republicans, is this helping, or hurting your party

Finally! I can agree with a republican about something! I can't believe it!

But, how can your party be the way to go when it has a Disc Jockey leading it?
First off it was the White house that started taking on Rush and their attempt to make him the spokes person of the party. He is not. Like Chenney or not I have the feeling that history will show he did what needed to be done after 9/11 like it or not. Sometimes someone has to do the dirty work.

The folks who wrote the case study don't really matter. He was prosecuted with 19 counts of violating the law and was found not guilty on all 19 counts.From the point of law absolutely correct.

However, the statistics mentioned from the Kansas Dept. of Health should be considered in the context of your earlier post of situations a) and b). The issue raised by the person who wrote the case study that Tiller was performing at least 50% of his late-term abortions on viable fetuses (babies) where there the mother's life was not in danger appears to be borne out in the statistics.

What isn't shown (I'm sure by design) is whether the reason for the abortion to "Prevent substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" was a physical or mental health issue. If the case study is true, that Tiller was using "mental health" issues as justification for the late term abortions, while not illegal, his actions are much morally worse than if he was legitimately trying to save women's lives or aborting unviable fetuses.

KDHE Center for Health and Environmental Statistics (http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/absumm.html)

There are only 3 late term abortion clinics in the entire nation, without him there are only 2.I do believe this in itself says a lot. Late-term abortions, in any situation, are highly controversial at best, downright illegal at worst.

The rape thing is a very poor choice as I'm sure most victims find out very quickly if they are not prenant and don't need to wait until their third trimester to have an abortion.I generally agree with this. Those who take the position that abortion is justified by rape occurrences really can't act 5-6 months isn't enough time to make a difficult decision. Obviously, a situation that provides life-threatening health risks to the mother is way murkier.

I do believe this in itself says a lot. Late-term abortions, in any situation, are highly controversial at best, downright illegal at worst.

I generally agree with this. Those who take the position that abortion is justified by rape occurrences really can't act 5-6 months isn't enough time to make a difficult decision. Obviously, a situation that provides life-threatening health risks to the mother is way murkier.

I agree that abortion should be provided in rape cases just in the first trimester or something like that. I'm pretty neutral on the whole abortion thing until it comes to the late term stuff then it starts to turn my stomach.

From the point of law absolutely correct.

However, the statistics mentioned from the Kansas Dept. of Health should be considered in the context of your earlier post of situations a) and b). The issue raised by the person who wrote the case study that Tiller was performing at least 50% of his late-term abortions on viable fetuses (babies) where there the mother's life was not in danger appears to be borne out in the statistics.

What isn't shown (I'm sure by design) is whether the reason for the abortion to "Prevent substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" was a physical or mental health issue. If the case study is true, that Tiller was using "mental health" issues as justification for the late term abortions, while not illegal, his actions are much morally worse than if he was legitimately trying to save women's lives or aborting unviable fetuses.

KDHE Center for Health and Environmental Statistics (http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/absumm.html)

What you're saying is that mental illness isn't a valid reason to abort viable fetus. I find this take ridicules knowing that mental illness is as much of a serious illness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_depression) as physical illness if not worse. Like postpartumt depression antepartum depression (http://www.americanpregnancy.org/pregnancyhealth/depressionduringpregnancy.html) is no joke. Often the chemical imbalance (can be categorized as physical illness too) brought about by pregnancy is so sever that abortion is the most logical course of action less you want depression to go untreated (not a good idea due to the fact that it can lead to psychosis if untreated, isn't that right TTL?).

People whose arguments are mainly based on god should not be taken seriously.

What you're saying is that mental illness isn't a valid reason to abort viable fetus. I find this take ridicules knowing that mental illness is as much of a serious illness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_depression) as physical illness if not worse. Like postpartumt depression antepartum depression (http://www.americanpregnancy.org/pregnancyhealth/depressionduringpregnancy.html) is no joke. Often the chemical imbalance (can be categorized as physical illness too) brought about by pregnancy is so sever that abortion is the most logical course of action less you want depression to go untreated (not a good idea due to the fact that it can lead to psychosis if untreated, isn't that right TTL?).

People whose arguments are mainly based on god should not be taken seriously.Uh, no, I don't think being diagnosed with a mental disorder can justify a late-term abortion. Understanding the seriousness of many mental disorders, it's not on par with a direct, cause and effect life-threatening unviable fetus situation. It just isn't the same thing.

There is a time at which a women's mental health should be of primary concern to her physician. What you're saying is that, if left untreated for the first 7-8 months after conception, the entire process should be re-evaluated? Sorry, but I can't buy that there would ever be a situation where a late-term abortion would "make the most sense" for mental health. It's a strawman.

Your distrust for diety-based arguments is duely noted, though I would think you'd be best off avoiding as opposed to discrediting. Lest you be committing a logical fallacy by baselessly dissmissing a widely considered factor in arguments of morality.

What you're saying is that mental illness isn't a valid reason to abort viable fetus. I find this take ridicules knowing that mental illness is as much of a serious illness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_depression) as physical illness if not worse. Like postpartumt depression antepartum depression (http://www.americanpregnancy.org/pregnancyhealth/depressionduringpregnancy.html) is no joke. Often the chemical imbalance (can be categorized as physical illness too) brought about by pregnancy is so sever that abortion is the most logical course of action less you want depression to go untreated (not a good idea due to the fact that it can lead to psychosis if untreated, isn't that right TTL?).Depression isn't a valid reason IMO to abort a viable fetus (baby) in the third trimester. Depression can be treated. Babies can be adopted. Death can't be turned back or fixed.

This can not possibly be the best arguments by you lot. Your professional medical "expertise" notwithstanding mental illness onset is neither always instantaneous (it can progressively get worse) nor is always treatable (through medication and counseling). Granted, some might abuse the system by merely claiming they're suffering from mental illness when they are not but the prospect of abuse shouldn't preclude mental illness as a valid reason.

This can not possibly be the best arguments by you lot. Your professional medical "expertise" notwithstanding mental illness onset is neither always instantaneous (it can progressively get worse) nor is always treatable (through medication and counseling). Granted, some might abuse the system by merely claiming they're suffering from mental illness when they are not but the prospect of abuse shouldn't preclude mental illness as a valid reason.It never was a valid reason. A serious concern yes. But I think you have to downplay the seriousness of the late-term abortion to arrive at your conclusion. You previously compared life threatening propositions to postpartum depression; as serious a form as it comes, but still not quite the same thing nor the same reasoning.

I'm not trying to downplay anything here, but I think you need to re-assess.

It never was a valid reason. A serious concern yes. But I think you have to downplay the seriousness of the late-term abortion to arrive at your conclusion. You previously compared life threatening propositions to postpartum depression; as serious a form as it comes, but still not quite the same thing nor the same reasoning.

I'm not trying to downplay anything here, but I think you need to re-assess.
The left can come up with one excuse after another as to why its OK to have a late term abortion just like this doctor did time after time. Its like they don't even want to adress the nature of this procedure.