Replies

Dear patent,

[This is my punishment for posting hastily.]

"'Sen. Frist appears to have started out as pro-abort, and has seemingly changed to a pro-lifer.

"'Are you saying that's unacceptable?'

"No, that isn’t even close to what I’m saying. I don’t see how saying 'I’ll take it in one of 51, not in the leader of the 51' can lead you to think I don’t want people to switch to the pro-life position."

Ouch! That really came out wrong, on my part. I wasn't sure that you initially read my post correctly, where I contrasted folks who had gone pro-life to pro-abort with Sen. Frist, who seems to have gone in the opposite direction.

I was concerned that you had initially read my post as saying that Sen. Frist had also moved from the pro-life to the pro-abort direction, and I was trying to make clear that I'd said the opposite, in contrast.

When I said, "Are you saying that's unacceptable?"

I was just trying to emphasize the actual meaning of what I said, not to actually suggest that you would think it's bad to switch to the pro-life position. I apologize for my execrable wording. I would never EVER have insulted you in that way.

Now, to the rest of your post.

"What I don’t want is this man, who seems tepidly pro-life at best, and who continues to support pro-aborts and abortion AFTER this supposed switch, as majority leader. If he seemed to be a real convert, I could accept him. He does not seem pro-life to me, despite the votes, when you consider his entire record."

Well, his votes are 100% pro-life, at this point. His publicly announced positions on abortion are about as pro-life as one can get and still be electable at the level of US Senator.

He supported David Satcher, but frankly, patent, Dr. Satcher was from his home state. Failing to support Dr. Satcher would have caused a stink in his own state. I don't expect politicians to fall over themselves to alienate key constituencies in their own states.

I'm not sure what else you're looking at.

Now, back to what put me in hot water in the first place. ;-)

"If even Mr. Gore had to pretend to be pro-life to get elected in TN, don’t you think that its possible Mr. Frist has recognized the same?"

That's part of my point. Sen. Frist seems to have originally been elected as a pro-CHOICE fellow. Against an incumbent, if I recall correctly. He seems to have converted to being pro-life. I'm not sure that it is for political reasons. He WON in 1994, as a pro-CHOICE candidate. Why change?

It's possible that he changed just for politics. But the fact that he got elected as a pro-abort really knocks a leg or two out from under that argument.

"Second, as to the original question, I believe that post 495 provided sufficient support for what little I did say about HCA, which is just that they provide abortions."

The only evidence of abortion at HCA facilities that I gleaned from any of the links in post #495, is that an HCA emergency room apparently completed a botched abortion (where likely the baby was already dead) in order to save the life of the woman who procured the abortion. If that turns out to be the heart of these charges, then I hope that Sen. Frist enjoys all the profits from his HCA stock to which he is legally entitled.

Gophack alleges that Dr. Tiller is the medical director of HCA Wesley in Witchita. He is not. He owns his own free-standing clinic, unrelated to HCA, where he murders babies for money. He teaches on a part-time basis at HCA Wesley, ironically, in "Family Medicine". He apparently even performs second and third trimester abortions at his death chamber, but his primary affiliation with the Wesley Medical Center ended about 20 years ago.

"Regardless of that issue though, he still speaks like a pro abort, pro stem cell research, etc., and in my view a party with him as a majority leader does not represent me."

I really haven't heard enought of him to make a similar judgement. You may know a lot more about him than I do.

sitetest