Well, I suppose that you 'gather' things that are in no way related to the discussion of your post.
You claimed that Bush had banned late term abortions. I simply inquired as to when and how, aknowleging that I may have missed this. You responded with a post regarding the banning of one late term abortion technique (which does not ban late term abortions) and I asked for further explanation. You now seem to be off of the deep end in assumptions about what I consider 'good enough' and meaningless statements about what (you think) I am stating. I haven't brought value judgments into the picture at all, nor have I mentioned my approval or disapproval of the partial birth ban. Wouldn't it just be easier to correct your original post about the ban on late term abortion, if you are wrong, and get on with meaningful discussion? I believe you are wrong about late term abortions being banned by Bush, you have not shown me otherwise, and I continue to believe you are wrong. This does not particularly bother me, but your credibility with me is dropping as a result of your defending (what I believe is) your erroneous statement claiming that late term abortions are now illegal.
If you wish me to consider your opinions as being worthwhile to weigh against my own (to consider the validity of my own point of view), you should try to be factually correct in your statements of fact.