Extremism breeds violence and terror and is the enemy of liberty. After the Tiller murder Republicans may finally have had enough.
I was very interested to see the reaction of many Republicans to the over-the-top behavior of the extreme right in the wake of the assassination of abortion doctor George Tiller earlier this week. On The Next Right they quickly removed an offensive article, and comments had loudly condemned the author. On Little Green Footballs they posted a substantial article condemning commenters and posters on several other right-leaning blogs for their remarks about Tiller. These reactions give a clear impression that more and more mainstream Republicans are fed up with the fanaticism of the religious right, sickened by their behavior over the Tiller issue and just about ready to give them the boot.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - roger nowosielski
Are you going to be around for a while, Clav? I'm just about to send you my next article.
27 - roger nowosielski
I don't know about you, Jordan, but I think that Ann Coulter's looks is way overrated. Rush salivates over her, and so do the other talk-show hosts. She leaves me rather cold - a raving bitch to say the least (though a vampire would be a kinder word).
I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.
28 - Jordan Richardson
I try not to look directly at Ann Coulter, much like Indiana Jones and Marion Ravenwood didn't look straight at the Ark.
29 - roger nowosielski
If that ain't a definition of a monster, than I don't know what is.
30 - Cindy
14
I think Jordan makes some good points. Also though, I can think of possible alternatives.
One might be empathetic toward the woman with for her position of being vulnerable. Especially if one speaks of the woman as having to make a "traumatic choice". The doctor is not making a traumatic choice. The doctor has chosen action while not in a vulnerable state.
(Caveat: I'm not defending/criticizing any position here.)
31 - Cindy
28
LOL
32 - Andy Marsh
First let me say I'm not in any way condoning the actions of his murderer.
I've been reading these comments and it seems that a few of you want to defend the actions of this doctor by saying he was basically, only following the orders of his professions.
My question to those of you who are defending him is, if these are the orders of his profession why are there only about three doctors in the country that will perform these late term abortions? Are they refusing to "follow orders" or are they living by the tenant of their profession that says, "first, do no harm"?
I have no say in whether a woman terminates her pregnancy, unless I was involved in creating the situation in the first place.
I could care less how many unwanted babies are terminated on this planet. Hell, I've met a lot of people that make me wish their parents believed in abortion!
33 - Cindy
16
I like Jordan's mind too! I was going to offer him a penny for his thoughts...or .38 cents for his entire brain. :-)
34 - Clavos
Rog,
I'm around most of the day; either here or at the hospital (which has wi-fi).
35 - Cindy
30
I garbled it, but hopefully still readable.
36 - Jordan Richardson
One might be empathetic toward the woman with for her position of being vulnerable. Especially if one speaks of the woman as having to make a "traumatic choice".
One might be, sure. But given the context of Arch's inferences I'm not sure I'd buy that he would be empathetic. Abortion is, in his mind, murder. How would the person making the choice of/for abortion be let off the hook with such ease?
The doctor is not making a traumatic choice.
Not sure I agree with this.
if these are the orders of his profession why are there only about three doctors in the country that will perform these late term abortions?
Because it's a fucking awful job and nobody really wants to do it. Most people refuse to perform the procedure because it's horrific and disturbing.
Are they refusing to "follow orders" or are they living by the tenant of their profession that says, "first, do no harm"?
Do no harm to whom...?
Dr. Tiller was "following orders" in that late-term abortions are a perfectly legal part of his job. Some call him brave for choosing to offer the legal procedure while other doctors choose not to.
37 - Arch Conservative
Jeannie, I gave myself the authority to formulate my own opinion that what Tiller did was evil just like you gave yourself the authority to judge me and suggest that I have no right to my opinion of Tiller.
Jordan...I do not fault the women who choose ot have abortions because I know that for most of them it is a traumatic experience and they often fell guilty afterward. They don't do it for the money and are often lied to by those who offer the service.
PLanned Parenthoodon the other hand doesn't give a dman. They mak emillions off of killing babies every year.
38 - Dr Dreadful
Arch,
Please, really. How would that last remark sound if you'd said, 'The Red Cross on the other hand doesn't give a damn. They make millions off of human suffering every year'?
39 - Jordan Richardson
I do not fault the women who choose ot have abortions because I know that for most of them it is a traumatic experience and they often fell guilty afterward. They don't do it for the money and are often lied to by those who offer the service.
But they've chosen to, in your terms, murder their children, Arch. How do you simply let them off the hook for murder because it was a "hard choice" or a traumatic experience?
Do you think abortion doctors provide the procedure for the money? How much money does Planned Parenthood make from "killing babies?" Why are the women seeking abortions not culpable for lining the pockets of these "killers?"
I'm sorry, but given your very own premise I'm finding it very hard to wrap my head around your logic.
40 - roger nowosielski
Thanks, Clav. It's on the way.
41 - zingzing
archie: "My question to those of you who are defending him is, if these are the orders of his profession why are there only about three doctors in the country that will perform these late term abortions?"
um, because doing so can get you killed?
42 - Clavos
um, because doing so can get you killed?
That may be the motivation for some few of them.
The majority probably don't perform late-term abortions because they became doctors to save lives, not end them.
43 - zingzing
of course, clavos. if i were a doctor, i certainly wouldn't want to be an abortionist. (although, as i understand it, being a doctor isn't always a prerequisite for that sort of thing.) of course, your last statement also neglects to mention the women that (some, maybe some few,) abortions save.
44 - Doug Hunter
"Most people refuse to perform the procedure because it's horrific and disturbing."
That's true and makes me wonder why it's legal. (with the exception of directly saving the life of the mother) There is plenty of time for a woman to choose prior to the point where a partial birth is necessary.
Zing,
Do you agree with delivering a viable fetus/baby most of the way out then brutally sucking it's brain out as it squirms away and grasps at the doctors hand? That's sick and is understandable why reasonable people wouldn't perform it (or support it for that matter)
45 - zingzing
"Do you agree with delivering a viable fetus/baby most of the way out then brutally sucking it's brain out as it squirms away and grasps at the doctors hand?"
yes, yes i do. i think it's awesome. i'm so glad that such things exist...
of course not, doug. that's like asking if someone really likes slitting dogs' throats and wallowing about in the blood and eating their own poop at the same time. come on.
that said, you do have a vivid imagination.
46 - Doug Hunter
The AMA says it is never medically necessary. Virtually everyone, when faced with the reality of what is done, is disturbed by it. The majority of doctors can't even bring themselves to do this.
If you don't support it and I don't support it and the AMA doesn't support it and no one supports it why in the hell do democrats keep fighting to keep this procedure, which is used electively the vast majority of the time, legal? Why can't it be gotten rid of?
47 - Dr Dreadful
Doug:
Do you agree with delivering a viable fetus/baby most of the way out then brutally sucking it's brain out as it squirms away and grasps at the doctors hand?
OK, a little less emotional language would be good here, I think.
One nurse who had attended at three such abortions testified that she had seen one of the fetuses - which had been diagnosed with Down syndrome - kick its legs and clutch with its fingers. Usually the fetus is euthanized or anesthetized before being delivered. A Salon journalist who sat in on some of these procedures reported seeing no sign of reaction from any of the fetuses as they were extracted.
The AMA says it is never medically necessary.
Appeal to authority, and I'm not sure it's even an accurate one. AFAIK, the ones who stated that it was never medically necessary were the writers and sponsors of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Do you have a citation, Doug?
BTW, the term 'partial birth abortion' is not a medically recognized one and is not used anywhere except in the US. The reason it's used here is pretty obvious.
If you don't support it and I don't support it and the AMA doesn't support it and no one supports it why in the hell do democrats keep fighting to keep this procedure, which is used electively the vast majority of the time, legal? Why can't it be gotten rid of?
Because the alternative procedure at that stage is to dismember the fetus inside the uterus, which is even more horrific, not to mention more dangerous, painful and invasive for the woman. At least this way the parents, if they so wish, have something recognizably human to mourn.
48 - Clavos
Because the alternative procedure at that stage is to dismember the fetus inside the uterus, which is even more horrific, not to mention more dangerous, painful and invasive for the woman.
I think what Doug meant is, Why perform any abortion at all at that stage?
And it's not an unreasonable question. One reason which justifies it is, of course, if the mother's health is endangered, but there is widespread disagreement regarding how many abortions are performed for that reason.
Just the sheer number of annual abortions seems to speak to the contention that the vast majority of them are for birth control; it's highly unlikely that tens of thousands of pregnancies annually jeopardize the mother's health. Also, far fewer abortions are performed on women of education and/or means compared to those sought by poor and/or poorly educated women.
49 - Dr Dreadful
I think what Doug meant is, Why perform any abortion at all at that stage?
And it's not an unreasonable question.
No, it's not, but I don't think either you, I or Doug are really equipped to answer it. We're none of us ever going to be in that situation.
50 - Doug Hunter
"Usually the fetus is euthanized or anesthetized before being delivered."
What is the purpose of this in the context that abortion is not considered killing or murder? Do they anesthetize the gallbladder before removing it?
In your gut you know this procedure is wrong and so do most people associated with it. Yes, others approve and accept it but so did the Germans in regards to concentration camps. In fact, the Nazis would certainly approve of the use of late term abortions to eliminate fetuses with genetic issues. They believed in the same thing only doing it just after birth rather than prior to. Of course, when they conceived it, it was 'evil'. How times have changed.
The point is, by the time you need to anesthetize the fetus or worry about it grasping at surgical instruments you shouldn't be doing abortions. I'm not religious and don't empathize with a blastocyst or a little alien petri dish thing, but by the time it is a developed, viable fetus it's to late to choose death IMO.
51 - Clavos
I'm probably never going to be a suicide bomber, either, but that doesn't mean I can't discuss suicide bombing and bombers.
All of society (yes, including men) has a stake in the abortion debate. The argument that men are "not equipped" is specious, IMO. Men certainly shouldn't have the right to dictate abortion policy without input from women, but we do have a stake and should have a voice.
I noticed a while back on another thread that any number of women participated enthusiastically in a discussion of the pros and cons of circumcision, and nobody (including me) objected. And why should anyone have objected? Women have a stake in the issue, both as mothers, as wives and as citizens.
52 - Clavos
Sorry. In #51 "wives" should have been "sexual partners."
53 - Cannonshop
To our Religiously Right posters: regardless of what you think of Tiller, Abortion, or the specific procedure, the fact is, he was Murdered in a Church. If you're religious, it's really, really clear:
"Thou shalt not Murder" Doesn't leave any room. None.
If you Aren't religious, then the Tiller murder's still wrong. We are not a nation governed solely by the passions of men (in spite of what the Left has been pushing) Most states have mechanisms for changing laws, and Kansas is no different. At no point, either in Law, or Religion, is there a hunting license that makes the Tiller kill "Okay".
Mind you now, in Kansas what Tiller was doing, so long as it WAS driven solely by the health of the mother, is legal. (Disgusting and alarming, and morally repugnant, but legal.)
Nowhere is going down and shooting a man in front of, behind, inside, or next to a church because you don't like his LEGAL business compliant with the Word of God, or the Word of the Law.
And there's also the "Stupid" factor here-by creating a martyr, you set back the fight to end the sucking of baby-brains or dismemberment of babies in the womb and marginalize opposition to the practice not only among your opponents, but among those that might otherwise be persuaded to be your allies as well.
Blowing shit up and shooting people makes heroes for the Left-look at Bill Ayers and the Weathermen, but it doesn't make heroes for the Right-because we don't roll that way.
54 - Clavos
Good comment, Cannon.
Second.
55 - Cindy
36 - Jordan,
The doctor is not making a traumatic choice. (my example)
Not sure I agree with this. (you)
I'm sure I don't agree with it myself. Agreement is outside my point.
What does accurately assessing or understanding someone's perspective have to do with agreeing with it?
56 - Jeannie Danna
???(Planned Parenthood on the other hand doesn't give a damn.)
#37 This is the most uninformed comment I have ever read and I corrected the spelling.
both sides
Just click over to the right "watch the full program online".
57 - zingzing
"Blowing shit up and shooting people makes heroes for the Left-look at Bill Ayers and the Weathermen, but it doesn't make heroes for the Right-because we don't roll that way."
hrm. there's some truth to this, when it's individuals doing so inside the country. however... you guys like blow shit up and shoot people outside of the country, in mass quantity--that's how you role.
58 - Andy Marsh
OK City was inside the country and it didn't make Timmy a hero! So that blows that bullshit theory out of the water...try again zing.
Janet Reno helped burn down a church full of people and you lefties still love her!
59 - zingzing
andy, that's not at all what i was saying.
i was saying that blowing shit up and shooting people OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTRY--i.e. in war--makes for right wing heroes.
pay attention and wipe that drool off your face.
60 - zingzing
hrm, let me say "in war, or "military actions," or "spreading democracy" instead.
61 - zingzing
"a church full of people"
yeah... that's what it was alright. (and i don't really care for reno that much, but i was a little young at the time to understand what was going on there.)
62 - Dr Dreadful
Clav,
I was attempting to answer the question of why an abortion would be necessary at that stage, not arguing that you're not entitled to an opinion.
From where you and I are standing, it may be hard to fathom why a woman - or a couple - would wait that long. We could never really appreciate it until we're in that position. The best analogy I can come up with - and I'm aware that it isn't that good - is the person who waits until the last minute to decide who to vote for at a presidential election (admittedly a situation where the stakes aren't as high (or perhaps they're higher (who knows))). And say, on the morning of the election, the person decides they're not going to vote at all. You and I, who've already made up our minds months ago, may regard this indecisive person with disbelief. That doesn't mean we're entitled to shove them into the polling station and stand behind them while they push the button.
63 - Cindy
47
Dr.D,
I read the stuff about both the nurse and about the journalist the other night when I was researching the fetal pain issue. The accounts conflict, wouldn't you say?
There is a debate about the point at which the fetus feels pain. In my mind it is unresolved, from what I have read so far. The problem is some doctors feel that anesthetizing/euthanizing the fetus is a greater risk factor for the patient. In light of their belief that the fetus cannot feel pain, they choose not to anesthetize. The arguments went before Congress. There was objection because then Congress would be determining what it is felt only a doctor, with medical knowledge, should determine based on the facts of the particular circumstance.
The fact that doctors have done and continue to minimize or rationalize pain felt by even neonates as either non-existent or as not really being pain but reflex, does not inspire my faith in their ability to appropriately judge whether or not the fetus should be anesthetized even during a surgical procedure, let alone whether a fetus should always or mostly be euthanized before an abortion.
All this makes me skeptical regarding this statement:
Usually the fetus is euthanized or anesthetized before being delivered.
Any reference to confirm this or is it just an assertion?
64 - Dr Dreadful
What is the purpose of this in the context that abortion is not considered killing or murder?
It wasn't in that context, it was in the context of the emotional images of wriggling fetuses you were conjuring up.
Agreed, abortion is a horrible, horrible thing, but then so was dumping a bombload of angry plutonium on Nagasaki. I don't agree with it myself and wouldn't want it if it were my child. That doesn't mean I claim a right to ban it. I'm pragmatic enough to understand that it might sometimes be the only option, and not just for medical reasons.
65 - Dr Dreadful
Cindy,
The argument as to whether the fetus should be anesthetized is moot. The doctor will most certainly anesthetize the mother: therefore the fetus will be anesthetized also, as the drug passes from the mother's bloodstream into the placenta.
66 - Cindy
65
Dr.D,
It's not a moot point.
I understand that the anesthesia crosses the placenta. However, there may not be enough anesthesia to accommodate the fetal pain.
Testimony of Jean Wright MD MBA
"It is my opinion that the human fetus clearly possesses the ability to experience pain from 20 weeks of gestation, and aspects of pain perception are present from as early as 6 " 7 weeks
gestation and continue to mature and organize until the 20th week. In addition, the pain perceived by a fetus is probably more intense than that perceived by term newborns or older children. Anesthetic agents that are routinely administered to the mother during any procedure would be insufficient to ensure that the fetus does not feel pain, and higher doses of anesthetic drugs, (enough to produce fetal anesthesia), would seriously compromise the health of the mother. Thus, it is my opinion that the fetus would be subjected to intense pain, occurring prior to fetal demise or during the surgical procedure, from many if not all in utero (abortion and other surgical) procedures."
67 - Cindy
Also, Dr.D, the mother is not always anesthetized. Sometimes nothing more than extra strength Tylenol or the equivalent is administered or even available. Where abortions have been performed at a facility (up until a certain gestational age) that don't meet requirements for the administration of anesthesia, then it is not even available.
Mistakes have also been made in gestational age.
68 - Cindy
54
Blowing shit up and shooting people makes heroes for the Left-look at Bill Ayers and the Weathermen, but it doesn't make heroes for the Right-because we don't roll that way.
Then what is the US doing in Iraq blowing people up, shooting people and creating 'heroes'?
In fact, I hardly know people who say they are on the right (many on the left also) who don't automatically confer 'hero' status or respect to soldiers merely because the engaged in a war. Some even claim that engaging in any war one's government starts is noble.
I think the taking of a good argument back to a battle of left vs right is getting boring. Not a good selling point, imo, that because you are on the right or the left you are therefore more noble. It's not useful and it convinces no one.
69 - Cindy
Re my #68,
I could have just said see zing at 57, 59, 60
Except I'd say, those on the left also participate and justify and take part in war. But, I see the point.
70 - Dave Nalle
While I'm all for abortion in general, I see zero reason why near-term abortions couldn't just as easily be replaced with mandatory adoption. Deliver the baby, whisk it away, have the mother sign away ALL rights forever, and let the adoption agency pay for the whole procedure. Legally mandate that in all cases where the fetus/baby is near term. The result for the mother is functionally the same and it's better for the baby and the adoption agency and parents looking for a baby to adopt.
But when the baby is NOT viable without artificial support out of the womb, abortion should be perfectly acceptable.
Dave
71 - Cindy
51
Clav's analogy with circumcision: I think this is a false analogy. The analogy equates denying men a say on abortion with denying women a say on circumcision. This is a matter of adults and children, in my view--not male and female. Pick male circumcision at age 40 then I'll agree with the analogy. :-)
When speaking about abortion, this is something that happens to an adult and takes place in her body, something certainly no male has a right to decide about (but also no other female, in my view). If men would like a choice on the issue, I submit that they have one--refrain from impregnating women, by whatever means necessary; that is your choice. On the other hand, opinion is not a dictate, I can appreciate having male perspectives and opinions. I reject, though, the part where any man determines or dictates what I or any other woman does with our bodies.
The relevant part applies to Dave's #70 also.
72 - Dr Dreadful
Cindy,
Points taken.
Fernando,
Isnt it time for left wing bloggers, such as this poster, to stop with the Democratic talking points ie "Rush is the leader of the republicans"...
But Rush Limbaugh is the de facto leader of the Republicans. There's precious little direction coming from anywhere else in the party at the moment.
..."All prolife people support murdering abortion doctors"
Would you care to show us anywhere on this site, or indeed in the known universe, where anyone has said this?
73 - Cindy
Rereading Dave's post I think his point is moot. Abortions, even late term ones, aren't performed after the baby is typically viable without artificial support.
To find out whether or not a 24 week old fetus could survive, one would have to deliver it and see if it lived without intervening support. Now, this would be a problem of a whole 'nother realm, as it is now a separate entity and would be subject to receiving medical intervention.
74 - Cindy
76
Fernando,
I agree, those are Dave's words.
???
(lol)
75 - Clavos
Clav's analogy with circumcision: I think this is a false analogy.
Only in degree. The infant boy doesn't die, but has no more say in whether or not the procedure is carried out than the fetus does.
If men would like a choice on the issue, I submit that they have one--refrain from impregnating women, by whatever means necessary; that is your choice.
Since what's at issue is a woman's body, I see it as more incumbent upon the woman, if she doesn't want a child, to refrain from getting impregnated, "by whatever means necessary; that is [her] choice."
I reject, though, the part where any man determines or dictates what I or any other woman does with our bodies.
Agreed. I wasn't arguing for 'dictating."