Phill Kline Part 2

Here are several videos from the first part of the ethics hearing:














Kline mentioned here that the ethics case has taken up most of his time. This is obviously the opposition's whole idea. If they can't get his law licence taken away, they will stall and stall and stall. Because at all costs the charges against Planned Parenthood must not be investigated.




The woman standing behind him is his wife Barbara.
Recuse: to refuse to be a judge in a lawsuit because of conflict of interest or other good reason. (see how I'm learning my legal terms!)
Judge Anderson is one of the two judges who investigated the ethics complaints against Kline and found no probable cause to proceed with the case (as Kline mentioned earlier). The case is still proceeding because Anderson's findings weren't what the opposition wanted to hear (obviously). Moreover, as Kline says in the next video, Anderson did find probable cause to continue with Kline's charges against Planned Parenthood (all 107 of them!). Again, this was the wrong result, so Morrison (Kline's successor as District Attorney) and Six (Morrison's successor) effectively silenced Judge Anderson.









Can you imagine being raped at 11 or 12 years old and then being forced to undergo a late term abortion? Late term abortions, by the way, are where the baby (highly developed at this point, and capable of feeling excruciating pain) is literally ripped limb from limb in order to remove it from the womb. The doctor (if you want to dignify them with that name) then checks the mangled body parts to see if they've got it all. Head? Check. Two arms? Check. Two legs? Check. Job done.
This is what Dr Tiller did for a living. This is the insanity of "choice". What choice did that poor raped girl have? What choice did her child have as it was being dismembered?
Never, ever say you are "pro-choice". That is utter cowardice. It's not a choice between chocolate and vanilla. It's a choice to kill a human being.

Further links: Kansas Watchdog

For justice.
freedomfightergirl

Babies Aren't Really People

A very smart guy called Matt Flannagan said words to this effect: "Among pro-abortion bioethicists, those who also support infanticide as well as abortion are not extreme- they're just the intellectually honest ones." This is simply because if an unborn child is a living human being from the moment of conception (and it is) then abortion is just as indefensible as infanticide. This forces people like this philosophy professor to argue that babies aren't really people until about 18 months of age or some such arbitrary date. Such is the insanity of the abortion ideology when taken to its logical end.

“I don’t understand what this thing humanity is or the property of being human,” the professor said.... read the rest here.

Champions of Choice

I'm back (again)! Here's a little gem I found in my ceasless trolling of the online pro-life scene. It's from the latest "Walk for Choice" in Chicago. Disclaimer: I am not in any way insinuating that all pro-choicers are like this. Rather, I would like to suggest that if you consider yourself pro-choice, have a look at what these champions of your cause are like.



A few things came to mind as I watched this. First, to the guy who wants Planned Parenthood clinics to be like Starbucks -one on every corner- of course you do, mate. Reminded me of this guy:


(image from fsunews.com)

Hmm.....

The girl with the "keep your rosaries off my ovaries" sign reminded me of a comment made by Dr. Bernard Nathanson about the role of the abortion rights movement in vilifying the Catholic Church as anti-choice religious fanatics bent on keeping women oppressed under a patriarchal religious system. Now, I'll be the first to say that the Catholic establishment has done a lot of indefensible things down the centuries, but this is not one of them. As Dr Nathanson said,

" We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its "socially backward ideas" and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion. This theme was played endlessly. We fed the media such lies as "we all know that opposition to abortion comes from the hierarchy and not from most Catholics" and "Polls prove time and again that most Catholics want abortion law reform". And the media drum-fired all this into the American people, persuading them that anyone opposing permissive abortion must be under the influence of the Catholic hierarchy..." [emphasis mine]

And anyway, what about every Hindu/Muslim/Buddhist/agnostic/atheist prolifer out there? Surely they deserve their fair share of vilification as "anti-choice fanatics"! Just kidding.

The rest of Dr. Nathanson's testimony can be read here.


For peace, love and respect in all things,
freedomfightergirl

Phill Kline, Part 1 of Many

This post covers what is, in my opinion, one of the most important developments in the pro-life scene this year. I am incredibly excited about this whole case. I must emphasise that while I do my best to have all my facts straight, this is a very complicated case, and my legal mind is still in its infancy (or perhaps still at an embryonic stage!). Add to this my very incomplete understanding of the American legislative system, and I'm sure I will get a few things wrong. I hope, however, that I will be correct on the essentials.

In a nutshell: Phill Kline, a former state prosecutor for Kansas, is the first person to bring charges against Planned Parenthood in its entirety. He has, in fact, charged Planned Parenthood with 107 crimes, including 23 felonies. Many of these charges relate to illegal late-term abortions and the concealment of statutory rape. This monumentous case is still pending, because the opposition has brought its own charges against Kline, namely for ethics violations to do with collection of personal details of women who received abortions.

I think it is fair to say that these are trumped-up charges with little or no plausible grounds. In fact, the ethics complaints in question were examined a few years ago by two judges who advised that they did not find any probable cause to believe that Kline broke the law. The documents containing these findings were buried by the opposition and only resurfaced this year. These findings has not stopped the opposition from first suing one of the judges and then continuing to sue Kline.

The hearings for the first case of ethics violations ended a week or two ago. As I said, I have found this an immensely complicated topic to research, but I think it is fair to say that these court proceedings were a spectacular miscarriage of justice. The hearings took eight days in total. The opposition took the floor first. After they had elaborated for seven days, the court then advised Kline that they wished to finish up with proceedings, and that he would have one day to present his defense. Kline and his lawyers in the end had somewhere around half a day to present his defense before the judges wrapped up proceedings. If that's not a pretty good indicator of judicial bias, I don't know what is. You can see Kline talking about it here:



This angers me more than I can say. More on this soon. Anyway, don't take my word for any of this- you can find out for yourself. Search jillstanek.com, lifesitenews.com, and wnd.com for information.

For justice.
freedomfightergirl