Thursday, June 04, 2009

I thought poverty caused crime

Suspect in Kansas Abortion Doctor's Killing Had $10

The guy's total assets were $10 and a 16-year-old car. He was unable to hold down a job. He had untreated schizophrenia.

All of these situations are used by the Left to excuse all manner of crime.

Unless the crime victim is an abortionist. Then all bets are off. Poverty isn't a factor. Unemployment isn't a factor. Mental illness isn't a factor. It's Bill O'Reilly's fault! (The new default person to blame for all ills now that Bush is out of office.)

27 comments:

Tlaloc said...

Not "excuse" but explain. However clearly the guy wasn't motivated by poverty. He wasn't robbing a liquor store. He was seeking out and murdering a doctor for political reasons.

I certainly agree that his mental illness issues should be taken into account. That may excuse some of his culpability, if you see where I'm going with this.

Lilliput said...

We all knew that this was a crime from a sick man so I don't know what you are trying to explain?

Pro choice peopel are angry and the things that pro life people say that may cause unstable people like this guy to do what he did. Its exactly like muslim suicide bombers - the people doing the brainwashing are not the ones killing themselves.

Finally,I take it this man was uninsured as he wasn't working - where was medicaid? Where was the Church? Why wasn't he treated? Now I know this kind of thing happens in the UK too - but at least we know who to blame and how to fix it? Who are you going to blame now?

Amy said...

Pro choice peopel are angry and the things that pro life people say that may cause unstable people like this guy to do what he did.

So now we're supposed to screen all people for psychological problems?

And what is it we say? The truth about abortion? How graphic the procedure is? The ramifications for mothers?

Um - that's not our fault. It's called the truth. If you don't like it, tough. I don't like the fact that babies have their brains sucked out, their limbs ripped off, and their mothers left with infections, infertility, and mental health problems.

Pro-aborts WANT abortion, so it's high time you faced the reality that a "medical procedure" you support is so gruesome, violent, and wholly unnecessary 99% of the time.


Finally,I take it this man was uninsured as he wasn't working - where was medicaid? Where was the Church? Why wasn't he treated? Now I know this kind of thing happens in the UK too - but at least we know who to blame and how to fix it? Who are you going to blame now?

The man. There is no law that says treatment for such illness is compulsory. He may not have wanted treatment, and laws are such that it's hard for family/friends to get unstable people treatment unless they can really make a case that this person is a danger to himself or society. That didn't happen here.

It's HIS fault, ultimately.

Purple Envelope Project said...

Wow. I have a lot to say on this.

First of all I'd like to say that my family has been devestated by Schizophrenia. My great uncle and uncle both killed themselves due to the disease. Two of my mother's cousins also have it, and have dealt with horrible things.

I'm going to tell a story about my mom's cousin, Heidi.

Heidi has schizophrenia. Her delusions kept her from getting treatment for a long time because she thought "they" were trying to poision her.

One day, Heidi got in her car and headed for DC. She was going to see President Clinton because she had 'heard' that he wanted to help her with her taxes.

Her car broke down halfway there, and a police officer realized that she was not in her right mind. He took her to a hospital where she was finally able to get treatment.

She has struggled for 10 years, on medication, to try to get some semblence of her life back.

Who do we blame for her little trip to DC? The media talked about taxes all the time. Are they to blame? Of course not. She was delusional.

The pro-life movement is no more to blame for the actions of Roeder than CNN was for Hiedi to try to get into the white house.

Schizophrenics do not make rational decisions. Reality gets blured into their delusions. They might see a press release denouncing violence, but believe that they are "really" being told to kill.

Would you blame the liberals who used the Bush/Hitler talking point for the past 8 years if another schizophrenic killed Bush?

No? Then stop blaming the pro-life movement for the actions of one very mentally disturbed man.

Tlaloc said...

"Then stop blaming the pro-life movement for the actions of one very mentally disturbed man."

I would if they weren't, you know, to blame for having demonized a doctor and hounded him mercilessly with lies and innuendo until one of them finally pulled the trigger.

To say nothing of the organized campaign against Tiler and his employees of intimidation.

If you don't want to be regarded as organized crime, try not emulating them.

GrannyGrump said...

Tlaloc, does it never occur to you that we actually SEE TIller the way we describe him? That to ask us to "tone it down a bit" would be like asking the Save Darfur Coalition to "tone it down a bit" when they talk about what's going on over there?

Tlaloc said...

"Tlaloc, does it never occur to you that we actually SEE TIller the way we describe him?"

No, I believe you (and most prolifers) do. I also believe most prolifers really saw Michael Schiavo as a monster. The thing is the perception and the reality just don;t correlate. Which means all the vehemence with which with which you believe you are defending you view (in the case of both men) is really just unreasoning hatred used to vilify.

That's a tragedy, an honest to god tragedy in the greek sense (people who commit terrible crimes due to an overabundance of some virtue). It's why I really wish you could take a step back to evaluate whether the way you see this man is in any way related to the man he actually was.

GrannyGrump said...

Why don't you take a step back and consider whether or not THIS really is a dead baby.

If the blanket-wrapped entity in those pictures really IS a dead baby, then Tiller REALLY DID KILL BABIES.

Just consider the evidence. Does that look like a dead baby or like some "evacuated tissue"?

Lilliput said...

" There is no law that says treatment for such illness is compulsory. He may not have wanted treatment, and laws are such that it's hard for family/friends to get unstable people treatment unless they can really make a case that this person is a danger to himself or society. That didn't happen here."

Amy, you can't be serious:

- the man was definately a danger to society - he killed someone

- I don't know in the States but here you candefinately force someone to have treatment if they are danger to themselves - never mind each other. Its called the Mental Health Act and is run by social workers and psychiatrists.

If you let an ill man who thinks he can fly jump out of aa window - whose fault is it?

GrannyGrump said...

Amy is right. To force mental health treatment on somebody requires that you convince a judge that the person is a danger to himself or others. And he wasn't showing any sign that he'd actually hurt anybody.

"John thinks he is Superman. He thinks he can fly. I fear that if we don't get him treatment, he might jump off a roof" would pass muster, most likely. "John thinks space aliens are after him, and he has started carrying a gun saying he's going to defend himself. And he's convinced that green eyes are a telltale sign that you're a space alien. I'm afraid he's going to shoot some poor unsuspecting person who just happens to have green eyes" would likely do the trick. But "John thinks he should only have to pay taxes he, personally, thinks are reasonable, and he wants a bunch of people to start attending an abortionist's church so they can sway the congregation to discipline him" doesn't.

The incident with the bombing materials had been so long in the past, and had really come to naught. Without some current ideology or behavior that indicated a threat of violence, odds are very much against a judge granting an involuntary commitment.

Tlaloc said...

"If the blanket-wrapped entity in those pictures really IS a dead baby, then Tiller REALLY DID KILL BABIES."

Tiller certainly performed abortions past the point that I'd consider it a baby. The thing is that's not per se a bad thing. When you are talking about a baby that is going to be born with no spine and live seconds outside of the womb, or one that will endanger the mother by the process of being born, there are simply times when it's appropriate. The people of Kansas agreed and allow for very late term abortions under certain circumstances.

You don't believe Tiller always followed the guidelines for those circumstances, but you tried a lot to prove such a contention and failed every time.

So what you are saying is "even though nobody in authority has ever found our claims to hold the slightest weight you should totally believe we're right beyond a shadow of a doubt and condemn this man." I don't see how you think that's a compelling argument.

Purple Envelope Project said...

Tlaloc,

Tiller admited that 3/4 of his late term patients were just teenagers who hid their pregnancies until they became physically obvious.

http://www.nrlc.org/ABORTION/pba/pbafact9.html

Kathy said...

Tlaloc,

Under which of Kansas's laws that permit late-term abortions was this child killed?

The story going along with the pictures indicates that the baby that was killed was killed for no other reason than that she had cystic fibrosis. At the point of gestation where the abortion was done, it would have been statistically safer for the mother to have continued the pregnancy and had a vaginal birth (if she didn't care whether the child lived or died, and preferred for her to be born dead, then there would have been no emergency C-section to save the baby's life; and maternal reasons for C-sections are quite low). I'll have to double-check the stats, but I believe that a vaginal birth carries with it a risk of about 2/100,000 of maternal death, but a late-term abortion has a risk of somewhere around 9/100,000.

Besides, the abortion procedure is very similar if not identical to a hospital induction (except Tiller sent the women back to a motel under the care of their friends or family, while hospitals typically employ people with, y'know, medical skills should the need arise); so if there is a risk to the mother of the "process of being born," then how does an abortion which ends in a whole baby, as opposed to dismembered baby help alleviate that risk? In fact, introducing instruments and intervening in a normal process unnecessarily introduces only risk.

Tlaloc said...

"Tiller admited that 3/4 of his late term patients were just teenagers who hid their pregnancies until they became physically obvious."

Conveniently I can't find any source for these comments except from two prolife websites.

Tlaloc said...

"The story going along with the pictures indicates that the baby that was killed was killed for no other reason than that she had cystic fibrosis."

And you believe them why exactly? Who are they? Oh they're a rightwing radio station. Okay, so potential conflict of interest. DO they provide any sourcing of their story? Uh.... no.

So all you have is the word of a probably prjudiced source with nothing to independently corroborate it.

But you believe it because you want to believe it.

Kathy said...

And you disbelieve it because you want to disbelieve it.

Tlaloc said...

"And you disbelieve it because you want to disbelieve it."

I have no reason to believe or disbelieve it, it is simply non-information. It is garbage data points to be thrown out as unsupported and potentially biased.

Lilliput said...

I can't understand you guys - the problem is not Tiller - its the parents. If they are too dumb to look up cystic fibrosis what it means for them and their baby - they maybe they are just too dumb to be parents. Tiller didn't walk up and down dragging pregnant women into his surgery. They came asking for a legally available service and he offered it. The parents are the ones who are idiotic to wait so long before termination. Why don't you pick on the parents and leave the abortionist alone.

Tlaloc has a very good point Christina, you are regurgitating maybe 100 - heck even a 1000 cases of death by abortion going bak at least 50 years if not more. Currently there are thousands of abortions going on daily - most of them returning customers - there are no straming cadavers here. Its a surgical procedure and carries a certain risk - yes there are a lot of crappy abortion doctors but thats because nobody really wants to do it - just like noone really wants to be the social worker in child protection responsible for taking kids away from bad parents - but as always - someone has to do it.

Women want abortions, Focus on that and leave the poor abortionists alone.

Lilliput said...

And one other thing I forgot - we are right poverty does cause crime - in this respect - this man did not have access to medical treatment as wasn't insured? Maybe he didn't have close friends so they csould pick up the signs of his illness - so he was poor of friends. This is not unusual for people that go postal.

Purple Envelope Project said...

Tlaloc. The source is listed.

Tlaloc said...

"Tlaloc. The source is listed."

Are you talking about the KGOV site's story? I just looked again and still don't see a link to any corroborating evidence.

If I'm just missing it then why don't you post the link here.

Purple Envelope Project said...

Tiller's spokesperson gives the 3/4number in the August, 26, 1991 edition of The Kansas City Star.

Just for you I combed the Kansas City Star archives and found the article in question.

Here is the direct link to the article: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=0EAF3CCD932A2995&p_docnum=6&s_accountid=AC0109060821165612445&s_orderid=NB0109060821154619079&s_dlid=DL0109060821170512521&s_ecproduct=DOC&s_ecprodtype=&s_trackval=KC&s_siteloc=&s_referrer=&s_username=broorel8&s_accountid=AC0109060821165612445&s_upgradeable=no

Pony up the 2 dollars to read it. Here's the quote from the article that is pertinent.

From Tiller's spokesperson "Supporters of late-term abortions say the women who receive them are often among those least prepared to become mothers. About three-fourths of Tiller's late-term patients, Jarman said, are teen-agers who have denied to themselves or their families that they were pregnant until it was too late to hide it."

Is the original source article good enough for you?

Kathy said...

I tried the link, but it went to a "session expired". Oh, well. Using your information I could find the article in question. Here is the website if that makes it any easier; but I doubt if I can link to the articles I found.

Tlaloc said...

"From Tiller's spokesperson "Supporters of late-term abortions say the women who receive them are often among those least prepared to become mothers. About three-fourths of Tiller's late-term patients, Jarman said, are teen-agers who have denied to themselves or their families that they were pregnant until it was too late to hide it.""

Alright let's assume this is accurate and wasn't later amended or corrected. Now let's go back to the initial claim:

"Tiller admited that 3/4 of his late term patients were just teenagers who hid their pregnancies until they became physically obvious."

I've gone ahead and bolded the word in your claim that is unsupported by the actual quote.

Your claim suggests that the only reason they are getting late abortions is because they chose to hide the pregnancy. The actual quote doesn't say that at all. All it says is that many of them are teens who hid the pregnancy. It doesn't imply a causal relationship, whereas you do.

GrannyGrump said...

The point, Tlaloc, is that Tiller's third tri patients were not, as you and his other supporters assert, exclusively or even predominately women who faced severe prenatal diagnoses late in pregnancy.

Are you okay with third trimester abortions for the same reasons at first trimester abortions, just done later because it took the patient that long to make up her mind?

Kathy said...

Tlaloc -- are you as muddle-headed as you appear? You seem to think you are smart, but I have to seriously question your intelligence at this point. Really. It's illogical to say that in giving the reason for late-term abortions for 3/4 of his clients as that they were teenagers who hid their pregnancies as long as they could, that they were having abortions for any other reason than that they were teenagers who hid their pregnancies until it was too late for them to have abortions by other methods. And remember -- these are killing those whom even you would consider to be babies, since they are most likely past the age of viability.

Purple Envelope Project said...

Tlaloc, are you serious? The quote flat out says that they are teenagers who hid their pregnancies. If there were a more compelling reason, don't you think it would be mentioned? If you want to see the full context, pay the 2 dollars and read the article.

The article is about the disparity between saving preemies and killing the "unwanted" children of the same age. It's a very even handed article. You can't seem to see things directly in front of your face.