Posted on 03/09/2005 7:26:48 PM PST by wagglebee
Common sense and decency leave the brain when pro-aborts perceive a threat to abortion.
The Los Angeles Times and the New York Times both issued crazed editorials within the past two weeks spinning Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline's criminal investigation of cover-ups of child rape and incest and illegal late-term abortions into a "shocking abuse of office" and a "disgraceful gambit."
"Disgraceful" Kline is bound by Kansas law to ensure Kansas law is enforced.
One of those laws prohibits sex with a minor under 14. That is a crime, either child rape or aggravated indecent liberties with a child.
Another Kansas law prohibits abortions after 22 weeks gestation unless the mother's health is irreversibly endangered. In that case, the unborn child must first be assessed for viability. If the baby can potentially live outside the uterus, the abortion of a fetus must convert to an emergency delivery of an extremely premature infant.
Yet another Kansas law requires the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to issue an annual report summarizing statistical data on abortions. The KDHE reported in 2003 that 78 children ages 14 years and younger obtained abortions that year, and 491 abortions were of mothers pregnant with babies 22-weeks gestation or older.
Objectively speaking, what is Kline supposed to do with these laws and data? Abortions of 14-year-old (and younger!) children are proof that sexual crimes have been committed. Abortions of 22-week (and older!) babies are evidence that murders may have been committed.
The answer is, ignore it, as far as the L.A. Times and N.Y. Times are concerned. Abortion proponents are more interested in shielding abortion than protecting young girls against rape and incest, or premature babies from being murdered.
To do so, the abortion cabal is hiding behind the "right to privacy," while ignoring yet another law this one federal, that states medical records can be obtained without the patient's consent if they pertain to a criminal investigation.
All 50 states have laws protecting children from sexual predators. Pro-lifers did not write those laws. Responsible legislators wanting to protect innocent children from pedophiles wrote those laws.
The N.Y. Times' editorial against Kline's "stealth campaign to violate the privacy" of baby murderers and young girls was published Feb. 28.
Only five days prior, Santos Sotelo of Elgin, Ill., was charged with predatory criminal sexual assault against an 11-year-old girl. His molestation over the course of five months was only discovered when the girl was found to be pregnant. Had the N.Y. Times editorial board been on the ball, it could have showcased this girl as its "sexual freedom right to privacy" poster child. If only she had aborted!
The L.A. Times says Kline is "hound[ing] clinic doctors," and the N.Y. Times says he is conducting "an ideological dragnet."
One of the two abortion mills Kline is "hounding" is George Tiller's Women's Health Care Services in Wichita, that brags it "specialize[s] in 'late' abortion care." On Jan. 13, 2005, a 19-year-old woman died after a botched late-term abortion at Tiller's clinic. She reportedly had Down syndrome and was, therefore, legally incapable of consenting to sexual activity.
In addition to fighting AG Kline's request to hand over the abortion records of prepubescent and adolescent girls and late term abortions, Tiller does not want to hand over this girl's abortion record either.
Perhaps the L.A. Times and N.Y. Times would like to champion this girl's "right to privacy."
Oh, I forgot. It's too late. She's dead.
This is so true.
Ignore is being kind, from what I have read they are deliberately distorting the truth.
Abortion is to liberals as communion is to Christians.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
One of the many reasons why I will never buy another S.F. Chronicle is columnist Jon Carroll, a raging leftist whose stock-in-trade is not the Rallish rant, but the Mo Dowd quasi-"wit."
Many years ago, there was a situation in Iowa involving abortion laws and their proper enforcement; a minor who became pregnant at the age of 14 (to the best of my memory) claimed that she was violently raped, which qualified her to receive state funds to pay for an abortion. After services were rendered, the local authorities investigated the incident. Naturally, they inquired of the girl whom her rapist was.
She refused to tell them. And the parents refused to cooperate as well.
Faced with a "rape" without a rapist, the investigation ended, but the state said, "If there is no rape, there shouldn't have been financial assistance for the abortion," and sued the parents for the cost of the procedure. This, of course, was a red cape in front of the abortionut bulls.
Carroll, in a column condemning the state, wrote one of the most heartless things I have ever read in a major newspaper: he said that after being "raped," everything had to be done to help heal the girl's wounds. "An unwanted fetus is a wound," he wrote.
I remember getting ticked enough to say some things that might have been in the Nicholson-Caan flick, The Last Detail. I wrote a letter to the editor, but natch, it never made print.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.