According to New York University instructor Jacob Appel, Kansas' notorious late-term abortionist George Tiller should be looked upon as "a genuine hero who ranks alongside Susan B. Anthony and Martin Luther King Jr. in the pantheon of defenders of human liberty." Good ... grief. Just when I thought I've read it all.
Appel formulated his sick view in a letter to the editor in today's Los Angeles Times (Sun. 3/22/09).
Tiller's practice is truly an abomination. His office has reportedly instructed women to expel their late-term unborn babies into a toilet. (See this eye-opening segment from the O'Reilly Factor from 12/12/2006.) Tiller currently faces 19 counts of "violating the state's late-term abortion law." Yet Appel says Tiller should be held "in esteem."
Here's Appel's full letter (emphasis mine):
The Times' article on the upcoming trial of Kansas abortion provider George Tiller certainly conveyed the animosity that abortion opponents feel toward his work, but I am not sure it captured fully the degree to which abortion-rights supporters, such as myself, hold him in esteem.
To many progressive Americans, George Tiller is a genuine hero who ranks alongside Susan B. Anthony and Martin Luther King Jr. in the pantheon of defenders of human liberty.
Although one need not agree with this assessment of Tiller, the intensity of this brave man's support among his admirers should not be underestimated.
Jacob M. Appel
New York
Oh, yeah. Did you see that Appel is a teacher of biothics? (Here's his bio I found.)
God help us all.
For more on Dr. Tiller, check out the work of Operation Rescue.
+_+_+_+
Latest from TheMediaReport.com:
Book Review: William Lobdell's 'Losing My Religion'
Attorney John Manly : An Index
—Dave Pierre is the creator of TheMediaReport.com and a contributor to NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Have said it before, and will continue saying it:
March 22, 2009 - 19:35 ET by CKA in Red State USALIBERALISM IS AN INTELLECTUAL, MENTAL AND SPIRITUAL DISEASE.
He keeps his allegedly
March 22, 2009 - 19:45 ET by GrannyGrump42He keeps his allegedly deathly ill third-trimester abortion patients in a FREAKING MOTEL for three days, cared for by whatever friends or family members they happen to have with them. This resulted in the death of a 19-year-old girl with Down syndrome:
http://justiceforchristin.com/christin.htm
So I guess the did the world a double favor by ridding us of this "defective" girl along with her baby? Is THAT what makes him a "hero"?
Who was legalizing abortion supposed to protect? Obviously not the patients, since the abortion lobby never gives a rat's ass if they live or die.
That girl is pretty young;
March 22, 2009 - 19:50 ET by Anniee451That girl is pretty young; I've been present at late term abortions as long ago as 23 years, and that "salting out" process wasn't in favor even then. What they did was insert the laminaria into the cervix and the next day go in with forceps and rip the baby apart to bring it out in pieces. An arm, a leg, a torso, a head. Which is actually quite brutal; at least as brutal as salting out, but still - how is it this doctor was so recently engaging in a process that had been discarded so long ago? Did he seriously conduct such an antiquated process? Isn't that a little weird?
At any rate, the praise of the "good doctor" is insane.
Funny thing...
March 22, 2009 - 20:41 ET by mizflame98Susan B. Anthony was against abortion. To compare Tiller,the baby killer to Susan B. Anthony is enough to not only make her roll over in her grave but to do backflips.
Without known exception, the early American feminists condemned abortion in the strongest possible terms. In Susan B. Anthony's newsletter, The Revolution, abortion was described as "child murder," "infanticide" and "foeticide." Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who in 1848 organized the first women's rights convention in Seneca Falls, New York, classified abortion as a form of infanticide and said, "When you consider that women have been treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."
http://www.feministsforlife.org/news/commonw.htm
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
"Susan B. Anthony was
March 22, 2009 - 20:57 ET by Anniee451"Susan B. Anthony was against abortion."
Yeah, I find it really hard to believe that he didn't KNOW that. I mean, come on!
well...
March 22, 2009 - 21:07 ET by mizflame98Liberals don't like to mention that. In fact, they claim the theory is a fallacy created by the religious right to hijack the feminist movement.
BTW, Martin Luther King wasn't too keen on abortions per his niece.
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
"In fact, they claim the
March 22, 2009 - 22:26 ET by Anniee451"In fact, they claim the theory is a fallacy created by the religious right to hijack the feminist movement."
Oh, that's just sick. Seriously, as recently as ten years ago feminists weren't even trying THAT one. Everyone knows Susan B. Anthony and Cady Stanton, et. al. were positively horrified by the idea of abortion! I mean, really - can't they at least be intellectually honest? Oh, wait. No, they can't.
Why should they?
March 22, 2009 - 23:00 ET by mizflame98Do you really expect the left to let the truth get in the way of their agenda?
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
Great catch
March 23, 2009 - 09:28 ET by Dave Pierremsflame98: "Susan B. Anthony was against abortion."
Excellent catch, msflame98. I had read that before, but I didn't make the connection when I was writing my piece. I wish I had thought of it for my post.
I'm glad you posted this.
.
March 23, 2009 - 10:54 ET by mizflame98Thanks Dave.
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
The importance of this post
March 22, 2009 - 20:44 ET by stratmanThe importance of this post is not that there is someone with Jacob Appel's viewpoint or that the LATimes would publish this letter, but the fact that the profession of "Bioethicist" is rife with people who share the same ideology.
I have spoken with several medical "ethicists" from different institutions. These folks are the "go-to" people when there is a question of how to handle moral/ethical issues in the context of medicine, such as end of life care. To a "T", all are of the Liberal ilk, some I would consider Leftist, such as Appel. Not a single one would be considered centrists, let alone right of center. I'm still holding up hope for a Conservative ethicist, but that is probably a pipe dream oxymoron.
These are the kinds of people who are employed to shape healthcare policy in hospitals and government. These are the people who consider themselves the vanguard of a new enlightened generation. These are the kind of people that are increasingly taking leadership spots in medical groups such as the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Association of Pediatrics.
I doubt any of the ethicists I've met would be against embryonic stem cell research, though a couple when asked (or offered on their own) said they were against cloning of humans. I also doubt any would advise against all abortion or euthanasia. In other words, they were activistic Liberals working to advance their ideology in the context of serious medical issues.
Of the ethicists I've met, all will fit in fabulously with Obamacare or whatever Socialized Medicine will be named.
How the universe made it this far without ethicists is a miracle! (sarc/off)
Another thing.
March 22, 2009 - 21:01 ET by mizflame98You'd think that a person who is a professor in bioethics would at least have a degree in either medicine or biology. Not one in creative writing and law. Am I the only one who thinks this guy is really out of his realm of expertise?
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
Who better to make
March 22, 2009 - 22:14 ET by stratmanWho better to make up incendiary crap about abortionists as heroes than someone with a M.F.A. in creative writing?
To be fair, Appel has a Masters of Philosphy from Columbia University, along with a B.A., two M.A's, M.F.A., and a J.D..
Still, given his letter to the LATimes, I would never confuse him with Plato.
He is
March 22, 2009 - 22:24 ET by mizflame98definately an over-educated idiot.
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
Without knowing more about
March 22, 2009 - 22:43 ET by stratmanWithout knowing more about Appel, I am not sure if he lacks a lick of common sense in juxtaposing American icons with an abortionist, or, was looking to pump up his 'street cred' by inflamming half of the country.
Publishing this kind of garp, when can we expect the LATimes to fold?
This is what masquerades as advanced education
March 23, 2009 - 03:39 ET by The Goat WhispererTo be fair, Appel has a Masters of Philosphy from Columbia University, along with a B.A., two M.A's, M.F.A., and a J.D..
Lacks sciences in the alphabet soup. And an attorney too; that makes a Professor of Bio-ethics? LOL, a polar opposite!
Dr. Appel comes across to the reader as just another dime-a-dozen Marxist professor, gifted with plenty of time and somebody else's money.
Today I'll take an Amish grade school graduate's financial aptitude over that of a Harvard MBA.
TGW
Amish Do Not Do Red Ink Accounting
March 23, 2009 - 09:55 ET by stratmanAt my medical school there was a physician who was the medical ethicist. We students looked for creative ways to avoid any encounter, which was mandatory for didactic purposes both in the hospital and during a Medical Ethics class.
In reality, the one year of Intro To Biology Appel received in his B.A. or the seven plus years the physician ethicist received appears to not make a significant difference in either case. But that's just my opinion.
Stratman
March 22, 2009 - 21:32 ET by dervishlargely, you're right, but don't forget about Leon Kass.
Dervish:Kass is an
March 22, 2009 - 22:45 ET by stratmanDervish:
Kass is an interesting person I'd enjoy meeting. The arc of his life would make for a good discussion in itself. I faintly recall his name bounced around briefly years ago in the MSM, but had forgotten about him as the Media stopped discussing him on their way to frying other fish. Thanks for the refresh!
I appreciated his thoughts about the ideological echo chambers of elitists from Academia proving bankrupt once he actually experienced how the non-Ivory Tower world lives.
Bioethicists
March 23, 2009 - 03:21 ET by PharmerThe purpose of bioethicists is to formulate excuses for those who desire to kill human beings, for one reason or another.
The main focus is to create a system in which human value becomes dependent on relationships or to job function. This places the unborn, disabled or very sick human beings into very killable categories.
A really effective bioethicist can make a person feel much better while contemplating the killing, as well as in the aftermath. Inventing creative uses for the bodies of the dead helps to expiate the guilt that normal people used to associate with killing other humans. So this has become a significant corollary field of bioethics.
Pharmer, spot on
March 23, 2009 - 04:25 ET by The Goat WhispererReminds me of suffering a hippie leftover as a "Medical Ethics" course Professor, espousing that we should learn how to lie to a patient.
TGW
Sad, but not surprising
March 23, 2009 - 09:02 ET by moderncommentaries83Of course, everything is "made up" by the "religious right" and liberals have to be brave and discern the "truth"!
Saying the original feminists supported or condoned abortion isn't original, but it sure is gutsy. Then again, liberals believe if you repeat a lie often enough it will morph into the truth. The original feminists understood that abortion was not liberating, but rather another tool used to oppress women and have them forefit control of their bodies to either an unsupportive or abusive boyfriend/husband/partner or an unsupportive/abusive family at the hands of an uncaring - and often malicious - abortionist.
This is no different than anti-Catholic liberals and dissenting "Catholics" who claim the Catholic Church only "banned" abortion about 150 years ago. We just make it up as we go along, according to them. Truth - which is that the Church has always been against abortion and infanticide and the earliest Christians rescued lots of babies left to die - hurts. So they lie.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
I gotta get over to the Hallmark store
March 23, 2009 - 09:41 ET by SickofLibsHappy George Tiller Day, everyone.
(except for all you fetuses out there)
There's More Than One Side To Every Story...
March 23, 2009 - 21:33 ET by The7SticksI will be the first liberal to say that Dr. Tiller may have committed crimes and those crimes need to be reviewed in court, and proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he has violated the law. That said however, it troubles me that you will report that Dr. Tiller has been attacked more than once by alleged assailants or a domestic terrorist group like Operation Rescue (yes, it's fair to deem a group that vandalizes an abortion clinic, by forcing a water hose into the ceiling to deliberately cause damage to the clinic, as a domestic terrorist group. I have read on this same site that a couple of liberal Catholic schoolgirls that threw red paint at a congregation were called domestic terrorists, so I think it is a perfectly fair comparison.)
What I am saying is that you'll gloss over that history of Dr. Tiller and his property being physically assaulted and condemn him on all the alleged crimes he's committed. Aren't you then essentially excusing this group Operation Rescue to be above the law and commit even more vandalism to more abortion clinics? Doesn't this also embolden more people to violently attack abortion doctors the way Dr. Tiller was attacked?
As I said, I will not dismiss that Dr. Tiller has been accused of crimes and he needs to be processed through the legal system in order to find actual justice. What I have a problem with is the methods that a group like Operation Rescue will employ by circumventing the law. The lesser of two evils is still evil, and if Operation Rescue is to make any progress with a pro-life agenda, they must first obey the laws of the land and stop vandalizing abortion clinics.
As I have been reading, I found out that the most effective pro-life activity is to establish a crisis pregnancy center in opposition to an abortion clinic. I also feel that the government needs to stay out of the abortion business on all levels, federal, state, and local. I would much rather this be a free-market situation that would decide which is more preferable. Since the abortion rate has been going down, I have been inclined to believe that the free market can solve the issue once and for all if the free market is allowed to proceed in that direction. If it works, more abortion clinics will close and more crisis pregnancy centers will open. I would much rather see the abortion rate go down that way than to see vigilantes taking the law into their own hands.
It's glaringly obvious on
March 23, 2009 - 22:27 ET by GrannyGrump42It's glaringly obvious that Tiller breaks the law. What doctor, faced with a gravely ill patient in the third trimester of pregnancy, would prescribe a trip to Wichita to spend three days in the LaQuinta tended by her Significant Other as preferable to checking her into a hospital? If these women were as sick as the law says they have to be, they'd be too sick to be treated as outpatients in the first place.
The whole idea that there can be ANY pregnant woman who fits under the requirements of the law is a necessary absurdity because the Supreme Court invented third trimester abortions in Roe vs Wade, and then mandated that states permit them for "health" reasons.
If a woman in the third trimester of pregnancy faces a major medical crisis such that the pregnancy is a threat to her, the doc will either induce labor or perform an emergency c-section. That's been the standard of care since the development of blood transfusions and antibiotics.