Judge Blocks Doctor From Filling Vacancy Left By George Tiller Murder

Mother Jones:

The first doctor to try to offer abortion services in Wichita, Kansas, since Dr. George Tiller was gunned down in a church in May 2009 has been blocked from doing so--by her landlord, who has claimed this would create a "nuisance." And groups opposed to abortion rights are hailing this development as a major win on a prominent frontline in the national war over abortion.

Read the whole story: Mother Jones

Comments

[anthonybrown]

10:49 PM on 02/07/2011

TADDLES, you wrote that "All animals are embryos at one time so saying it is a step in human developmen­t is incorrect."

Look, an embryo is the name of human being at an early stage of development. If you need me to specify "human" embryo so you don't confused, I'll be happy to.

A very young human being is an embryo. A human being several months later is a newborn. Then an infant. Eventually an adult. At NO stage in the process of human development are you NOT a human being.

Look, there are PLENTY of good reasons to support abortion rights. But bad science is a poor one to rest your entire case upon.

[rshrink]

02:21 PM on 02/10/2011

So quit using bad science anthony. Who gave you the right to decide when a organism becomes a human being? What special qualities have you demonstrated that give you that status? Science doesn't even try to decide that. It is a metaphysical question, which science doesn't get into as of yet. So, I know you will seek to have the last word, but if that is devoid of facts and information, then what is that worth really.

[anthonybrown]

08:21 AM on 02/07/2011

IAMFEDUP - Thanks for your reply. I was unable to reply to yours, so I am putting it here.

You wrote, "Until the baby is more than halfway outside her womb? That is a lie."

I'm not sure what you meant about lie. Very few abortions take place this way. But they are perfectly legal. Your perfectly healthy daughter could be halfway out of the womb with Barack and Michelle Obama standing by to adopt her, but if you said that it would impact your "emotional health" to pull her out a few more inches, you could then pay your doctor to jam scissor in her skull, open then, to enlarge her skull, replace the scissors with a suction catheter, then suck out her brains until her skull collapses.

Doing so makes you a "brave hero" according to most of the posters here.

Should the doctor err and accidentally pull her all the way out and do THE EXACT SAME act, he would them be labeled a "vicious animal" and be charged with capital murder.

Some crazy, fanatical, Talibanesque misogynists see the similarity between these two situations as presenting some serious legal and ethical issues..

The rest of us know that to even raise a SINGLE question about this means you loathe women and it is your ldream to create a patriarchal theocracy in which women are denied education, income, and all human rights.

Oh, and you must be a Republican, as NO Democrat would even give pause here.

[Maezeppa]

07:39 AM on 02/07/2011

That's not "nuisance" - it's thuggery.  It will be overturned on appeal.

[bluntobject]

01:52 AM on 02/07/2011

Is abortion causing a nuisance?
 
Ummm, not likely. But the anti-abortion protesters certainly are.
 
Let's ban them instead. :)

[rshrink]

11:54 PM on 02/06/2011

Simple minded people make simple minded approaches to a problem which has no chance of working. So-called anti-abortion activists make no effort to understand why women choose to get abortions and therefore, their actions are only a nuisance and, have clearly caused the onset of violence. We live in a society now which is unfriendly to working class families and as long as that is the case, more women will choose abortion. This will be in addition to the ones who do so for health reasons. We are cutting education, health care for the poor, money for programs to help those who are mentally ill, money for those who are addicted to substances and there is no effort to raise taxes to help pay for the states deficits, which in my state now stands at 6.5 billion dollars. So, does the citizenry really want more babies being born in a state with a deficit, where the odds are good that many, if not most of these babies will end up in foster care, troubled and with mental illnesses and dependent on the state at least until the age of 20. Republicans, who never connect the dots, have no plan to address this problem. They can just use their guns to kill the doctors who provide the service, which is chosen out of hopelessness due to a lack of jobs and increased insecurity for families.

[bmike]

11:29 PM on 02/06/2011

In my state there are aprox.2500 meth labs in people homes.We have aprox. 3-4 abortion clinics.Shut down Abortion clinics expect meth labs to be abortion clinics and there are 2500 of them.

[KDMac]

09:20 AM on 02/07/2011

Landlords don't rent to people knowing their intent is to operate a meth lab. I'm sure they would evict them if they knew. Cleanup is EXTREMELY expensive.

[rshrink]

04:27 PM on 02/07/2011

I think the point is that these whackjobs are more worried about abortion than they are the people and families that are destroyed due to the use of substances, not to mention the environmental implications and law enforcement costs.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

07:26 PM on 02/06/2011

"creating a clear nuisance to and disturbing the peaceful possession of all other tenants."

We have a similar clause in our Leases but we call it "Quiet Enjoyment". This is a perfectly enforceable term of the Lease and the use is clearly something that attracts an element that could disrupt other tenants and clearly 3 of those tenants have already threatened to leave.

In addition, it would be interesting to know how much time is left on this Doctor's Lease. The Landlord is under NO obligation to renew unless there is an option.

[rshrink]

12:14 AM on 02/07/2011

This is punishing the tenant instead of those who create the nuisance, the protesters. You might recall that when dems protested during the Bush years, they were pushed back out of sight and often were not given any media coverage. So much for the liberal bias of the media. The media in Wichita would clearly be biased in favor of the protesters, in large part.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

09:37 AM on 02/07/2011

Yes it is punishing the tenant because of what they attract. That affects the other tenants. If you allow it, you punish the existing tenants. In the commercial real estate world you have a different set of rules than the residential world. You can refuse anybody a new lease and no reason is needed to be given. For example, I refused to renew a lease with an existing tenant and they thought I was singling them out because they were not as wealthy as other prospective tenants who could pay more. I never gave them a reason but they were partially right and I was within my rights to reject the renewal request.

[hornedcog]

12:46 PM on 02/06/2011

My question to any self proclaimed "Pro-life" advocate is very simple but remains unanswered. What is your constitutional solution to deal with the unwanted children of unwilling parents? Your devout inquisition is not applicable to a society of free individuals that rely on tolerance of each others beliefs. If there were a solution offered, it may sway some people your way.

[kilthistle]

02:15 PM on 02/06/2011

CRICKETS. You have identified one of the hypocritical underpinnings of the forced pregnancy movement. They care passionately about the fetus until the moment it is born.

20% of children in America live in poverty. Where are the "pro-life" folks? Already-born children die from lack of health insurance. Were the "pro-life" hypocrites fighting to extend SCHIP?

If the forced pregnancy people answer your specific question by saying adoption will take care of the babies of unwilling parents, ask to see the list of "pro-life" advocates ready to adopt these babies with their name on it.

[Zeus9000]

07:21 PM on 02/06/2011

What a ridiculous argument... one mirrored by delinquents such as Gosnell and others who justify the snip of a scissor.

[CateManhattan]

11:23 PM on 02/06/2011

Ooooohhhh, you'd force babies to live with pro-lifers? Whoa, that could be a tough situation -- moralistic, punitive, preachy, going on about the rapture . . . . telling these children that they were born in sin, etc.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

07:27 PM on 02/06/2011

adoption.

[kilthistle]

08:04 PM on 02/06/2011

How many babies, whose birth mothers chose continuing the pregnancy instead of having an abortion, have you adopted? If the answer is zero, you need to be quiet.

If the answer is that you have adopted children whose mothers made that choice, congratulations, it is commendable that you stand behind what you preach. Now, how many more are you going to adopt?

[rshrink]

12:19 AM on 02/07/2011

That has already been an option, but guess what, not enough people adopt and guess what else, not all adoptions work out. In fact, in many cases, it doesn't work. That is why we have foster care and that is already hugely underfunded, as are mental health services in general. So, you see, your simple answers are not answers at all. If you ever worked with the actual problems, you might have a chance to learn what is really going on, instead of living in your idealistic fantasy world.

[Mutch]

12:22 PM on 02/06/2011

Protesters will continue to push for their beliefs until acts of abortion becomes secretive.

Republicans are trying to redefine "rape" to different types of rape and "victim" to "accuser". Only "rape, rape is covered" - Kristen Schaal.

Next thing you know a judge will come nagging about something unconstitutional...
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-february-2-2011/rape-victim-abortion-funding

[Shozen]

11:59 AM on 02/06/2011

Segregating abortion services from other medical services by requiring them to only be performed at "abortion clinics" causes women to be isolated and targeted. Abortion services should be available in hospitals and other types of medical institutions. That should end this "public nuisance" issue.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

07:28 PM on 02/06/2011

So once this Lease is expired, you think the Gov should force Landlords to have abortion doctors mixed in with other doctors? What about the choice of the Landlord to determine who they want to sign a Lease with?

[BamaRainbow]

09:35 PM on 02/06/2011

It's really none of the landlord's business what a doctor does in his/her practice as long as the service is LEGAL. Also, I'd note that landlords do not have an unconditional right to "determine who they want to sign a lease with." Presumably, the landlord is running a business and can no more refuse to lease a building for commercial purposes to someone without JUSTIFIABLE concerns than he could refuse to lease a building for residential purposes without justifiable concerns. Someone with a poor credit history or a criminal record CAN be refused; someone with a different skin tone or political affiliation canNOT be. Hell, by your reasoning, a landlord could refuse to lease a building to a political candidate if the landlord's "choice" is allowed to be a factor.

[rshrink]

12:23 AM on 02/07/2011

I think the government should enforce laws against people who use aggressive tactics against patients and physicians. You may have heard that some of the physicians have been shot and killed by these peaceful protesters.

[hornedcog]

11:07 AM on 02/06/2011

If "Operation Rescue" was an environmental cause, there would have been convictions of terrorism and conspiracy. This is mob violence endorsed by our government.

[imfedup]

09:20 AM on 02/06/2011

Although it should not be necessary, the obvious answer is to have wealthy proponents of abortion rights donate to buy a large plot of property and a building. Protesters would be trespassing if they stepped on the grounds. Fence it off, check people in at the gate, and put a guard with a metal detector at that gate.

[jukesgrrl]

04:01 PM on 02/06/2011

If anti-gun protesters tried to keep a gun seller from doing his business in the location of his choice, do you think for one minute they'd get away with it? By the same token, why should one class of medical providers be required to spend tons of money other medical providers aren't required to spend? If I'm giving allergy shots in a building and and an abortion provider wants to rent in the same building, they should be able. What they are doing is no more illegal than an allergy shot. And if their work is disrupted by people who disagree with the law, it's up to the local police to enforce their safety.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

07:30 PM on 02/06/2011

You are wrong because ultimately, the Doctor does not own the building, she Leases. Once the Lease is up, there is no obligation to renew on the part of the Landlord.

[imfedup]

12:08 AM on 02/07/2011

As I said, it should not be necessary. However, if law enforcement will not ensure that protests are peaceful, which is the only kind that's protected by the Constitution, we must find a way to provide this legal service in a way that doesn't compromise the safety of the doctor, her staff, or her patients. The bigger goal is much more important that quibbling about what we should not have to do.

[rshrink]

12:31 AM on 02/07/2011

I think the state should pay for the extra expense and the law enforcement as needed.

[KDMac]

09:24 AM on 02/07/2011

Where does the state get the money?

[tulane-grad]

12:16 AM on 02/06/2011

Another perfect example as to why we need far more "common sense" abortion control legislation.

[bagman29]

11:22 PM on 02/05/2011

I wish Libs would just be honest about abortion. Im so sick of hear about "rape and incest' when 99% of abortions have nothing to do with rape or incest.

If you want abortion legal for any circumstance, then just say so. Dont use scare tactics like "rape and incest".

Oh, and no one cares what a woman "does with her body". Any woman can shave her head or get a full sex change if she wants to.

Its the body of the unborn child people care about.

[hornedcog]

11:10 AM on 02/06/2011

How do you propose to deal with the unwanted children of unwilling parents? Do you have a constitutional solution for that?

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

07:31 PM on 02/06/2011

adoption

[Zeus9000]

08:03 PM on 02/06/2011

So Gosnell was a hero by solving your over population with a snip of the scissors? Is this really the best you have?

[thatsjun]

11:49 AM on 02/06/2011

No woman should have to give up control of her body. It doesn't have to be rape or incest for her to decideher fate. A pregnancy begins with a zygote, a fertilized, then a fetus that is unable to survive outsde on its own. Many women would suffer psychological damage for the rest of their lives if they had to give up a child - wondering where that child is and what is happening. An abortion is the right of each individual woman. Even the church until the 1500's when the Pope declared otherwise decided they needed more people and $ changed the ruling from it is not human until the fifth month when the soul enters the body. So up until that time abortions were allowed. If men could become pregnant the laws would be different.

[Carl Caroli]

10:59 PM on 02/05/2011

The American taliban must be stopped.