• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Man accused of killing abortion doc says he's being 'treated like a criminal'

Thought about putting this in a new thread, but I suppose there's no real point in putting two threads about basically the same subject.

Well, besides complaining about the fact that he's being treated like a criminal and that his jail is cold, the guy is now claiming that there are other attacks planned.

Suspect in abortion doctor death warns of violence

WICHITA, Kan. – The man charged with murdering a high-profile abortion doctor claimed from his jail cell Sunday that similar violence was planned around the nation for as long as the procedure remained legal, a threat that comes days after a federal investigation launched into his possible accomplices.

A Justice Department spokesman said the threat was being taken seriously and additional protection had been ordered for abortion clinics last week. But a leader of the anti-abortion movement derided the accused shooter as "a fruit and a lunatic."

Scott Roeder called The Associated Press from the Sedgwick County jail, where he's being held on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller one week ago.

"I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal," Roeder said. He would not elaborate.
 
Many of the charges against him were in fact dropped as the prosecutor in charge of his case was fired and a new guy brought in.

The question of whether Tiller was performing abortions that failed to meet the state criteria of an irreversible maternal health risk was never actually addressed in court.

It's actually the only unfortunate part of his being shot down. He was due back in court and I believe eventually they would have nailed him no matter how many friends in high places were willing to do gymnastics for him.

Jurors Acquit Kansas Doctor in a Late-Term Abortion Case

Published: March 27, 2009

WICHITA, Kan. — After years of investigations and four days of testimony, jurors here took just 45 minutes on Friday to acquit a controversial abortion doctor of charges that he performed 19 illegal late-term abortions in 2003.

--snip--

Dr. Tiller could have faced a year in jail and a $2,500 fine on each of 19 counts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/28/us/28abortion.html?_r=1

What were you saying about charges "dropped?"
 
Tall, I don't know how I can be any clearer. The accusations around Tiller are that he was killing perfectly healthy, sound, viable babies at some outrageous rate a year......

Where is your proof that these babies were healthy, sound and viable or that the mother's life wasn't endangered. Don't you think it's a little bit odd that Tiller and all of these women, who had late term abortions, were just out to kill these healthy and viable babies?

Does that really sound reasonable to you?

Again, a dr. was hired by the state to review the records. That dr. is on record claiming Tiller was not following Kansas law. The prosecutor was fired and the drs. testimony never brought to court.

His testimony was never replaced. It's not as if they said, "That dr. is a flake and we don't trust him so instead of using his testimony we are going to have the records reviewed by someone else."

No. Rather than deny that Tiller's records showed what the reviewing Dr. said they showed the governor declared, "Quit looking at Tiller's records. They don't matter. He doesn't need reasons. "

Does that sound reasonable to you???



Is that a yes or a no?

:confused:
 
What, I don't give a crap that someone took that freak out. I've said so repeatedly.

Do you consider yourself "pro-life?" If so, how do you reconcile that with your feelings about Tiller's assassination?
 
What, I don't give a crap that someone took that freak out. I've said so repeatedly.
unfortunately that seem to be the nature of the beast that is the extremists, within the pro-life bowel movement
 

Originally there were close to 40 charges. The original prosecutor was fired. The new prosecutor dropped over half the charges.

The charges that went to court all dealt mostly with whether or not the Dr. Tiller used for second opinions was an employee of his are not.

The court did not get into individual abortions and whether the mother actually had an irreversible health condition. All those types of charges were dropped when the original prosecutor was fired.
 
Originally there were close to 40 charges. The original prosecutor was fired. The new prosecutor dropped over half the charges.
.

Shouldn't you link this claim?
 
Do you consider yourself "pro-life?" If so, how do you reconcile that with your feelings about Tiller's assassination?

I um realize that pro life like pro choice is a catchy phrase for a particular movement and not a philosophy of life. It pertains to abortion; end of story.
 
Exactly. I can't seem to fathom why a woman would carry a baby for 7 months and then decide out of the blue that they want to get rid of it. It just doesn't make sense, unless there were health factors at play.

No, it doesn't but "murderer" appears to be the word of the day.

The pragmatic side of me also sees the monetary benefits of late term abortion (yes, I know it sounds cold hearted).

If you have a baby that that is going to die shortly after birth you have the costs of hospital & professional fees for the birth as well as hospital and professional fees for the baby, even if it only lives an hour, followed by funeral expenses.


EDIT: I gotta go take Gary's mom to chemo....bbl
 
Last edited:

Don McKinney had been hired to investigate Dr. George Tiller, one of the few doctors in the nation to perform late-term abortions. McKinney has previously protested outside Tiller's clinic. His last day will be Saturday.

Geez, it seems clear that the guy had a political axe to grind. Dontcha think it's a little strange to have someone investigating the doctor after having protested outside his clinic? :roll:
 
I um realize that pro life like pro choice is a catchy phrase for a particular movement and not a philosophy of life. It pertains to abortion; end of story.

Nice dodge. Too bad you didn't answer the question.
 
Originally there were close to 40 charges. The original prosecutor was fired. The new prosecutor dropped over half the charges.

The charges that went to court all dealt mostly with whether or not the Dr. Tiller used for second opinions was an employee of his are not.

The court did not get into individual abortions and whether the mother actually had an irreversible health condition. All those types of charges were dropped when the original prosecutor was fired.
are you sure you have this right this time? you were forced to admit when you entered your first version of this event, that you had posted incorrect information re who was fired
 
are you sure you have this right this time? you were forced to admit when you entered your first version of this event, that you had posted incorrect information re who was fired

I wasn't forced to admit anything. I made a mistake and got mixed up in regards to DAs and state prosecutors. No biggie IMO. If you think I'm wrong again point it out. The information is widely accessible, easily gotten, and all over the net.
 
Your ignorance allows me to conclude that you prefer living in denial. :roll:

And what am I allegedly ignorant of ?

The content of your off topic appeal to emotion ?
 
I wasn't forced to admit anything. I made a mistake and got mixed up in regards to DAs and state prosecutors. No biggie IMO. If you think I'm wrong again point it out. The information is widely accessible, easily gotten, and all over the net.
if the next poster had not exposed your unforced error would you have changed your post.

If it is doesnt that go to your credibility
 
Last edited:
Pray tell. When did I ever say other American's "don't get to have views" because mine is so accurate? I'll save you the trouble.

Oh now I remember, its that if their views don't match yours, then they are a scumbag.

The point I was making about religion, was not about your religion, whatever it may be, or even if you don't have one. It was about acknowledging the religious liberty of others. It was about not calling them scumbags just because they hold a different view than you do, regarding what can often be a "religious" question.

No Zippers were raised or lowered in the creation of this post.
 
Not talking about a baby.

I know you need to devalue the baby so that your conscience can remain unstained by your advocation of murdering children, but by all standards of reason, we are talking about a baby by that stage of development. It's awfully funny the somersaults in logic the mind will endure as a coping mechanism against our own base thoughts.

incorrect. It states
:

I know what it states. Nothing in that statement makes my assertion false. If you think it does, please elaborate but I know now that my tolerance for selective emphasis on single words to the exclusion of the whole document is exactly 0. But if you think you can make your case...



Not a citizen. And a real citizen, has decided to empty her womb. Respecting that real citizen, this activity is no one's business but her and her doctor.

Yes a citizen, just not one that has left the womb yet. The activity of late term abortion is the entire society's business as it directly impacts a baby citizen with pain, suffering, and deprivation of the most basic of rights.
 
Posted this in another thread, but I thought it'd be more appropriate here:

Aside from the obvious differences between what an unborn fetus should have...

Is there or is there NOT a pretty significant difference between the rape and murder of an 8 month old and legal optional choice of a woman to abort her fetus.

I mean, besides the fact that, oh I don't know- one was definitely alive and the other could still have been stillborn. Besides the fact that one was legal and the other was illegal. Besides the fact that one had rape involved and the other didn't. Besides the fact that Rapist/Murderer A chose to end the life of a toddler and Doctor B did what he was legally obligated to do and what Paying Customer C paid him to do (this is a capitalistic society right?).

I don't understand why Doctor B should be justifiably murdered even though he wouldn't be "murdering fetuses" without the consent of Paying Customer C. I don't really think he enjoys "murdering fetuses" but we all do work our jobs to get money right? Why should Tiller be the target of violence when he's doing what is legally his right to do? Why shouldn't these insane psychopath confused Pro-life (irony?) murderers go after the women who choose to have the abortions? Why don't they use the same scare tactics on them?

Can we agree that, if ANYBODY (which I don't agree with, as I'm pro-choice) is to be morally blameworthy for these actions, shouldn't it be the women who make the decisions to go see the big bad abortion doctors? Also, if the Tiller killer instead killed the women who went to go see Tiller, would he be getting as much support from some pro-lifers as he is now?
 
if the next poster had not exposed your unforced error would you have changed your post.

If it is doesnt that go to your credibility

I don't think so as the error doesn't change the story much in my opinion. I'm not about lying about stuff that is easily proven one way or another by most anyone on the web who knows how to google. I don't have the entire Tiller case with all names involved all up in my head 24/7. If I make a mistake call me on it and I'll say, "Yeah, you're right. " It's not like my having the wrong name of who exactly got fired changes the point that a guy was fired to bring in a friendlier more pro-Tiller state prosecutor.

So think what you want about my credibility. It's certainly more interesting than the "See no evil, hear no evil, " approach most take on the Tiller fiasco.
 
Posted this in another thread, but I thought it'd be more appropriate here:

Aside from the obvious differences between what an unborn fetus should have...

Is there or is there NOT a pretty significant difference between the rape and murder of an 8 month old and legal optional choice of a woman to abort her fetus.

I mean, besides the fact that, oh I don't know- one was definitely alive and the other could still have been stillborn. Besides the fact that one was legal and the other was illegal. Besides the fact that one had rape involved and the other didn't. Besides the fact that Rapist/Murderer A chose to end the life of a toddler and Doctor B did what he was legally obligated to do and what Paying Customer C paid him to do (this is a capitalistic society right?).

I don't understand why Doctor B should be justifiably murdered even though he wouldn't be "murdering fetuses" without the consent of Paying Customer C. I don't really think he enjoys "murdering fetuses" but we all do work our jobs to get money right? Why should Tiller be the target of violence when he's doing what is legally his right to do? Why shouldn't these insane psychopath confused Pro-life (irony?) murderers go after the women who choose to have the abortions? Why don't they use the same scare tactics on them?

Can we agree that, if ANYBODY (which I don't agree with, as I'm pro-choice) is to be morally blameworthy for these actions, shouldn't it be the women who make the decisions to go see the big bad abortion doctors? Also, if the Tiller killer instead killed the women who went to go see Tiller, would he be getting as much support from some pro-lifers as he is now?

How is not giving a hoot that Tiller was gunned down support for his killer?
 
From your link:

Kline charged Tiller with 30 misdemeanors for allegedly performing 15 illegal late-term abortions in 2003

So where did you get the 40 number?

Again I'm speaking from memory. You asked for an exact link I went and found one for you, a non biased one.

So the gist of my point was the original prosecutor had more charges against Tiller. The new guy brought in dropped them all and went with 19 charges all having to do with 2nd opinions.

The original point stands. The question of whether these women met state kansas law and had an irreversible health threat NEVER had to be answered in court do to the original prosecutors charges being dropped upon his firing. The new guy brought substantially less charges all surrounding 2nd opinions which is why tiller was acquitted.

The jury never had to decide if Tiller was killing viable healthy babies in women who had no irreversible health threat.
 
Again I'm speaking from memory. You asked for an exact link I went and found one for you, a non biased one.

Your memory seems to add things on to a subject you obviously are very passionate about. It puts your credibility on the line IMHO about this subject.
 
Back
Top Bottom