<<< A couple of points: Just because he performed late-term abortions, doesn't mean that is all he did as a doctor (perhaps it was all he did - I don't know). Additionally, did he perform them in any and all situations, or was it when the life of the mother was at risk or at stake? (I'd see there being a difference there).>>>

Steve, I'm not trying to make you angry, but neither I am trying to secure my position on your Christmas card list. I saw an article yesterday where the gays in San Francisco are holding a vigil for this tiller guy....now WTF? How are the topics related? What is the connection? Well, killing babies and being gay are both considered "liberal", so thats as far as their mentality goes. One would even guess (in the absence of better information) that a touchy-feely gay in touch with his feminine side would have some compassion for a helpless baby, but NO!

Now this clannish, band-wagon, we support anything liberal mentality is quite apparent in the article, don't you think? Now Steve, your questions has validity, and always need to be asked in a fair trial when justice is being sought, but your post has a strong energy of "did it really happen that way". Trouble is, you hate this same thing in the Holdemans. I know I do. Steve, can you have it both ways?

If you want to be a man, you have to seek justice, align yourself with truth and not with a clan. Believe me, the liberals are as clanny as the conservatives. I was going to add "if not more so" but I realized that would be impossible to be more clanny than a staunch conservative. You need to do begin to do your own thinking. When you do this, you often find your self in one camp or the other, and more often yet, in neither camp.

Amen to your post on justice Doug. Babies need protection and justice and any man who doesn't think so is no man at all.

This so-called "woman's right to choose" is a graphic example on the list of logical fallacies.

Suppose I sell an antique gun and discover later it was worth ten-times what I sold it for. Now I have this deep regret for my original CHOICE. Do I have the right to murder the buyer so I can avoid the consequences of my original choice? Would we ever think of this in terms of "right to choose"?

Some may argue that the mother didn't always choose to begin the pregnancy and so then she has the right to terminate it with death of the child. But I never had a choice to be born to my parrents either, so can I go kill them and call it freedom of choice?  The crux of the matter is that the pro-abortionists have convinced themselves (must be terribly hard to do at first) that unborn babies are simply worthless lbs of flesh. 

Thought Experiment:

What if due to some weird CHOICE a woman made, that she would be able to have a new baby already birthed inserted back inside of her womb. Now all suppose for the sake of the experiment that it is impossible remove the baby without killing, but that it would be naturally birthed later at no harm to the baby. Would society allow her to kill the baby because of her original choice? Clearly no! I will never understand how the word "Choice" ever got involved in this argument. The crux is plain and simple - is it bio-mass, or is it a baby? If its a baby, the constitution and bill of rights FULLY applies. If it is bio-mass, then eject it and toss it in the trash if it troubles you. It really is that simple.

All very good thoughts, Scott.

When Justice is forfieted in the name of compassion, we have lost our way. The whole thing is inside out at this point! When justice has been traded in for what is more pleasurable than justice, we have lost our way! We are absolutely begging to become a third rate nation at this point and we're too overcome with the idea of pleasure to realize it, as it happens before our eyes.

For the sake of the quality of the mother's life is the [type compassion] that over-rides justice in this particular matter. The verbage is always the same. This is how a person responsibile for thousands upon thousands of late term abortions can sit through a church service when the name Jesus is mentioned, for was He not compassionate even as I am? Oh how I wish the rest of humanity were as commpassionate as I am. I must tell you; we have lost our way in this matter and have done it in the name of compassion.

It could be that the energy of abortion and homosexuality is percisely this pleasure-madness! If that's revealed to be so, it shall judged by the intrinsic truth of the matter. Everything will come to terms when completly out of it's closet and we shall witness it, for where sin [missing the mark] abounds; Grace already much more abounds! Nothing will remain covered or hidden. Intrinsic truth wins! God wins, if we believe in God or not!

There seems to be an affinity originating from somewhere between homosexuals and the abortionists. Finally we'll see that we can no longer (with a straight face) blame everything on the idea of being the minority. Certainly a legitimate affinity is generated in the realm of being a minority.

<<< There seems to be an affinity originating from somewhere between homosexuals and the abortionists. >>>

I copied this from an article in the associated press:

<< "He never wavered," says Susie Gilligan, who knew Tiller as part of her work in the Feminist Majority Foundation.>>>


...and we see also with the women's movement.


So there is a strong affinity between gays, abortion, and the women's movement, and who know what other kinds of dysfunction.....why, what are the ties that bind?

>>I saw an article yesterday where the gays in San Francisco are holding a vigil for this tiller guy....now WTF? How are the topics related? What is the connection? Well, killing babies and being gay are both considered "liberal", so thats as far as their mentality goes. One would even guess (in the absence of better information) that a touchy-feely gay in touch with his feminine side would have some compassion for a helpless baby, but NO!< <br>

I don't know what the connection is, unless it has to do with the fact that the same people who support the killing of doctors who perform abortions are often the same people who are rather less than accepting of GLBT people. You know, sort of like the same people who oppose abortion might rally to the cause of a pastor who gets fined for holding bible studies in his home (actually it was about parking and access issues, but you get my point). The two are not necessarily linked either.


>>Now this clannish, band-wagon, we support anything liberal mentality is quite apparent in the article, don't you think?< <br>

Probably.

>>Now Steve, your questions has validity, and always need to be asked in a fair trial when justice is being sought, but your post has a strong energy of "did it really happen that way". Trouble is, you hate this same thing in the Holdemans. I know I do. Steve, can you have it both ways? < <br>

My intent was not to play the BDIRHTW? card. What I was trying to point out was that there was probably more to this guy than just late-term abortions.


>>You need to do begin to do your own thinking. When you do this, you often find your self in one camp or the other, and more often yet, in neither camp.< <br>

Actually, I'm not quite sure how you have come to the conclusion that a) I don't think for myself, b) that I am necessarily in the 'liberal' camp on everything, or even c) that I don't find myself in neither camp from time to time.

I'm not going to argue point a) or b) with you. But, I will point out regarding c) that I personally consider myself to be in neither camp per se on the abortion issue. It may come as some surprise to people here, but I am actually anti-abortion/pro-life and pro-choice. I do not agree morally with abortion, at least in the late-term, unless the health of the mother is clearly at risk. At the same time, I do not believe I have the right to decide what happens in a woman's uterus. Perhaps that's a hankian position, but that's where I stand.

I have always found the late-birth abortion to be quite abhorrent, especially as the so called partial birth has been described. I understand that such an operation is legal only when the life or health of the mother is threatened. When doctors recommend the procedure only because of the mental health of the mother, i.e., depression: that seems awfully wrong to me.

But today I heard and read two stories of women who were patients of Tiller whose situation was much more sympathetic. In both cases, the women were carrying a child that would not survive outside the womb. The neural deformity was not discovered until several weeks into the second trimester. Their choice was to carry the baby to term and watch it die at birth, or terminate the pregnancy. They chose the latter. Since they were into the second trimester, Dr. Tiller and a handful of other clinics were the only place in the country to go. Both women were married with planned pregnancies. They experienced a lot of agony in the decision, and were grateful for the care and support they received from Tiller and his staff.

Other cases at his clinic involved very young victims of rape who only came forward after it was too late for a normal abortion. Many other cases involved fetuses that were brain dead.

So what is the profile of the normal patient at Tillers office? Up until now, I had assumed it was mainly women who just wanted an abortion because of the convenience. Perhaps that is true, but this information puts a different twist on it.

Stan, that is interesting. How does one ever get to the bottom of something while being inundated with biased hyperbole?

I don't know, Scott, but I know that listening to both camps give you a much better picture of reality than only listening to one.

Stan, that is interesting. How does one ever get to the bottom of something while being inundated with biased hyperbole?

Perhaps by watching/listening to a variety of mediums rather than only Fox 'news'.

Somewhat tangential to the thread, perhaps, but is the religious and political right down there going to be calling for the death penalty for Dr. Tiller's murderer?

Stan.. I can thoroughly understand the agonizing process that the women who had babies that were told that their babies had neurological defects went through in their decisions to end their baby's life. I personally was told that my first child, Kimma, had anencephaly and the dr's were telling me I could terminate the pregnancy. The dr.'s said that if she lived it would not be for long. Anencephaly is basically where the brain does not develop. It is extremely tough being in the proverbial rock and the hard place. I did not have an abortion. The dr.'s have been wrong on their diagnosis before, so not having an abortion.. means that I do not have to have it in the back of my mind of.. "what if the dr.'s were wrong?" Not having an abortion, meant that I could grieve for my baby. How does one grieve for their baby when they know that they are the one who chose to end that baby's life? These women that you speak of.. could have experienced love and care of people if they would have decided to not have an abortion too. The care and support I received from the nursing staff at the hospital when I gave birth to Kimma was amazing. AND the care and support I received from family and friends was even more incredible. The walking through the pregnancy was really tough.. but the love and care afterwards.. and knowing that I did not end the life of my child was definitely worth the tough months.

Btw.. those women DID choose to have an abortion because of convenience. It is much more "convenient" to have an abortion and not be asked as you as a pregnant women... get bigger and bigger.. oh.. your pregnanat.. aren't you so excited? Or.. well.. it doesn't matter the sex of the child.. as long as they are healthy. etc.. etc..

On the young rape victims.... that's a whole other issue... did Tiller report these crimes to the police? Or did he just perform the abortion and let it go? By law.. as a "dr." he is obligated to do so.

These abortions on the young rape victims.. are also a matter of convenience. It is more "convenient" to have an abortion rather than face the reality of someone raping a young person. It is more "convenient" to not have to go through a trial, etc., to try and bring the rapist to justice.

Steve.. so far, the people I have talked to.. and most of them call themselves Christians, say that the guy should be brought to justice. I haven't heard them talking about the death penalty yet. The cases that I know of here, that have had the death penalty charge out there.. have been ones that the person killed more than one person and or mutilated the person.

Also, most of the christians that I talk to, are extremely saddened by this event. They were hoping Tiller would repent of the killing of all of these babies.

The rape victims I heard mentioned were 10 and 11 year old girls. As bad as abortion is, it seems a greater injustice to force a child that young to carry a baby to term when she is already a victim of such an evil crime. I got the impression they were not trying to cover it up to avoid prosecuting the rapist, but were doing what they thought best for the young girl.

As to reporting the crime, I have no idea. It seems the responsibility would rest on the organization that arranged the abortion. Its not worth speculating on because I have no info.

Below is a link to a letter to Senator Obama from a woman who had a late term abortion after the fetus was diagnosed with Anencephaly. Dr Tiller performed the abortion. This is one of the cases I wrote about above.

http://www.essentialestrogen.com/2008/07/open-letter-to-obama-a-personal-perspective-on-late-term-abortion.html

>>On the young rape victims.... that's a whole other issue... did Tiller report these crimes to the police? Or did he just perform the abortion and let it go? By law.. as a "dr." he is obligated to do so.

These abortions on the young rape victims.. are also a matter of convenience. It is more "convenient" to have an abortion rather than face the reality of someone raping a young person. It is more "convenient" to not have to go through a trial, etc., to try and bring the rapist to justice.< <br>
Lark: Are you actually seriously asking that question? If you are, I think I smell burning cookies in your kitchen again. Why would you think that it's an 'either/or', abortion or prosecution? It could be 'both/and' which is what I would hazard a guess is what really happened.

This would be justice in my opinion: 1) Don't force a 10 or 11 year old girl to carry a baby, conceived due to a rape to term (i.e. terminate the pregnancy), AND get her professional psychological care to deal with the rape. 2) Prosecute the perp/perv who did the rape, to the fullest extent of the law.

Stan.. Thank you for posting the link to that letter. A lot of what Lynda went through in discovering that her baby had anencephaly is what I went through including the thought from the dr.s that the only thing keeping our baby Kimma alive was her connection to me.

Lynda made it sound like all of her options were horrific. I disagree. Abortion is horrific. Continuing on with the pregnancy is hard BUT it is not horrific and does not cause the baby any pain. I specifically asked my dr. about that. I also asked my dr questions about continuing the pregnancy. My dr. said that most women who have babies with anencephaly will not complete the entire pregnancy and will usually go into delivery around the 6th month. If they do go the entire time then they would need to choose a date to deliver on.

Lynda use of the idea of life support as justification for her decision to end her baby's life was based off of what the dr's told her. I am still to skeptical of dr.s to believe that everything that they can show a person in a sonogram and other tests are entirely accurate. There are times when all of these have been wrong. Why should a person chance killing their baby for the reason of a defect when continuing the pregnancy will not harm the baby?

Lynda's last thought on her site of "If your loved one was placed on life support and attending physicians said there was no chance of life continuing without the machines, who do you want to make the decision as to when and if life support is removed?" Is a thought provoking one... my question to that is, If you had a loved one who was on life support with no brain activity, would you want to decide to put chemicals on their body that would soften their tissues and bones, and then shove an instrument into their head (like a vacuum) and suck out their brains? (As done in many abortions that are 2nd or 3rd trimesters) Or like is done in rare abortion prcoedures...pour a liquid on their skin that would burn their skin?

Lynda's posting of her story has encouraged me to write out my own in more detail. Thank you again for posting that. Maybe someday I will post mine in more detail.

Steve.. hmm.. "cookies burning in the kitchen" is that a little bit of the "Ad Hominem" logical fallacies stuff? Yeah.. I agree.. I did use the either/or bit. When yes, both could happen.

Knowing that Tiller could brutally kill a baby while still in the womb during the 3rd trimester.. for some reason does not instill in me a belief that he would react honorably in the reporting of the possiblity that one of his young clients was raped.

A reason as to why he would not report that.. is...money. Considering,
most girls who are getting raped in the USA at the age of 9 or 10 know who the rapist is. The rapist could very easily be the same person who is taking them in to get the abortion. (93% of the victims of sexualabuse in the grade school age, know their attacker.) I went looking up statistics. From all of the sites.. it looks pretty consistent. Abortion because of rape occurs in about 1% of all abortions. In the US, there are 3,700 abortions a day. This would be about 37 women a day. 15% of sexual assualt and rape victims are under the age of 12 (this figure includes both boys and girls.) This would play out to what.. maybe 1 or 2 girls or at the max 5 who got pregnant because of rape?

Anyway.. Steve.. you make it sound like a person is nuts to encourage a 9 or 10 year old pregnant rape victim to carry the pregnancy to term. I totally disagree. Yes, it would be very difficult for them. However, encouraging a child to kill the baby that they are carrying will result in more issues for them to deal with in their "psychological" treatment plan.

Well, if we're takling about logical fallacies, how do you classify this?

>>as a "dr." he is obligated to do so< <br>
And what about this?

>>Knowing that Tiller could brutally kill a baby while still in the womb during the 3rd trimester.. for some reason does not instill in me a belief that he would react honorably in the reporting of the possiblity that one of his young clients was raped.< <br>
How are the two connected?

Steve.. This may not be logical to you.. but... the way I connect those two thoughts.. are under Kansas law medical professionals are required by law to report any suspicions of child abuse. Which is interesting to me because Tiller was committing child abuse on all of these babies still in the womb... so.. I find it difficult to believe that he would find it necessary to rat out someone else that is abusing a child outside of the womb.

While you believe that he was committing child abuse, the fact is that what he was doing was not against the law. But, to not report child abuse as defined by the law, would be illegal.

Therefore, assuming he was a law-abiding citizen, he presumably would have reported cases of abuse as defined by the criminal code.

Steve.. hmm.. what is that 3 possible logical fallacies..
Post Hoc: Assumption
Appeal to authority: law abiding citizen
Slippery Slope: Presume

These logical fallacies are rather fun...

It's interesting to me that some people try to make the abortion "doctors" out to be noble. Suggesting they are doing this to help people... people with babies with defects or rape victims. When the majority of the people that get abortions do NOT get abortions for those reasons. From the statistics I read... 1% are for rape and 6% are for "life" threatening reasons to either the mother or child. That leaves 93% of the abortions for other reasons.

Now.. if you look at what the abortion dr. makes..
Women bring into the abortion industry about $64,000 per hourevery hour, 365 days a year. (Thats $560,640,000 per year.)
Access, Life Dynamics, Inc. p. 4.

According to former abortion clinic owner, Eric Harrah, the average doctor who does abortions one day a week at a clinic averages 25-40 abortions [per day]. He will walk away in his pocket with an average of $100,000 to $125,000 a year. (Thats $1,923-$2,403 per one-day work week.)

If youre a participating member of an insurance company, they will give you incentives to perform an abortion. First trimester abortions are $250...Ive seen them pay over $2,000 for those abortions, because they would rather pay $2,000-$2,500 for a first trimester case than pay $7,000-$8,000 for prenatal, labor and delivery. When asked if he, as clinic owner, pockets the money, Mr. Harrah answered, Oh, definitely. He later stated,

This was taken from this web sitehttp://www.ashcofriendsforlife.org/abortion_facts_and_figures.htm

>>Steve.. hmm.. what is that 3 possible logical fallacies..
Post Hoc: Assumption
Appeal to authority: law abiding citizen
Slippery Slope: Presume< <br>

I did not know Dr. Tiller, so I don't know for a fact that he was a law abiding citizen. I can only make an assumption based on the fact that I have not heard or read anything (apart from your speculations) that would indicate otherwise; therefore I make a presumption that he would have reported cases of abuse (that is, abuse as defined by the criminal code, not by someone's personal viewpoint) to the proper authorities.

What logical fallacies are you using in your attempt to cast aspersions on Dr. Tiller's character? For God's sake - you keep referring to 'abortion "doctors"' - even though these individuals are licensed medical professionals. If you were referring to the persons who performed coat hanger abortions in the days before Roe v Wade, then the term would be appropo. Fortunately, in my opinion, the need for that kind of "doctor" no longer exists - and may it stay that way.

Steve.. hmm.. yeah.. the abortion "doctors" may have earned a degree from a college BUT when they choose to kill babies in the womb .. which in my book... goes against what a dr. is supposed to do... I choose to give them the respect they have earned.. "dr." or not even using the title of dr.

Steve and everyone.. I would encourage anyone who thinks that abortion is ok, because it is legal.. to read the book Lime 5 by Mark Crutcher you can get it on Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Lime-Exploited-Choice-Mark-Crutcher/dp/0964888602

Steven, You spoke in one of the posts above on having a STAND on this issue. I couldn't even tell what that stand was with all your double talk of "I am anti-abortion, abortion is immoral..at least in the case of... unless...at the same time.... I cant tell others that its wrong.."  bunch of verbal diarrhea. 

So I ask you a question that I would like you to give us your opinion on here, if you can.

"Whats worse? A pedophile molesting a baby, or a abortionist killing unborn babies (lots of them)?

I think most of us think that castration for pedophiles would not be too harsh. What then should be done to abortionists?  Or is this where you divest yourself of brains and morality and go back to talking about what the "law" says?

 

Sheesh, I knew I shouldn't come back here! Got me all stirred up again!

Hey Xeppie, long time no see. Now take a deep breath, let it out real slow. and say to yourself, "I am going to be what God wants me to be, kind, loving, forgiving, and treat others like I want to be treated. I am going to love my neighbor just as I love myself......"

And don't forget to do it with a smile, walking around with a frown makes other people depressed too.....
You take care of that family, ya hear.


PS, I do have to wonder where some people really stand sometimes. Must be the way we are trained, do things while being nice at all times except when you are standing up to X someone., Don't rock the boat, Don't give you opinion as a strong opinion or conviction, always leave your opinions as a question........How well I remember SS School.

don't take offense, I really do agree with what you said.

Laws can easily create this mirage; if it's legal, it's somehow alright.

The breakdown or prosperity of a nation can be measured by the quality of it's laws.

No court should ever legeslate from the bench, that's not legal and yet it has been done many times. Laws should be made only in the houses of congress in this country. While we all know this, the liberal type mind continues to legislate from the bench. In this activity the liberal type mind is an awfully dishonest, crafty, and effeminate.

Legeslating from the bench is neither a conservative nor a logical idea. The conservative and logical mind does not think in those terms.

Sheesh, I knew I shouldn't come back here! Got me all stirred up again! LOL, I had to delete mine LOL calledoutPTL

Lark said, "From the statistics I read... 1% are for rape and 6% are for "life" threatening reasons to either the mother or child. That leaves 93% of the abortions for other reasons."

Are these statistics for late term abortions like Dr. Tiller performed, or are they for all abortions in general? If so, it would be interesting to see the statistics for late term.

Steve.. "More than 88 percent of abortions are done in the first trimester, and most doctors will not perform them beyond 22 or 24 weeks because of moral qualms, social stigma, legal concerns, inadequate training or lack of experience. Barely 1 percent of procedures are done after 21 weeks. At 37 weeks, a baby is generally considered full-term." This one was taken off of a Washington Post website.

Another statistic from Wikipedia..In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute collected questionnaires from 1,900 women in the United States who came to clinics to have abortions. Of the 1,900 questioned, 420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks. These 420 women were asked to choose among a list of reasons they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. The results were as follows:[3
71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation

48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
6% Woman didn't know timing is important
5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
11% Other

Steve.. Another statistic. Tiller's clinic was one of the three clinics in the US that performed late term abortions. Some people try to debate the idea of.. well.. how many late term abortions are there? Making it sound like.. well.. there's not htat many late term abortions.. so the others are ok to have. Judging from the statistics listed above from several posts.... there are maybe 34 done day. Here is some food for thought.. just in case you didn't get this info going to school.. Have you ever read up on how a baby develops in the womb?

You see.. when I gave birth to our daughter, Kimma, (the one with anencephaly)at about 24 weeks, I saw her precious tiny little hands and feet. Her hand was maybe the size of my thumb. So perfectly formed with little nails and all. You see when people try to say.. well.. abortions are ok.. as long as it's not in the 3rd trimester.. I sit here and remember how Kimma's tiny hands. The babies hands are forming even as early as week six in the pregnancy.


Weeks 9-13 The baby can make a fist and the sex of baby begins to become apparent.

The weeks 14-16.. the baby sucks its fingers and gets it's own fingerprints.

The weeks of 17-20.. the baby gets eyelashes and nails on fingers and toes. The heartbeat can be heard with a simple stethoscope.

The weeks 21-23.. the baby begins to look more as a newborn with skin that is less transparent.

The weeks 24-26... the baby if born now.. could actually survive with some medical assistance. The baby actually can show signs of being startled.

I gave a brief desciption... I would encourage you to check out some websites and get a better idea.. with pictures and such. http://www.americanpregnancy.org/duringpregnancy/fetaldevelopment2.htm

The first trimester and second trimesters are the ones that are most common for abortions to occur. But how can a person get an abortion (or encourage someone else that it's ok to get one) when you read how the baby is already developing so much.

Those are indeed things that should get our attention, Lark.

In my selective service days I did autopsies. I was very surprised that at six weeks into a pregnancy the baby already looked like a baby. I was shocked! We removed many of these after the death of the mother and preserved some of them in solution.

[Fetal tissue] is a gross misrepresentation and a convenient denial of what is actually in the uterus after those first six weeks of conception. That was you and I at six weeks old with a strong desire to come to term and see the world outside. That was the Doctor who perfroms them as well. The baby is crying; Mamma can I go out and play, it ain't raining! But then for the better quality of the mother it suddenly rained and hailed something awful! It's called, compassionate abortion! Now I'm crying!

I concluded after my service days that if I were to purposefully terminate a baby's life, then what right do I have to life myself? An eye for an eye was the original law of truth. Manly men of logic understand this.

We also understand grace and forgiveness but grace and forgiveness when revealed, works heart-felt repentance and a turning away from our lower behavior toward a higher behavior!

Steve.. you asked for some info on Tiller statistics and clinic.

I read the newspaper today, "The Wichita Eagle" and it had a rather interesting article about Tiller in it. According to the Eagle,Tiller started off wanting to be a dermatologist. His dad was a dr. too, and when his dad died, Tiller took over his dad's clinic. During that time, he found out that his dad performed illegal abortions in the 50's and 60's before the 1973 Roe Vs. Wade decisions was made. Tiller phased out his dads regular clinic and turned it into an abortion clinic. LeRoy Carhart, an abortionist who rotated through Tillers clinic, said that he personally saw five or six patients a week who were more than 24 weeks gestation and 40 or 50 patients who were under 24 weeks.

Lark's figuring.. 50 abortions a week at Tiller's clinic would be 2,400 a year. 5 patients a week whose babies were more than 24 weeks gestation would be 240 per year. Hmm..about 10% of them.

Back to what the Eagle says... 323 abortions were reported to have happened in the state of Kansas that were 22 weeks or later in 2008. Of those, most if not all of them were at Tillers clinic. Of those, 323 abortions, 192 were determined to be viable and the reason for the aboriton was listed as the womens health.

Lark's.. thoughts. WOW!!!! That's some pretty high statistics Tiller has there.. makes one wonder about Tillers judgement on women's health.

Back to Eagle again.. Tiller granted a rare interview in 1991 and pulled out a 3 ring binder. He showed the reporter pictures of the babies that his clinic does abortions on. Babies with hydrocephalus, spina bifida, fused legs, open spine, lethal chromosome abnormality.

Lark.. says.. wow... those are the abortions he did... I know of a totally incredible person who was born with hydrocephalus. This person I know.. definitely has the potential to totally impact anyones life touches people in a totally positive way.

One odd positive Tiller did was to help a few women adopt their babies out.. however the families that received those babies had to be definitely pro-choice.

Another interesting site.. http://www.eadshome.com/BornAlive.htm

This site talks about what happened with abortioned babies who were born alive before the year 2000. This was written by an eye witness account of one nurse and is incredibly sad.

I was reading the Wichita Eagle article again. In it, it also said that this one abortionist receives $5,000 to $6,000 per late term abortions and he does about 5 or 6 a week. If that is true, at 5 abortions a week and $6,000 per abortion.. that would be... $30,000 a week, $120,000 a month and $1,440,000.

Interesting.. work as an abortionist for 1 year and you become a millionaire.