TexasCHLforum.com

I, too, appologize Charles. And to everyone else. It was not my intention to get into a discussion or debate over the overall topic of abortion itself.

Sorry. I understood what you meant a couple days ago. I'm still not quite sure how to respond though, but here's what I'm thinking so far.

I'm thinking that the women would not be guilty of a crime if the doctor did not facilitate their wishes. I think he should have denied them if they were beyond 24 weeks or whatever Kansas’ upper limit is unless there was a real medical need for the mother. It appears as though there was not in many cases. Many of them may not have even known what the laws were regarding the upper limit.

The guy that killed will have his day in court and should go to prison. I have no problem with that. And I do feel sorry for the doctor's family. I just can't say I feel sorry for the doctor.

Yeah, I think they were trying to remove it from the list of things that would be a Capital Murder.

ClarkLZeuss wrote:

C-dub wrote:Bill O'Reilly is discussing this right now on Fox News.

Doh! I had hoped he would, and wanted to hear his POV about it, cause he has really skewered Tiller over the years. What did he say?

He had a lot more information than I did, obviously. This guy had performed over 60,000 abortions with many being after 24 weeks gestation. I think he said that according to Kansas laws there must be a reason provided by the doctor that a late term abortion was medically necessary for the mother. Or something like that. Anyway, the excuses given by him in many of these cases was EXTREMELY flimsy.

Bill O'Reilly is discussing this right now on Fox News.

Good afternoon everyone. I'm back from my day job.

I may have meant the Talmud, but I don't think so. I was aware that the Torah was several books of the Old Testament, but did not know which ones or if they were identical. I didn't mean to be so literal, those were just the only other examples I could think of at the time.

nitrogen wrote:

C-dub wrote:KeithB,

O.G. & Nitro,

Similarities aside, aren't most of or at least many of our laws based on the Bible, not the Koran or Torah.

Therefore I'd think that most of our laws are based on commonalities in faiths, not one specific faith.

Then this would expain many of the ambiguities, such as that of abortion where we cannot seem to come to an agreement on when life begins and when it should be protected?

I've always been slightly confused about our laws when it comes to abortion. If a person, other than the mother, does something to intentionally cause the death of the fetus they are charged with murder in most cases. Yet, when the mother chooses to intentionally abort the same fetus it is legal. Aside from the fact that the SCOTUS said it was legal, I'm still not sure I understand the difference between the two circumstances.

I dont' mean to get so deep this early in the morning and I'm not trying to get philosophical on anyone. We're just having a discussion and I'm trying to deepen my understanding of whatever.

KeithB,

I totally agree that context is very important. If I can find where It gives a family member this right I will certainly post it. I think it is Genesis 9:5-6 where the death penalty for murder is spelled out.


O.G. & Nitro,

Similarities aside, aren't most of or at least many of our laws based on the Bible, not the Koran or Torah.


Also, just to restate my position: I think that this person murdered this doctor and should pay his penalty. Where my difficulty lies is with feeling sorry for the doctor.

omegaman wrote:74novaman wrote

We can (and the Bible teaches that we should) forgive others who wrong us if you can find it in yourself to do so. But the State cannot afford to be soft on criminals and forgive lawless acts--especially violent crimes. The death penalty truly reduces violent crime, in my humble opinion. It is certainly not hypocritical to abhor violent crime and support the death penalty at the same time.

It's not just the state that the bible gives this ability to. If a family member of mine were murdered it also gives me the right to take the murderer's life. I just read it a few days ago and I've been looking all morning, but I can't find the reference. Can anyone help me out here?

I agree dicion. I'm just having a hard time feeling any kind of sympathy for the doctor. The 16y kid killed in the OK pharmacy probably didn't deserve to die, but I don't know if I can say the same for this doctor. Legally protected by an immoral law or not. That's why I'm having such a difficult time with this one.

IMHO

I'm having a real difficult time with this one. Yeah, murdering this "doctor" was wrong and I wouldn't have done this, but . . .

This man was a dispicable person and because of his relationship with the former governor, now sectretary of HHS, he was allowed to continue erforming late and sometimes very late term abortions. By making significant donations to Sebelius' campaign and her own nut job views he bought legal protection in the form of a governor that blocked all attempts to require parental notification for minors to get abortions and to prohibit late term abortions.

I think it was also Sebelius that blocked KS for years from having CHL laws until the state senate was able to pass it with enough votes to not require a signature from the governor or override a veto. After getting my CHL, before going to visit my parents several years ago, I was looking to see if KS allowed me to carry in their state. I ended up contacting the state troopers office by e-mail with my question. A reply stated that at that time they did not allow civilians to carry a concealed weapon, but as soon as they could get a real governor they would correct that.

I understand my facts may be wrong, so please don't hesitate to correct me, but this is how I remember them.