Patterico's Pontifications

3/29/2013

Planned Parenthood Representative Fights Bill to Save Babies Born Alive During a Botched Abortion

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:02 pm

The slippery slope at work, ladies and gentlemen. The position of this woman appears to be: We love abortions so much, if the baby is born alive, the decision whether the baby should be saved should be a private decision for the mom and the doctor that was trying to kill the kid seconds before. In other words, she’s approving murder:

Watch all the way to the end to see her objecting to a provision that would require a doctor to drive the born-alive baby to a hospital — because, after all, what if it’s a long drive?

You think I’m making that up? Watch the video.

163 Comments

  1. Surely we can set a reasonable geographical limit on how far a doctor must drive to save a human life. Must he go 60 miles? 90 miles?

    Sheesh.

    I don’t think it saves this woman that she’s dumb, by the way, although she clearly is.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:04 pm

  2. the thing to remember though is the silly git has absolutely nothing but nothing to do with passing this law

    the Florida wankers should just have a vote and move onto more for reals pressing business

    bread and circuses are omens you know

    carb-laden omens

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:10 pm

  3. When I was younger, I was “Pro-choice”. And even politically active in that direction.

    It was conduct like the above by pro-choice activists – and the outright lying done by PP and NARAL witnesses during the partial birth abortion legislation hearings a couple of decades ago – that disgusted me.

    I kind of wallow around the middle of the issue these days.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:12 pm

  4. and you know what else we need to train abortion doctors more better to where they’re not so botchy

    I’m sorry but going in for an abortion and leaving with a baby wazzle in the NICU is just not something anyone should have to go through ever

    that’s deeply screwed up like a David Cronenberg movie

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:17 pm

  5. Where can I find her mother? I would like to suggest something to her (the mother), in consultation with her doctor of course.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:17 pm

  6. I supported abortion until we made the choice to abort a child. Have never felt the same since and do understand how any human being could choose to have a second. We have five children now. I often wonder what our choice might have grown to be.

    Comment by highpockets (2d68a3) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:22 pm

  7. FYI, I just erased what was going to be the worst tirade I had ever launched here…by far.

    - Do youse not realize this is one of the few issues that Obama actually voted on instead of just showing up as a state rep in Ill.????
    - The creature in utero is not a person, it is a thing that is a parasite on the woman. If the woman wants to kill it, then she should get to kill it.
    - There are no slippery slopes, just extensions of logical reasoning.

    While we are on the subject of PP, apparently there was a YouTube video expose’ on some PP program in the NW. Among the things being taught to public school students, “abstinence” was not doing anything that had the possibility of making you pregnant or getting an STD… complete with graphic illustrations of what one could do while being “abstinent”

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:23 pm

  8. I wonder how long they would allow them to make the decision to murder the child?

    Comment by JD (b63a52) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:25 pm

  9. I don’t care how yay aborty you are happyfeet, this is disgusting.

    Comment by JD (b63a52) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:26 pm

  10. hello? I’m perfectly ok with them passing this law.

    I just think the have more important things to do.

    Have a vote and git on with the gittin on already.

    This is creepy and morbid.

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:28 pm

  11. *they* have more important things to do I mean

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:29 pm

  12. When I was a med student, one morning one of the pediatrics residents was venting their frustration/anger/completely being beside himself over an incident the previous night.
    Back in the day before widespread use of beepers (yes, the 1980′s!!) most hospitals had an overhead page for emergencies, “Code Blue”. He was on call, hanging out in the peds ward when he hears this stat page for the peds resident on call to some floor he was totally unfamiliar with. He gets there to find a live birth from a late end trimester abortion in the OB/GYN ward. For the time the infant was well below the size of premee survivors. His reaction was something like, “What in the &(^*&%&%* he** do you want me to do.
    He was not happy.

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:30 pm

  13. this is so eraserhead

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:30 pm

  14. Thank you highpockets for being willing to share your experience.

    feets, I thought you were pretty bad before when you were all misogynist ugly about Palin
    and I didn’t see how you could get worse
    now I do

    of course, since they slit babies throats here in Philly when they are born alive maybe I don’t think it is so funny

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:33 pm

  15. Does happyfeet not like learning the position of Planned Parenthood on this issue?

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:33 pm

  16. I think they should pass the law quite irrespective of the position of the pptwat.

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:34 pm

  17. That she smiled through the whole thing was creepy

    Comment by JD (b63a52) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:35 pm

  18. thank you!

    it’s creepy

    it’s good freaking friday you nutballs

    i want a lil more bunnies and chockit and a lil less eraserhead babbies

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:37 pm

  19. Greetings:

    Kind of interesting that this would occur while that dirtbag Philly dog abortionist is on trial. Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.

    Comment by 11B40 (9a0cea) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:39 pm

  20. how on earth would you think to surmise that this is a coincidence Mr. 11?

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:41 pm

  21. They keep running ‘Constantine’ and the disguised demons, that populate his world, that’s what it reminded me off.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:42 pm

  22. What I don’t get is why we’re all bothered when some homeless guy gets beat to death for kicks.

    Or when some chick that was assaulted runs down the assailant in her Buick.

    Or a homeowner boobytraps the backdoor when he’s gone for a season and blows an intruder to bits.

    These are all quality of life issues, just like the drugged up ghetto fetus that would not have a responsible relation if they lived.

    Water and oxygen are scarce ya know.

    Those Spartans we were talking about on the SSM thread had a pile outside town they just tossed in infirm on. At least we burn the bodies.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:44 pm

  23. Where have you been? Women have had a license to kill their children for a generation.

    Here’s female empowerment – if your child gets in your way, kill it. Feminism has nothing whatsoever to do with motherhood.

    Comment by Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:45 pm

  24. The keen thing about single-payer healthcare, e.g., Britain’s, is it handles these inconveniences for everyones benefit.

    It also pays for transgender plastiquery.

    And punches the clock when grams goes into defib in the ICU.

    I so wish we were civilized like the Old Country.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:50 pm

  25. Have the Philly abortionist’s multple crimes gotten the same play and attention in the national press as the Colorado Century Theatre shooter? As the murder of Hadiya Pendleton? As Marco Rubio taking a sip of bottled water? As Sandra Fluke’s need for birth control pill subsidy? Why not? Just asking.

    Comment by elissa (572ec5) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:52 pm

  26. Its a lucky thing epigenetics is responsible for sexual orientation.

    There’s no way amniocentesis can sort the buggerer out.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:52 pm

  27. Just a reminder to the people that want to get rid of those icky social conservatives from the party. This is what you’d be trying to replace them with.

    Think you can stomach that?

    Comment by NJRob (fe68e7) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:57 pm

  28. Regardless of one’s stance on legal abortion most reasonable people do in fact see a huge moral difference between a morning after pill that prevents an unwanted pregnancy from “taking hold”, a simple early first trimester termination that occurs before a fetus is viable, and the outright killing of a full or nearly full term live birth who has just survived an abortion procedure. The unequivocal firebreathing zealots always seem to rise to the surface whether they’re on the right or left. PP deserves everything it gets and every possible blowback on this one.

    Comment by elissa (572ec5) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:08 pm

  29. I think this is an interesting take on the gender related things:
    http://patterico.com/2013/03/27/supreme-court-leaning-towards-striking-down-doma/comment-page-14/#comment-1195121

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:11 pm

  30. NJRob, I can’t stomach the Todd Akins of the world either. I want all zealoty zealots to just go away. On both sides these creepy zealots demean the debate, make their “side” look stupid, and insult voters’ intelligence.

    Comment by elissa (572ec5) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:14 pm

  31. Mr. Feets, I unnerstand why you don’t want to wave your abortion pom poms over Planned Parenthood’s stance of killing babies what survive late term abortions. It’s kind of a gruesome practice to defend. Move along, nothing to see here. Let’s talk about ice cream and cupcakes.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:14 pm

  32. Or polygamy.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:16 pm

  33. no Mr. daley you do NOT understand

    nobody understands

    and that is my cross to bear on this good friday

    my back is strong Mr. daley – weep not for me

    but if wee small aborted babies are getting borned and being killed on the table you would think these Florida douchebags would be in a hurry to pass a law to do something about it

    not sit and patronize us with their silly interrogation of an empty-headed planned parenthood moron

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:20 pm

  34. NJRob, I can’t stomach the Todd Akins of the world either. I want all zealoty zealots to just go away. On both sides these creepy zealots demean the debate, make their “side” look stupid, and insult voters’ intelligence.

    Comment by elissa (572ec5) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:14 pm

    You can not stomach him all you want. The difference is the party walked away from his stance. Your possible allies here never walk away from this one.

    Akin’s stance is still one about life versus the cult of death. But I’m not here to defend Akin who did admit his error. This creature will never do the same.

    Comment by NJRob (fe68e7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:21 pm

  35. Sweet smiles and sharp knives. The very definition of the left.

    Comment by Ag80 (b2c81f) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:22 pm

  36. And yet conservatives are waging a “war on women”?

    And yet conservatives are the party of Death?

    Comment by Jcw46 (0af03c) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:24 pm

  37. the courts keep striking these laws down, and Top Men, keep waving through the judges that do it, Halligan, was the exception, that proves the rule.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:27 pm

  38. on what basis do they strike these laws down Mr. narciso?

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:28 pm

  39. “and that is my cross to bear on this good friday”

    Mr. Feets – Then stand tall and wave those baby killing pom poms for Easter.

    Give me the knife!
    Give me the scissors
    Give the borned alive baby
    Now its dead
    Another one bites the dust

    Go team bortion

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:30 pm

  40. I’m sure there is a word for the kind of question the committee members asked the smiling specter of death, but I don’t know what it is.

    However, I do know the scenario is extremely unlikely.

    I also know why she would not answer the question.

    That is why it was an excellent question.

    Comment by Ag80 (b2c81f) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:31 pm

  41. the same idiocies we hear from Kagan and Sotomayor,

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:31 pm

  42. Todd Akin’s idiocy cost us a much needed sure thing gimmee U.S. Senate seat in 2012. I’m not OK with that–whether he “apologized” or not, or “did admit his error”, or whether “the party walked away from his stance”. YMMV.

    Comment by elissa (572ec5) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:34 pm

  43. nono Mr. daley the babies won’t die

    the florida Rs have heard their bleak cry!

    They’re off to great places – today is their day!

    Their mountain is waiting and they’re on their way!

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:38 pm

  44. 33. “nobody understands

    and that is my cross to bear on this good friday”

    I know this analogy is used all the time by lifeydoodles for some pain or injustice, but just for the record if one is not being martyred for the faith it is inapt.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:38 pm

  45. Happyfeet wants this law passed so quick there is NOT A SECOND TO WASTE.

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:39 pm

  46. point taken Mr. gary

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:39 pm

  47. lickety-split quick like an easter bunny Mr. P!

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:40 pm

  48. There can be no debate just pass it pass it pass it now

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:41 pm

  49. 42. Let’s not forget the MO party regulars that voted this idiot into office in the first place, then proceeded to give him a primary victory over conservatives like Brunner, a State officer, and Steelman.

    More of the Party of Stupid getting its way, if we may be precise.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:41 pm

  50. easter bunny

    Just say bunny
    the school principle in GA or wherever said so
    don’t offend anybody

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:42 pm

  51. And then move on to more pressing business, I believe your phrase was. This bread and circus saving tiny children thing is really quite a distraction

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:42 pm

  52. Not the hill to die on, got it, well the continuing. . .

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:45 pm

  53. there can be debate i guess

    but um

    what’s there to debate?

    we decree you abortion people aren’t supposed to kill living babies what are just sitting there all helpless and whatever – you’re supposed to try and help them, even if if you have to drive like 60 miles or whatever

    hey hey you guys slow down let’s think this through

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:45 pm

  54. And the only possible value of revealing Planned Parenthood’s opposition to saving little babies is nothing when stacked up against the pressing business of tasty tasty cupcakes.

    Stop typing comments now and write your local Florida legislator the clock is ticking tick tock tick tock listen to it

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:46 pm

  55. I think Smith College refusing to admit a transgendered female in the state of transgendered equality is more pressing business.
    If s/he is a MA public school student, s/he is accustomed to being treated as a female by state law.

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:46 pm

  56. The “elegant” “soft-smiling” Philadelphia abortionist got away with it because even though Pennsylvania could, constitutionaly, require that all abortions after the first trimester be performed in a hospital or a clinic within a hospital, it does not.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:46 pm

  57. cupcakes are chock full of treacherous carbs Mr. P

    don’t be like me I had to find out on the street

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:48 pm

  58. Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:46 pm

    It was the RINO Gov. Ridge that told the state health dept to not enforce that,
    not the usual suspect Ed Rendell

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:49 pm

  59. Can require a second doctor in attendance to treat the baby in case it is born alive, too. Constitutionally.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:50 pm

  60. It was a closely held secret for years that they are packed with sugar.

    Just like the closely held secret that killing fully born babies is wrong

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:50 pm

  61. well the cat’s outta the bag now boy howdy

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:50 pm

  62. Some threads are more suitable for elfin insousiance than others, happyfeet.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:51 pm

  63. Just like the closely held secret that killing fully born babies is wrong
    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:50 pm

    not if the one had his way

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:51 pm

  64. Can require a second doctor in attendance to treat the baby in case it is born alive, too. Constitutionally.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:50 pm

    Think of the LOGISTICS!

    Also the bread and circuses involved in trying to save such children

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:52 pm

  65. ok fine Mr. nk happy good friday errybody

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:52 pm

  66. Come on Mr. happy, you’re smarter and better than this.

    You know the problem with the scenario and why she can’t answer.

    Comment by Ag80 (b2c81f) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:52 pm

  67. Please.

    Enough with bills to save children.

    Move on to “more for reals pressing business.”

    You “Florida wankers” with your bills to save babies’ lives.

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:54 pm

  68. Well when they take his favorite foozle, that’s when it will matter.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:54 pm

  69. Good Friday is stained with discussion of such irrelevant nonsense.

    Happyfeet has spoken!

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:55 pm

  70. I’m going to another thread and just so you know when I go I take the fun with me

    deal with it

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:56 pm

  71. “Happyfeet wants this law passed so quick there is NOT A SECOND TO WASTE.”

    Mr. Patterico – I thought mostly Mr. Feets wanted people to stop talking about killing live borned aborted babies.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:58 pm

  72. ‘the question is moot’

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:59 pm

  73. The courts, the “the courts”, have tightened or loosened (depending on your point of view) the restriction on abortions about as much as they are going to for the time being. The fights, such as this one, in the state legislatures are meaningful and important, making a difference not only in the laws that will be passed but also generally in the public debate.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:59 pm

  74. 62. Welcome back, that was art.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:00 pm

  75. Can we deal with the loss of “the fun” of minimizing laws designed to save newly born infants?

    HOW CAN I SURVIVE WITHOUT SUCH FUN?!?!?!

    Comment by Patterico (fd63f7) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:02 pm

  76. I don’t even consider myself a “pro-lifer,” although I certainly do like the idea of letting people live.

    It’s just that you can’t ever get the “pro-choice” side to admit to what they really want. Just to be clear, “rare” is not a part of that.

    I don’t include Mr. happy in that generalization. I bear Mr. happy no ill-will. He and I disagree all the time. There’s nothing wrong with that.

    Comment by Ag80 (b2c81f) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:07 pm

  77. This is Sandra Fluke just a few years down the road.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:17 pm

  78. Abortion is an ugly, distasteful thing and it makes for ugly, distasteful discussion, that’s true. Many people would just rather not talk about it.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:19 pm

  79. If abortionists are required to save babies who are born alive in an abortion attempt, does that not defeat the purpose of an abortion?

    Comment by Michael Ejercito (2e0217) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:25 pm

  80. the Florida wankers should just have a vote and move onto more for reals pressing business

    After all, what could possibly be more pressing than killing babies born alive?

    I’m sorry but going in for an abortion and leaving with a baby wazzle in the NICU is just not something anyone should have to go through ever

    First and foremost, the baby, no? How about not putting an innocent through the torture of aborting in the first place? That way, a botched job and the NICU can be completely avoided.

    The lack of integrity in these comments is stunning. The only way to grasp them is to fully understand that there is no intrinsic value of human life and work from there.

    Comment by Dana (292dcf) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:29 pm

  81. Todd Akin’s idiocy cost us a much needed sure thing gimmee U.S. Senate seat in 2012. I’m not OK with that–whether he “apologized” or not, or “did admit his error”, or whether “the party walked away from his stance”. YMMV.

    Comment by elissa (572ec5) — 3/29/2013 @ 7:34 pm

    No, the people of Missouri who bought McCaskill’s propaganda and voted for her are to blame for that.

    Comment by NJRob (fe68e7) — 3/29/2013 @ 9:15 pm

  82. If abortionists are required to save babies who are born alive in an abortion attempt, does that not defeat the purpose of an abortion?

    Comment by Michael Ejercito (2e0217) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:25 pm

    You mean the legal right to murder your own baby? Probably. So what.

    Comment by NJRob (fe68e7) — 3/29/2013 @ 9:24 pm

  83. It took me a while to get the evil w**re’s point, but “inconvenience” and “burdensomeness” have been consistent pro-abortion arguments in court toward striking down some regulations. Sometimes successfully, sometimes not. She was parotting the court strategy. E.g., there will be fewer doctors doing late term abortions if the doctors are obligated to take the baby to a facility that could save its life, and that in turn is a burden on the mother’s right to an abortion.

    Comment by nk (c5b7ef) — 3/29/2013 @ 9:37 pm

  84. here is a singing here Mr. NJ

    cause of how the internet magic works you just have to click it for to hear the whole singing

    it don’t have a whole lot to do with eraserhead babbies, no sir

    but still nevertheless it is an important singing in my ever-shrinking family

    and easter is a lot about family I think

    but mostly it’s just a song for luby’s people I think

    so if you is one of them I think you might would appreciate hearing this singing

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 9:50 pm

  85. Put em in a closet
    Throw em in the trash
    Slit their widdle necks
    Cut their widdle spines

    Go Team Bortion!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/29/2013 @ 9:56 pm

  86. Not sure why you directed that song at me. I do like enchilada’s, but I would never be such a cheap SoB to only tip a quarter.

    I don’t get the remark about the Presbyterians. But I did waste the 7 minutes listening to it because I don’t mind country music.

    Night.

    Comment by NJRob (fe68e7) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:01 pm

  87. “And the only possible value of revealing Planned Parenthood’s opposition to saving little babies is nothing when stacked up against the pressing business of tasty tasty cupcakes.”

    - Patterico

    Whoah, there. That could be misinterpreted.

    If this does anything, it saves children delivered alive from abortionists who might kill them on a table. So every day it’s not passed is a day where a child’s life is unnecessarily at risk.

    happyfeet is saying pass this bill as soon as possible. Your comment implies that there’s value to be had in hashing this out in public.

    Put simply, that comment could be read as one arguing that it’s worth risking lives to score political points.

    Comment by Leviticus (17b7a5) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:01 pm

  88. oh.

    oh nono momo

    you wanna make it right mr. daley?

    then when you go to Nationals – bring it!

    <snap>

    don’t slack off cause of you feel sorry for me

    that way when I beat you i’ll know it’s cause of I’m better

    oh hell’s yeah

    this is so on

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:02 pm

  89. g’nite Mr. Rob thanks for listening

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:03 pm

  90. Mr. happy,

    I did not know Mr. Keen, Ms. Griffith kinda and Mr. Lovett for sure. And those are facts.

    So did another guy who posts here sometimes.

    Good people.

    Apropos of nothing.

    Comment by Ag80 (b2c81f) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:03 pm

  91. that’s neat Mr. 80

    but mr. lovett was in kind of a state days are last I checked

    and that reminders me about julia roberts’s ever-shrinking career profile

    i worked in a building once where they come on in and filmed scenes for that movie where she was all worried about water quality

    she got an oscar for that

    and good for her

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:14 pm

  92. happyfeet is saying pass this bill as soon as possible.

    Is that what he’s saying? You read context differently than I do.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:25 pm

  93. The Constitutional right to freedom of speech and the Constitutional right to bear arms can be limited by Congress.

    But not abortion. Because abortion is a Constitutional right. Or something. Just like marriage. Or whatever.

    Besides, an abortion is a medical procedure which is between a woman and her physician. Except when it’s being decided upon by a panel of bureaucrats appointed by Dr. Obama.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (1a4f67) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:28 pm

  94. no that’s what I’m sayin Mr. P

    ain’t no time fer drama

    we’s gots babbies to save

    now who’s wit me????

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:29 pm

  95. It seemed like what he was saying when he said this:

    “if wee small aborted babies are getting borned and being killed on the table you would think these Florida douchebags would be in a hurry to pass a law to do something about it

    not sit and patronize us with their silly interrogation of an empty-headed planned parenthood moron”

    And this:

    what’s there to debate?

    we decree you abortion people aren’t supposed to kill living babies what are just sitting there all helpless and whatever – you’re supposed to try and help them, even if if you have to drive like 60 miles or whatever

    hey hey you guys slow down let’s think this through”

    Comment by Leviticus (17b7a5) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:31 pm

  96. thank you Mr. levi

    thank you for reals

    I swear I choose my words with no small care and yet people end up twistering them into these grotesqueries I don’t recognize

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 10:40 pm

  97. Mr. Feets – You ever been fishing and catch some nice big juicy fish and before going home to cook em up for some nice tasty foozle using your favorite recipe you got to clean em before sticking em in your cooler. You start cleaning one, scraping the scales, sticking the knife in to gut em and all of a sudden the fish starts flopping around and you realize it isn’t dead yet.

    Good times.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/29/2013 @ 11:09 pm

  98. Yea, but, when are those babies “born?” We all know that is the question. Plenty of premature babies are alive today and as old as me.

    I’m not trying to twist words. The scenario we are discussing is simple:

    If a baby is born alive despite a botched abortion, what should the doctor, mother and father do?

    As unlikely as that is, the simple answer is all measures should be taken to preserve the baby’s life. Otherwise is murder.

    The quandary is as simple as the question.

    So we have this great big ethical stew and the primary reason is because the United States Supreme Court somehow found the word “abortion” in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    The successors to that Court are probably going to root around and find other words that do not exist in the documents to our detriment.

    Regardless, I think we should remember those documents are not restrictions on citizens about what they can or can not do.

    They are quite clearly documents designed to tell the government what it can not do.

    So, we are arguing about an ethical issue that should have no place in the course of a federal government. Except it does.

    Voting is not hard.

    Comment by Ag80 (b2c81f) — 3/29/2013 @ 11:26 pm

  99. no honestly that don’t happen often Mr. daley cause of first thing I do when I clean me some fishes is I cut off they head

    this is, however, not something I often do in north hollywood where I now live

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/29/2013 @ 11:31 pm

  100. 8. I wonder how long they would allow them to make the decision to murder the child?

    Comment by JD (b63a52) — 3/29/2013 @ 6:25 pm

    Perhaps this PP spokestwit is still within the time window.

    Comment by Steve57 (be3310) — 3/29/2013 @ 11:49 pm

  101. “If a baby is born alive despite a botched abortion, what should the doctor, mother and father do?

    As unlikely as that is, the simple answer is all measures should be taken to preserve the baby’s life. Otherwise is murder.”

    - Ag80

    Yep. I totally agree.

    What worries me is that many other liberals that unreservedly agree with the sentiment that you’ve just expressed won’t make the connection that the baby that is so obviously alive on the table was the same living baby 20 seconds ago, despite the fact that it was still inside its mother’s womb. And the same living baby 20 seconds before that. And 20 minutes before that. And 20 hours before that.

    The line-drawing problem is “resolved” by willful blindness.

    Comment by Leviticus (17b7a5) — 3/29/2013 @ 11:53 pm

  102. “Yep. I totally agree.”

    Leviticus – Mr. Feets seems to have trouble carefully choosing words that say the same thing.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/30/2013 @ 12:44 am

  103. Plainly the problem is twisted, disturbed, iniquitous thinking:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/elderhealth/9959856/Its-the-cold-not-global-warming-that-we-should-be-worried-about.html

    Could epigenetics be the cause? Improved genetic testing might possibly eliminate a significant source of the problem and wipeout AIDS in one blow.

    Lets invest in the future. Its for the children.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/30/2013 @ 4:51 am

  104. “The fool says in his heart ‘There is no God’”

    And with that we’ve a world of trouble.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/30/2013 @ 4:57 am

  105. “Leviticus – Mr. Feets seems to have trouble carefully choosing words that say the same thing.”

    - daleyrocks

    Not really. He just says other things, too, and people choose to focus on those other things.

    Comment by Leviticus (17b7a5) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:14 am

  106. What worries me is that many other liberals that unreservedly agree with the sentiment that you’ve just expressed won’t make the connection that the baby that is so obviously alive on the table was the same living baby 20 seconds ago, despite the fact that it was still inside its mother’s womb. And the same living baby 20 seconds before that. And 20 minutes before that. And 20 hours before that.
    The line-drawing problem is “resolved” by willful blindness.

    Comment by Leviticus (17b7a5) — 3/29/2013 @ 11:53 pm

    Do you realize you are arguning along the same lines as Rick Santorum? Except he was challenging Boxer on how many cm of baby was inside or outside of the birth canal.

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:15 am

  107. Blue on blue theft, battery and genocide is in the pipeline:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/british-gaza-convoy-activists-were-raped-in-front-of-their-father-in-benghazi/

    Your way of life is passing away Westerner. The Jooos world population is decreasing, just like the rest of your white bigoted azzes.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:15 am

  108. “Do you realize you are arguning along the same lines as Rick Santorum?”

    - MD in Philly

    Yeah, pretty much.

    Comment by Leviticus (17b7a5) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:25 am

  109. Just checking.
    Intellectually honest and a credit to you state.

    Meep! Meep! swooshhhhhhh!!

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:33 am

  110. When I was younger, I was “Pro-choice”.

    After the baby is born, maybe it should have a choice? And the right to say

    “Keep your hands off my body”?

    Comment by Dan Kauffman (27c54a) — 3/30/2013 @ 6:34 am

  111. “Not really. He just says other things, too,”

    Leviticus – Can you point out where he carefully chooses his own words to say the same thing. What you point out in #95 is not it.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/30/2013 @ 6:50 am

  112. Leviticus @ 101,

    What worries me is that many other liberals that unreservedly agree with the sentiment that you’ve just expressed won’t make the connection that the baby that is so obviously alive on the table was the same living baby 20 seconds ago, despite the fact that it was still inside its mother’s womb. And the same living baby 20 seconds before that. And 20 minutes before that. And 20 hours before that.

    The line-drawing problem is “resolved” by willful blindness.

    Absolutely. And they won’t because they can’t. For if they were honest about the line-drawing, their entire argument for abortion becomes exposed for the irrational grotesquerie it really is. It’s far easier to squawk about women’s rights, blah, blah, my body, blah, blah, than look reality squarely in the eye.

    That is the dishonesty that is so absolutely necessary in order to keep the murderous machine functioning.

    Comment by Dana (292dcf) — 3/30/2013 @ 7:01 am

  113. I don’t think it saves this woman that she’s dumb, by the way, although she clearly is.

    It’s far worse than being dumb. She’s one of those types who undoubtedly believes her biases — her ideology — stem from a place of great humaneness and generosity. That’s what makes people like her both frightening and grotesque.

    Just how deranged can humans become when it comes to such two-faced emotions and the way they manifest? That’s best exemplified by the insanely two-faced nature of no less than Adolph Hitler—who various liberals like to clumsily use as a foil against conservatives. Hitler was a vegan and animal-rights admirer. Such a notorious figure makes me think of today’s increasingly fashionable PETA-do-gooderism mixed together with Obama-Green-Earth-do-gooderism, sprinkled with a dash of Obama-breezily-shrugging-off-late-term-abortions.

    Comment by Mark (212a14) — 3/30/2013 @ 7:02 am

  114. Maybe it’s time for another flood.

    Comment by Joe Miller (33b78c) — 3/30/2013 @ 8:44 am

  115. Oh, but I do weep for you, Happy. For fatherhood lost. Tears of sorrow. Real tears, not sarcasm.

    To abort a child is to abort our Lord, Who, also, spent time in the womb. Truly, I feel that I know what it was like; to have lived out Herrod’s massacre of innocents.

    Have mercy on us, O Lord.

    Comment by felipe (3243af) — 3/30/2013 @ 8:44 am

  116. A new billboard along my daily drive proclaims the 50th anniversary of some atheist org. The timing of its appearance reminded me of this:

    http://abyssum.wordpress.com/2013/03/29/christians-are-called-on-to-be-a-lot-of-anvils/

    Happy Easter, everyone.

    Comment by felipe (3243af) — 3/30/2013 @ 8:54 am

  117. It is so painful to watch this utterly depraved woman refuse to admit she would willingly support INFANTICIDE.

    At least have the courage to admit you want to murder children when the purpose of your organization is to maximize the number of children murdered.

    Would she oppose INFANTICIDE if the doctor SHOT the baby with an semi-automatic handgun? Would the capacity of the magazine be an issue?

    THE BARBARIANS ARE HERE!

    Comment by WarEagle82 (2b7355) — 3/30/2013 @ 9:30 am

  118. no that’s what I’m sayin Mr. P

    ain’t no time fer drama

    we’s gots babbies to save

    now who’s wit me????

    The sincerity inherent in your presentation is overwhelming. This is so important it must be pushed through without debate and also it’s not “for reals pressing business.”

    You are fooling no-one.

    Correction: you’re fooling Leviticus.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/30/2013 @ 10:58 am

  119. A person who views the above video and pronounces that the “wankers” are the lawmakers?

    That’s a person who is SINCERE about saving the children.

    Again: only one person here is fooled by the act.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:01 am

  120. i still think this vote is a no-brainer what coulda been executed with a minimum of stupid

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:01 am

  121. What ever happened to it’s for the children?

    In today’s world, nothing is for the children. Not marriage, not education, not women’s health. Only vapid political speech is for the children.

    We spend every debt-laden day consuming our culture’s future.

    Comment by Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:06 am

  122. I like the new standard though. Now we know that even one second of debate over an assault weapons ban shows the proponents don’t really care about saving children because every second of debate they allow is another life lost.

    Something tells me if I went around making that argument in a corn pone voice while calling Dianne Feinstein a “wanker” Leviticus might see through it.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:08 am

  123. the florida wankers are pretending they’re doing a data-driven act of responsible governance

    lol

    what gives it away is when the one wanker asks the pptwat hey how often does this happen anyways toots?

    And the pptwat is all hell if I know.

    So they both gaze at each other in abject ignorance.

    This is cause this is a feelings law not a law based on empirical data.

    Nothing wrong with that, though you’d think existing law covered this situation already.

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:14 am

  124. Keep digging, happyfeet.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:19 am

  125. Nothing wrong with that, though you’d think existing law covered this situation already.

    You’d think. Except, did you actually watch the video?

    They had a previous witness who said it didn’t.

    But hey, they’re insincere because what? They passed the law at 4 p.m. instead of 2 p.m. because of all the testimony and debate?

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:19 am

  126. It would be one thing if these legislators never debated and had testimony on any law, and set up such procedures exclusively for this statute.

    But we know that’s not the case.

    And that’s why happyfeet is sniggering behind his hand as he struggles to maintain a straight face in arguing that the debate and testimony is WASTING TIME WHEN THERE ARE CHILDREN TO SAVE!!!!

    It’s seriously a very poorly done act.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:21 am

  127. You quoted Jim Treacher’s analysis some time ago, Patterico:

    http://jimtreacher.com/archives/001068.html

    It’s relevant.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e88e07) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:30 am

  128. They had a previous witness who said it didn’t.

    it’s still surprising that current law lets people in florida kill babies

    they should change that I think

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:30 am

  129. if a doctor had to drive 80 miles to save the life of a child and the speed limit was 65 MPH, how long would it take for the doctor to reach that life-saving destination?

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (64a03d) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:30 am

  130. Thanks Patterico.

    Comment by NJRob (fe68e7) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:34 am

  131. the florida wankers are pretending they’re doing a data-driven act of responsible governance

    lol

    what gives it away is when the one wanker asks the pptwat hey how often does this happen anyways toots?

    And the pptwat is all hell if I know.

    If existing law is so clear, why is she having trouble answering that question?

    I bet it is already murder under existing law, but I (unlike happyfeet) have absolutely no problem with lawmakers seeking to make that perfectly clear. I do not dub them “wankers” for doing so, nor do I mock the process in any way.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:35 am

  132. It’s seriously a very poorly done act.

    That makes me think of the a-ha moment when it came to Judge Vaughn Walker. Not so much his ruling against Proposition 8, or his being homosexual, but his breezily dismissing back in the 1980s the legal inappropriateness of a proposal to ban handguns in San Francisco. Namely, his noting that while such a law would run counter to state law (much less the 2nd Amendment), he nonetheless thought such a ban would be AOK anyway. That immediately revealed to me the core of what he’s all about. And, as far as I’m concerned, previous attempts to portray Judge Vaughn as a rock-ribbed Republican or common-sense rightist flew right out the window.

    Comment by Mark (212a14) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:36 am

  133. I too have absolutely no problem with lawmakers seeking to make that perfectly clear

    but lawmakers + cameras = wankers I think, if you don’t mind my saying so

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:42 am

  134. It is my personal belief that the only wankers in this are those that cannot see the depravity of the PP position.

    Comment by JD (3cbfc7) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:45 am

  135. i respect your belief Mr. JD and I will say nothing further about these florida lawmakers and their well-meaning lawmakings

    I’m a go rag on Mr. Dr. Carson some more

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:49 am

  136. I’m watching the longer hearing on this. This isn’t necessarily a simple situation. The baby is born and the mom was trying to have it aborted minutes before. In normal circumstances, a parent can be presumed to have the best interests of her child at heart, but that logic does not necessarily apply (to put it mildly) when she was trying to end its life just minutes ago. The extent to which the mother’s desires for her child must be respected by the doctor seem like a legitimate area of interest and inquiry for the state.

    Comment by Patterico (2efd47) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:51 am

  137. JD, it is clear that the woman knows perfectly well the implications of what she is saying, and is trying to slice things so thin that she has cover.

    Except it doesn’t work. She is hand waving desperately to keep from appearing to condone flat out murder.

    The meaning of “is” started all of this. Here we are.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e88e07) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:53 am

  138. I get it. If your mother doesn’t want you, you are not a person. You are trash, not even worth a few gallons of gasoline.

    But your mother is liberated so it’s all OK.

    Comment by Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/30/2013 @ 1:39 pm

  139. Between a woman and her doctor, what could possibly go wrong?

    She once had to kill a baby delivered in a toilet, cutting its neck with scissors, she said.
    http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_22829373/dr-kermit-gosnell-trial-abortion-clinic-worker-describes

    …Abortions are typically performed in utero.

    Comment by Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/30/2013 @ 2:24 pm

  140. Patterico, I don’t get it. The baby—okay, let’s say “developing zygote”—is born alive, and able with medical assistance survive. Sure, the mother went into the clinic for a (very) late abortion, and apparently she has that right in some circumstances.

    But the “developing zygote” did not die, and is alive. How is that not a newborn baby? Would any MD or health care professional be permitted to allow a newborn to die on the say so of the mother?

    I’m not trying to be difficult. I see this as pretty simple.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e88e07) — 3/30/2013 @ 2:26 pm

  141. I’m afraid I don’t get this thread, and many of the comments.

    Yes, there is a real issue. A few moments before both the mother and the doctor present were trying to kill the pre-born child, “Woops”, the child was born alive (it has happened, some are old enough to know it happened, happy mother’s day, hey).
    - Some think the reasonable thing to do is finish what was started, as if the newborn is still a “blob of tissue” that is a piece of property of the mother to do with what she will.
    - Some people think that even if you grant the mother the right to kill something inside her, she no longer has that right once the child has “escaped”.
    - Once upon a time I believe even Nancy Pelosi pronounced that she and the Catholic church think the child should live.
    - But Barack “I’m present” Obama actually vote against such a child protection bill in the state of Ill.

    Yes, he did. And many, many black pro-life voters didn’t know or didn’t care…enough.

    The idea is unfortunately a serious one for some, who are so blinded they’ve lost their humanity.
    Can you grant humanity to someone who wants to kill a newborn child just for showing up?

    There are some ideas so heinous that one would like to just refuse to give them the time of discussion. Unfortunately, there are people who are actually ready to act on the ideas, no matter how unspeakable.

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/30/2013 @ 2:40 pm

  142. Would any MD or health care professional be permitted to allow a newborn to die on the say so of the mother?
    I’m not trying to be difficult. I see this as pretty simple.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e88e07) — 3/30/2013 @ 2:26 pm

    Depends what you mean by “permitted” and by whom. If the doctor was planning on killing an unborn child capable of life and the baby is born alive he/she has made a mistake. People like to correct their mistakes.
    Who is going to stop them? If you make it officially and specifically illegal, then maybe someone around, a janitor, a receptionist, the mailman, maybe even an assistant or nurse, has a reason to say something to avoid getting involved in a crime.

    By the time euthanasia is legalized somewhere some doctors have already been doing it 20 years.

    The barbarians are not at the gates, they are in the break room.

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/30/2013 @ 2:46 pm

  143. MD, there is a horror and SF writer named F. Paul Wilson. He has an MD, too. He wrote a story called “Buckets” that is not for the weak of heart.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e88e07) — 3/30/2013 @ 2:57 pm

  144. i think this is the buckets

    Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/30/2013 @ 2:59 pm

  145. Mr. Feet, that is a website that reprinted that without Dr. Wilson’s permission and without his “afterward” comments.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e88e07) — 3/30/2013 @ 3:01 pm

  146. No links this time. I read the transcript where this PP tool said she’d like to have more conversation on the question of whether the baby should or shouldn’t be killed.

    Apparently when I link to and quote what others have said far more eloquently than I think I could it confuses certain people. So let me be plain.

    Nothing this PP tool is saying is new. Obama said it. The AP and the NYT have said it. They have refused to say in what little reporting they’ve done on the Gosnell case that snipping the spine the spine of a baby that has been born is actually infanticide. They casually mention that “typically” such abortions are done in utero.

    These are the people who are going to lecture me on the moral issues of the day? These are the people who are going lecture me on my intolerance who can look at a helpless baby and say, “I dunno?”

    I don’t think I’m going to be lectured to about morality from this crowd. We need a revolt.

    Comment by Steve57 (be3310) — 3/30/2013 @ 3:30 pm

  147. This is a horrific post/thread at the heart of it: we are discussing what to do with a baby born alive after the attempted murder of it. How is that irony not the most surreal thing of all? It’s the worst kind of madness: dressed up in legalize and medical terminology – anything to remove the moral depravity from it. clean it up and make it something, anything other than what it really is.

    That we are at a place where this is the debate, is staggering. One can attempt to massage and tweak the gut of it with manipulations and rationalizations to make it palatable, even civilized, but it is still at its core, reprobate and and indictment against our collective society.

    They have refused to say in what little reporting they’ve done on the Gosnell case that snipping the spine the spine of a baby that has been born is actually infanticide. They casually mention that “typically” such abortions are done in utero.

    Because when you do it in the dark of the womb – which ironically, should be the safest place ever provided for a baby – the moral depravity of it can be hidden, thus it’s not really there.

    Comment by Dana (292dcf) — 3/30/2013 @ 3:59 pm

  148. When someone says “we need to have a conversation” this typically means “I won’t talk about that so shut up.”

    This turn of language is similar to “and much, much more” which actually means “and that’s about it.”

    Comment by Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/30/2013 @ 4:20 pm

  149. “Correction: you’re fooling Leviticus.”

    - Patterico

    You’re right. In my stupidity, I’ve forgone the obviously righteous response of being offended by people who speak differently (or even have different priorities) than I do.

    “A person who views the above video and pronounces that the “wankers” are the lawmakers?”

    - Patterico

    They are wankers. My other comments should make clear how horrifying I find abortion, but happyfeet is right: “lawmakers + cameras = wankers.” Do they know how they feel about the issue? So what? Deal with it.

    Comment by Leviticus (d22ccd) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:35 pm

  150. “That we are at a place where this is the debate, is staggering. One can attempt to massage and tweak the gut of it with manipulations and rationalizations to make it palatable, even civilized, but it is still at its core, reprobate and and indictment against our collective society.”

    - Dana

    Yep.

    Comment by Leviticus (d22ccd) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:36 pm

  151. Do they know how they feel about the issue?

    (Sorry, holdover from another iteration).

    Comment by Leviticus (d22ccd) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:38 pm

  152. “Now we know that even one second of debate over an assault weapons ban shows the proponents don’t really care about saving children because every second of debate they allow is another life lost.

    Something tells me if I went around making that argument in a corn pone voice while calling Dianne Feinstein a “wanker” Leviticus might see through it.”

    - Patterico

    They don’t care. They care about scoring political points. So f*ck them. If they cared, they would vote.

    Comment by Leviticus (d22ccd) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:40 pm

  153. nono Mr. daley the babies won’t die

    the florida Rs have heard their bleak cry!

    They’re off to great places – today is their day!

    Their mountain is waiting and they’re on their way!

    Comment by happyfeet

    But didn’t the Democrats glorious leader kill a law like that in his Illinois Senate Subcommittee?

    Comment by Dan Kauffman (27c54a) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:40 pm

  154. Comment by Dan Kauffman (27c54a) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:40 pm

    he actually not only showed up but voted against it. I don’t think he killed it though, even Nancy Pelosi was against it at the time, I believe.

    Comment by MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:44 pm

  155. If abortionists are required to save babies who are born alive in an abortion attempt, does that not defeat the purpose of an abortion?

    Comment by Michael Ejercito (2e0217) — 3/29/2013 @ 8:25 pm

    Since the rationale for abortion is the woman has a right to decide what to do with her own body, after the baby is born it is no longer part of her body therefore we are no longer talking about an abortion the legal term is homicide. Tell me Michael doesn’t the born alive child have the same Civil Rights as you and I?

    Comment by Dan Kauffman (27c54a) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:47 pm

  156. You’re right. In my stupidity, I’ve forgone the obviously righteous response of being offended by people who speak differently (or even have different priorities) than I do.

    Huh?

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:54 pm

  157. They don’t care. They care about scoring political points. So f*ck them. If they cared, they would vote.

    But the point wasn’t whether they care, but whether MY argument would be sincere if I called them wankers and then criticized them for delaying the vote for EVEN ONE SECOND.

    You followed that, right? That my point wasn’t about the lawmakers?

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:56 pm

  158. They are wankers. My other comments should make clear how horrifying I find abortion, but happyfeet is right: “lawmakers + cameras = wankers.” Do they know how they feel about the issue? So what? Deal with it.

    They are. They are working on legislation. That’s what legislators do.

    If you want to abolish committees and getting public input for Really Important Legislation, say so.

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 3/30/2013 @ 5:57 pm

  159. “They’re working on legislation”? Really? What fine points of legislation are they working out?

    Were their minds made up? They should have been. Mine would have been. Yours would have been.

    So what are they doing?

    Comment by Leviticus (46159f) — 3/30/2013 @ 6:13 pm

  160. Surely we can set a reasonable geographical limit on how far a doctor must drive to save a human life. Must he go 60 miles? 90 miles?

    I would say it should be the same for the baby as it would be for the woman if something serious happened as a result of the abortion procedure.

    Comment by Dan Kauffman (27c54a) — 3/30/2013 @ 11:03 pm

  161. Much more comprehensive video of the March 25 hearing here:
    http://youtu.be/gyMZTtBwt3M

    Comment by Badger Pundit (3077f7) — 3/31/2013 @ 8:54 am

  162. Thanks for the suggestions you have contributed here. I believe there are numerous qualifications that can’t be ignored when looking for a local dentist.

    Comment by Michal (08aea0) — 4/25/2013 @ 12:27 am

  163. Michal (08aea0) — 4/25/2013 @ 12:27 am

    spam

    Comment by redc1c4 (403dff) — 4/25/2013 @ 12:36 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4074 secs.