tiller is doing is wrong? OR you just believe that it's wrong? Another question, if you was to have an 10 years old daughter who got rap and pregnant and she doesn't want to keep the baby? what would you do? Make her have the baby?

The Tiller family has announced that the clinic in Wichita will not reopen. The terrorists win.

What, no outrage over the shooting of US servicemen in America's street?

Does the writer thing that tiller is a hero, and it's US troops that are the "baby-killers"?

Strange view of who is a "hero."

Carla...when does your column about the Muslim extremist who killed the soldier at the recruitment center come out? I can't wait to see your outrage at that.

Susana (and the rest) who seek an article on the murdered military recruiter:

I have no intention of writing that story. Not after the multitude of comments and stories I've seen attempting to justify the death of Dr. Tiller.

I've seen nothing at all in the way of attempting to justify the death of the military recruiter.

And there's the rub.

The murder you are writing about was carried out by a deranged man, not all of the other people you are smearing with your condemnation.

You lose all credibility when you paint with such a broad brush.

Would you blame all muslims for the act of murder committed against the military recruiter on Monday?

In my opinion, you are the one who is repugnant, you are the swill.

A simple proposition for the believer and the unbeliever alike: if you must err, err on the side of life.

To the extent that we cheapen life, we invite the worst excesses of the last century - and this one.

Murder is always wrong. Self-defense, or the defense of one's loved ones or one's community, or one's country is not.

"If only the "pro-lifers" cared about ALL LIFE and not just the unborn this world might be a better place."

If only the pro-choicers could be as unequivocal about the mass murder extermination of the post-natal unwanted so their true colors would become more apparent.

David Hickson:

I never justified the killing of Tiller in any way shape or form. I merely said that I am relieved that no more babies will die at his hands and I AM. That's no crime. I can't believe that speaking one's mind is a crime; but taking innocent lives isn't. I stated in one of my blogs that people have a general disregard for life, whether it be through taking the life of a perfectly healthy child or shooting the man that takes the life of a perfectly healthy child. Jumping to conclusions and begging Carla to delete our posts is a violation of our rights, though, because we still have the freedom of speech...we have been out of our mommy's wombs long enough to be considered humans.

Carla:

Carla, just curious about your abortion: was the baby or yourself gravely endangered? (rhetorical question). And if you work solely for women who are in desperate need (2% of actual abortions) then bravo, but I bet that is hardly the case.

Nancy:

No I am not "having a baby for every babies that dies." And I am my own person, I don't agree with just anything someone says. There are people on this blog that want me out of here. My grandfather used to say that any old dead fish can swim down stream; but it takes a live one to swim up current. I am not favored and neither are my views. I will continue to make my opinions available when and how I possibly can.

Nancy, rape and incest account for very few of the total abortions committed. And to say that Tiller only took babies that were compromised in health or compromising the mother's health is incredulous. Come on! He worked for thirty-some years at it!

Tiller killed humans to solve a problem.

The murderer of Tiller killed him to solve a problem.

Both actions are repugnant and are based upon a very similar root philosophy.

Carla, look in the mirror. It is your ethos that the murderer of Dr. Tiller followed.

Carla - I want to know why an "11 yr. old rape-victim who might die in childbirth" or a woman who's body is "ravaged with cancer" is waiting till late-term to get her abortion anyway? Pro-abortion advocates always use these excuses. It would be interesting to know statistics, however true they might be, showing the yearly numbers of "therapeutic" vs. "elective" abortions performed by Women's Health Care Services.

Carla wrote:

"It was the right decision for me"

Nothing else matters, right?

Go Lorrie00! That is exactly what I am talking about! There are isolated instances where health is at risk. But for most women, like Carla, having a baby would cramp their lifestyle of blogging and so they get rid of the kid.

It is an acknowledged fact, even by Planned Parenthood, that the overwhelming majority of abortions are done for convenience reasons, not to protect the mother's life.

It is an acknowledged fact, even by Joe White, that the overwhelming majority of condom use is for convenience reasons, not to protect lives.

It is an acknowledged fact, even by Joe White, that the overwhelming majority of condom avoidance is for sexual-pleasure reasons, not to conceive babies.

But let's get down to it, Joe: why does anyone other than the pregnant woman, in consultation with medical professionals, get to decide about an abortion?

Condoms, diaphragms, IUDs, and what have you: they're all forms of birth control. And so is abortion. I have no problem acknowledging that.

Call it "convenience", I really don't give a damn. Your whole schtick is CONTROL OF WOMEN'S BODIES.

Here's a good statistic from the "Center for Bio-Ethical Reform"....more "swill", eh?

-Why women have abortions- 1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

Hey, Carla, and while we are at the dreamy Planned Parenthood passing out condoms and talking sex ed, let's educate them on what an abortion is really like. You can give your own account and then we can look to statistics and info which might include some of the following:

* Heavy Bleeding - Some bleeding after abortion is normal. However, if the cervix is torn  or the uterus is punctured, there is a risk of severe bleeding known as hemorrhaging. When this happens, a blood transfusion may be required.  Severe bleeding is also a risk with the use of RU486.  One in 100 women who use RU486 require surgery to stop the bleeding.

* Infection – Infection can develop from the insertion of medical instruments into the uterus, or from fetal parts that are mistakenly left inside (known as an incomplete abortion).  A pelvic infection may lead to persistent fever over several days and extended hospitalization.  It can also cause scarring of the pelvic organs.

* Incomplete Abortion - Some fetal parts may be mistakenly left inside after the abortion. Bleeding and infection may result.

* Sepsis – A number of RU486 or mifepristone users have died as a result of sepsis (total body infection).

* Anesthesia – Complications from general anesthesia used during abortion surgery may result in convulsions, heart attack, and in extreme cases, death.  It also increases the risk of other serious complications by two and a half times.

* Damage to the Cervix - The cervix may be cut, torn, or damaged by abortion instruments.  This can cause excessive bleeding that requires surgical repair.

* Scarring of the Uterine Lining – Suction tubing, curettes, and other abortion instruments may cause permanent scarring of the uterine lining.

* Perforation of the Uterus - The uterus may be punctured or torn by abortion instruments. The risk of this complication increases with the length of the pregnancy. If this occurs, major surgery may be required, including removal of the uterus (known as a hysterectomy).

* Damage to Internal Organs - When the uterus is punctured or torn, there is also a risk that damage will occur to nearby organs such as the bowel and bladder.

* Death - In extreme cases, other physical complications from abortion including excessive bleeding, infection, organ damage from a perforated uterus, and adverse reactions to anesthesia may lead to death. This complication is rare, but is real.

Women who undergo one or more induced abortions carry a significantly increased risk of delivering prematurely in the future. Premature delivery is associated with higher rates of cerebral palsy, as well as other complications of prematurity (brain, respiratory, bowel, and eye problems).

Abortion and Breast Cancer:

Medical experts are still researching and debating the linkage between abortion and breast cancer. Here are some important facts:

* Carrying your first pregnancy to full term gives protection against breast cancer.  Choosing abortion causes loss of that protection.

* A number of reliable studies have concluded that there may be a link between abortion and the later development of breast cancer.

A 1994 study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found: “Among women who had been pregnant at least once, the risk of breast cancer in those who had experienced an induced abortion was 50% higher than among other women.” Emotional and Psychological Impact:

There is evidence that abortion is associated with a decrease in both emotional and physical health. For some women these negative emotions may be very strong, and can appear within days or after many years. This psychological response is a form of post-traumatic stress disorder. Some of the symptoms are:

* Eating disorders
* Relationship problems
* Guilt
* Depression
* Flashbacks of abortion
* Suicidal thoughts
* Sexual dysfunction
* Alcohol and drug abuse

http://www.pregnancycenters.org/abortion.html

"His cold-blooded murder for what looks like political and religious reasons is revolting."

Do you feel the same way about the soldier who was killed for political and religious reasons in Little Rock?

Pauly cy: Yup. But I don't see anyone trying to justify that murder. While there's a whole raft of people working to justify the murder of Tiller.

I'll leave it to your own intellect to discern that difference.

Carla, do you think that all of these unwanted children are a result of not knowing how to put a condom on a penis?! Or because 19-year old people don't understand that you can get pregnant through unprotected sex?! I think that a better approach would be to tell people that if they get pregnant they may feel compelled to have an abortion, which could have serious repercussions for the woman (my bulleted bullshit) and ends the life of a child in the process. And I am serious about this approach. Most sex ed doesn't go into explicit detail about abortion, it merely states it as an option. I don't quite understand your stance, either, Carla. Are you reactive or proactive?

You have a nasty mouth. Nothing I said warranted that kind of language.
Is this one better? It's from 2005...but I'm sure it's still timely. Almost 80% are what would be considered "elective", I think.

Abortion Statistics - Decisions to Have an Abortion (U.S.)

25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion want to postpone childbearing.

21.3% of women cannot afford a baby.

14.1% of women have a relationship issue or their partner does not want a child.

12.2% of women are too young (their parents or others object to the pregnancy.)

10.8% of women feel a child will disrupt their education or career.

7.9% of women want no (more) children.

3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to fetal health.

2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to maternal health.

There have been no states ever that out-lawed aborting a pregnancy when the mother's life was in danger, btw.

Personally, I don't know what I think about 1st trimester abortions, but I do believe that anyone who waits till the 7-8-9th months to have an "abortion" for convenience is committing murder. By that time, adoption should be the only choice.

You really should be nicer to people who comment on your stories and columns if you want to continue to gain readers.

My feelings about the abortion debate were well summed up in a bumper sticker I saw some years ago:

"IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN ABORTION DON'T HAVE ONE"

It's not just me...many of your comments to other people are pretty rude and your own column carries a few exaggerations, too. Besides I'll bet it's difficult to move a tough old broad such as yourself by mere statistics, anyway.

...but from the same website (mnstate.edu) Approximately 1,370,000 elective abortions occur annually in the U.S.
88% of abortions occur during the first 6 to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

<hr/>

Even though that number is above 50%, it doesn't make me feel any better.
I'm not advocating the murder of Tiller. However, it's funny that liberal justice is what released Scott Roeder after he was arrested for bomb-making, etc. If conservatives ran the country, Dr Tiller would be alive and killing babies today.

When Roeder gets the needle for his crime are you liberals going to do a candle light vigil outside the prison? I know you only like to save killers maybe you will try to save Tillers killer.hmmmm?

Joe, you asked me "Do they have a legal right to protection of their life?"

My answer---"NO, they do not." You can call it a fetus, a baby, a kid. It can have a heartbeat, move, hell it can dance the macarena for all I care, if what is in the woman's womb will kill her, either directly through childbirth or indirectly (she needs medical treatment she can't get cause of the fetus) or if what is in the womb is already dead or will have no brain function once born, then I have NO issue with the woman getting an abortion at any time. Are we clear now?

As for the other comment you made, I didn't say that Sex Ed alone would lower the number of abortions. It takes, education about sex plus birth control access, THEN you'd see a drop in unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions. But abortions will never go away completely, whether legal or illegal.

We will never find common ground on this issue. You have the right to try and get the laws changed to stop abortions....just as I have the right to try and expand/protect abortion rights and access. You have the right to protest at clinics, peacefully....and I have the right to walk into those same clinics as a patient or volunteer without being harmed.

But NO ONE has the right to kill someone who is performing a legally allowed act under the law.

A girl named Kelly once spoke out on leaving her baby in a toilet in Tiller's clinic when she was 14. She cited how the worst case scenario of having the child would have been a lot better than the emotional and behavioral consequences of having the abortion. Also, it was mentioned in the clip that Dr. Tiller often cited emotional issues as being sufficient cause for abortion. Aren't women supposed to be emotional during pregnancy due to hormones and what not?

Carla, you may have not had any regrets or hard feelings about your abortion but you are far from a prototype!

Terry and Tiller are/were both murderers. I can feel better about a murderer killing a murderer. Anyone who looks at this case and says that Tiller was a good person because he obeyed the law is seriously flawed as a human. The people who went to Tiller were murderous cowards. I can't imagine a mother choosing comfort over her childs very life, yet this is what you support.

So why is the mother who drowned her children a criminal. Wasn't she simply protecting herself from stress? family problems? Her children were viable just as the babies that Tiller murdered were viable in too many cases.

Sadly though, it doesn't matter if my arguement is dead on. The people who support late term abortion sicken me because they would rather not deal with standing up against evil but would rather support it since it doesn't directly affect them. You are pathetic and I think it even sadder that you stand up to have babies killed that in many cases probably would have grown up to be better than you Carla

Good, bad or otherwise, Tiller wasn't breaking any laws and didn't deserve to be murdered. If you're too damn lazy to work on changing the laws or if you can't convince the public with your arguments that the laws should be changed, you need to accept reality and live under the laws of the land (isn't that what people are always telling us about gay marriage?).

And don't start up about the laws of your invisible sky-god-----we live in a democracy, not a theocracy, so "God's law" is irrelevant to our legal statutes.

There is no middle ground with these fundamentalist fanatics, why do I even try? Oh, that's right....because they keep spouting utter bilge and trying to take away my legal rights and telling me how to live my life.

To Lisa in CA----yeah, yeah, we may be aborting the next Einstein or Gandhi....or maybe the next Timothy McVeigh or Jeffrey Dahmer. How the hell do you know? The only thing you have a right to decide is what happens in your own womb...stay the hell out of mine, okay?

Okay, I'm off this thread for good, my blood pressure is just getting too high for this level of stupidity.

Ms Mel Harmon: even if you don't read this, it still deserves attention.

Some of the "laws of invisible sky god" to which you are referring are a part of our legal statutes. Most people would agree that the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are important. The right to life has been considered one of the inalienable rights of humans. Why should it be any different with a baby?

Oh, and staying away from your womb shouldn't be hard, I'm sure it is a futile place. You might even consider having your uterus removed?

I agree with you about the level of stupidity on this thread, though. Women's wombs have become like execution chambers. And we are executing the innocent by the thousands each and every day. Yet people on this blog applaud this tragedy and strive to make the gallows and slaughterhouses available to more women! Senseless "progressives." We are institutionalizing barbarism and that befits regression.

I will leave this thread also. None of you have swayed me to consider abortion in a different light. I really expected more from you pro-choicers; but your arguments are ill-formed and unsubstantial. Where are the cold, hard facts? A few women who were happy after their abortion and all of your selfish "my life, my baby" whines are pathetic.

Carla, I have one last post for you. Bush's take on abstinence was hardly what made the abortion rates spike, dumbass! Look closely at the rates of abortion and you will see that they parallel the economic conditions. And this shouldn't be a shocker because it seems that economic factors are a big factor in deciding whether to abort.

Oh, and maybe the reason so many women agreed with you on their abortion being necessary and good is because they could sense your intolerance for other viewpoints. If in my postings, I am foistering my fundamentalist viewpoints and it's unwelcome, then you are incapable of debating this matter and really should cease to continue with this and other blogs.

What kind of lifestyle does a child have when they are dead?

That is the lifestyle that is relevant to this discussion.

"If only the "pro-lifers" cared about ALL LIFE and not just the unborn this world might be a better place."

I nominate this sentence for the "Dumbest Thing Ever Written on the Internet". Congratulations, and good luck at this year's award ceremony.

Amazing Carla lambastes FreeRepublic yet links to the DailyKos, the hate filled leftist group.

Carla, does being pro-abortion help with your guilt?

I'd find all these arguments about how late-term abortions are only conducted when there is risk to the "health of the mother" much more convincing if I didn't know that pro-abortion types include such muzzy notions as "mental health of the mother" under that umbrella, thus providing a loophole for the women who abort a late-term, healthy, fully-developed fetus because she is "depressed" or "upset."

But the most telling truth about pro-abortionists is this: Ask the ones you know the following question.

If a procedure were perfected that could extract a fetus at four months without killing it, if the fetus could then be raised in an incubator and given up for adoption with no further cost to or demand upon the mother, if the procedure were free and no more painful than abortion, THEN would you consent to outlawing abortion?

Most of them will say No. Why? Because the goal of abortion is that the baby die.

Don't believe me? Ask around. 4 of 5 will say no. The baby must die.

Ms Mel Harmon wrote:

"You can call it a fetus, a baby, a kid. It can have a heartbeat, move, hell it can dance the macarena for all I care, if what is in the woman's womb will kill her, either directly through childbirth or indirectly (she needs medical treatment she can't get cause of the fetus) or if what is in the womb is already dead or will have no brain function once born, then I have NO issue with the woman getting an abortion at any time. Are we clear now?"

Are you clear on the fact that life threatening situations like you describe are a tiny fraction of all abortions?

Are you clear on the fact that the overwhelming majority of abortions are done for convenience?

I have no problem with abortion as an option if the life of the mother is seriously endangered. And nearly everyone would agree with that.

To continue throwing that red herring into the discussion shows you haven't got anything else.

No wonder your blood pressure is high.

I do not condone violence, but challenge anyone to morally differentiate the actions or motives of Scott Roeder in Wichita in 2009 from those of John Brown in Harpers Ferry in 1859.

Carla,

You trash others for posting stats from "anti-choice, inflammatory cesspools" , but even when I post stats from Guttmacher, a Planned Parenthood apologist, you are afraid to discuss them.

Tell us why convenience is sufficient rationale for killing a child. That's all.

I asked about sex selection in another thread. How 'bout answering the issue instead of throwing mud?

This issue should be a big concern to women, since it is girls that are more commonly the losers on the sex selection question.

Is sex selection a valid reason to kill the unborn?

Should a girl get the death penalty for being a girl?

Leroy,

John Brown attacked the government (a military installation) and Scott Roeder attacked an unarmed individual. No moral equivalence there. Sorry.

Tiller was a creep. But I cannot condone rubbing out abortionists, or crack dealers, or any number of other scum.

The state has the right, and the responsibility to protect us from scum, and we need to be sure it does.

I'm as anti-abortion as they come. But shooting Tiller was not the answer. Two wrongs don't make it right IMHO.

Yeah 'cherry picking'. I linked to the WHOLE report by Guttmacher, an organization that takes the OPPOSITE view of mine.

Yeah 'cherry picking'. Right.

With the Republican Party having folks like Trishdish, Lorrie00, Susana, Joe White and others, then you all through your vapid, fundamentalist-based comments have just convinced me not to vote Republican for the next 20 years.

I will be re-reading this post and every vapid pro-life comment to reaffirm my thorough disgust with everything that is anti-intellectual and thus Republican.

Politics is a game of persuasion and perception. Keep on telling yourself it is a fight and conveying so in what you write in online blogs.

Doing so will keep many silent readers and people such as myself voting Democrat.

Great job, ya'll are doing a great collective effort of keeping non-affiliated voters voting Democrat through your anti-intellectual, antiquated values based flames.

The Republican Party must feel so great to have people like Joe White, Lorrie00, Trishdish, Susana and other knucklehead fundamentalists speaking out for their mainstream Republican policy positions.

Carla,

Keep feeding these trolls, they make the mainstream Republican policy positions incredibly persuasive for pushing moderates from Republican ranks.

Keep on talking sister, even though not one of them has responded to a post you wrote. Instead they respond with the same flame re-articulated in dumber and dumber ways the more they write.

Ryan,

The American public is growing more and more pro-life with each passing year.

As medical technology makes the pro-abortion position less and less defensible, just go ahead and stick with the Democrats.

Your party will be a pro-life party in a few years, and you'll be in a tiny minority, screaming and stamping your feet.

Joe,

Your work and talk with me is done. You have convinced this 24 year old, non-affiliated voter to not consider voting Republican for the next 20 years.

Keep up on talking brother because the Republican Party needs more people like you to cull the so-called RINOS from their ranks.

You know, the same RINOS who elected Eisenhower, Ford, and Bush I.

Then again, Reagan is the only one that matters right?

./end my involvement in this post

Ryan,

Your 'concern troll' act is stale and unconvincing.

It matters not if you're leaving.

You were done before that.

If you can't discuss the issue squarely, this is probably not where you belong.

you people crack me up!!! you guys think that if there isn't anymore abortion, women will stop finding ways to do it!!! You can't relate to it until it happens to you! I believe then you will change your mind! and wish Dr.Tiller was here to help you! hahhahahhaa

Nancy,

I don't doubt that there are hundreds of women and girls who would say that Tiller 'helped them'.

'He helped me so I wouldn't have to tell my parents.'

'He helped me so I could attend college in the fall at the same time as my classmates.'

'He helped me because I didn't have a high paying job and could not afford to raise a child.'

'He helped me continue to pursue my career and not miss an important promotion.'

'He helped me because my boyfriend would've left if I had a baby.'

'He helped me avoid the embarrassment of others knowing what I did.'

Yes, he 'helped'.

But at what cost?

The cost of a life.

Why do you guys care so much about this? oh it's because you guys are the people! Well now n days people don't care about people anymore! you can find few people who will do sometime and other do a lot of talking but doesn't do anything to support! Everyone who had a problem with Dr.Tiller or abortion. Then fucken do something about it!!! damn!!! Pay more tax to welfare Or every time you get pay throw some money at people who needs it! Open up a foster home, adopt a kid!!! There so much shit you can do!!! but if you aren't doing jack shit then shut the fuck up! It an more fuck up is that, that man Dr.Tiller got kill at a damn church!!! I wonder what kind of person will kill someone at a fucken church??? From what I know people who are MOSTLY against abortion are christian! and if they are, therefore they should understand the bible more then anyone else. Just because he did abortion doesn't mean he should be murder. For whatever you judge him it will be judge on you!

Less than 1% of abortions a year are preformed because of the woman's health. If she has carried it to the 7th or 8th month then undergoing an abortion is harder than having a C section. This is not about helping, it is about women killing their less than perfect babies out of convience.As a woman I can not fathom a woman who would voluntaily kill her own flesh and blood especially if they were sick. I wonder why they want so badly to hurt an already handicapped child? Most would be very surprised to find out how badly most men think of a woman who chooses to kill her own child. I know men who have divorced their wives after finding out they had killed a baby in their younger years. Abortion has a tendancy to ruin the rest of a woman's life.Someday hopefully we will talk about this as a settle civil rights issue just as slavery is discussed today. The Supreme court also said that owning salves was legal for about 100 years before they reversed that decision just as they will declare abortion as first degree murder someday. Hopefully the clinics are keeping the names of those who have done this since they are required to by law. That way all who are still alive will have to pay for their crimes in this life and not only in hell for their eternal life.

As an OBGYN those of you who think life doesn't begin at conception obiviously have never went to medical school. It is settled science that infact at concetion there is the complete DNA of a separate human being. The spinal column is formed by the 3rd week of gestation which means that a child at 4 weeks gestation DOES feel pain. I suggest some of you look up the film "Silent Scream". One of the leading Dr's who helped legalize abortion filmed an early abortion hopeing to silence pro lifers but ended up quiting preforming abortions after he watched the 4 week babies mouth open in a silent scream as it was being dismembered alive. Every women who has an abotion should have to view the dismembered body that comes out of the vaccuum. It would probably keep her from ever doing it a second time. You do know that when they stop and turn their back on you in the abotion room that they are counting body parts right? If they don't have the whole baby they have to go back in and do it again.

Carla Axmen, isn't that a name I recognise from the local abortion clinic's registry? You see woman who have had abortions must defend their murderous behavior otherwise they go insane from the guilt. That's why some are so vocal they have to see others validate their sins.

Nancy,

I can tell you that I, and most pro-life people, completely condemn the murder of George Tiller.

I do not favor murdering abortionists, or crack dealers or any other societal predators.

I wish he had gotten the chance to live his life and change his ways.

As the scripture says "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked says the LORD, but that he should turn and live."

Predators, such as abortionists, take advantage of a person in a bad situation in order to make lots of money for themselves.

I hope the shooter gets the maximum penalty.

But that doesn't excuse the life that George Tiller lived and that he killed babies for trivial reasons.

No one can deny that the overwhelming percentage of abortions are done for convenience reasons.

Planned Parenthood admits it. I've posted the link several times, but liberals often don't want to read anything that doesn't fit their pre-digested worldview.

Here is the report from Guttmacher

These "arguments" between the Reich and the Almost-Reich are not designed to persuade anyone, but rather to go on endlessly, thus ignoring and avoiding the reality of the essential agreement between the two parties on foreign policy, civil rights, economics, etc.

While the world's ecosystems are collapsing, both sides are congratulating themselves on their greater moral courage. Pathetic.

Carla,

No one is forcing you to worship anything. Are you smoking something?

We simply have said you shouldn't kill babies.

Is that too much to ask?

You can imagine people jumping off the fence toward you all day if you wish.

But the fact is that society is moving in a pro-life direction, not toward your pro-abortion mindset.

People look at sonograms of their children and they remember all the pro-abortion rhetoric about it being 'just a blob of tissue'.

And they know you didn't tell the truth.

Try explaining to your kids that it would've been alright if you had aborted them.

And they'll turn pro-life quicker than you can blink.

In all of their choosing, I sincerely hope that the pro-choice people who've made human sacrifices can say that it was worth it. Citing data and previous posts from authors, most of the reasons women have abortions are for "convenience reasons."

If a woman were to abort for such a reason as emotional or financial burdens, went on to advance herself and decided to "plan" her next children--what if her financial and social achievements were to be uprooted, a spontaneous miscarriage, if you will, of all that she'd worked for? What would she do, get rid of her kids if she regressed into a poorer financial or emotional state? Would she drown them in a bathtub or some lake because that is the way to deal with financial and emotional obligation, just get rid of it?????

I can imagine with the current economic upheaval it is not out of the possibility that women endure economic and social regression years after abortion. People loose their jobs everyday.

LIFE happens! And for most other life events, you don't just have a medical procedure and "poof" it's all gone.

Hey, planned parenthood people, good luck "planning" the lives of your clients!!

Carla, I don't know that I would characterize Dr. Tiller as a hero, although his refusal to compromise under threats of attacks and actual attacks indicates he was a pretty brave man. In any case, there's no justification for murder, no matter the motivation, and folks like O'Reilly who incite these nutcases have a lot to answer for.

Tiller performed illegal late term abortions. Kansas law allows late term abortions if

"(1) The abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant woman; or (2) a continuation of the pregnancy will cause a substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman. "

Tiller killed handicapped babies because he thought he could get away with it. And he did.

But killing the patient is not the solution for disability or illness.

Those who justify abortion of an ill or handicapped infant are surrendering everything medical science has fought to achieve for thousands of years.

<h2>Why do we think death is an acceptable option when a baby is ill or disabled?</h2>