Just like in a military war, culture wars have their battle grounds and their memorials. In Kansas, where the culture war concerns abortion, the main front is Wichita. That's where Dr. George Tiller was murdered in 2009, and that's where a new physician, Dr. Mila Means, has announced she wants to expand her family practice to offer the service. She would be the first open provider since Dr. Tiller's assassination.
We stopped by her office today and talked to clinic manager Andrea Hamel. You can hear in this brief interview with Ms. Hamel so many elements that mirror those in a literal war -- territory, strategy, intelligence-gathering, camaraderie, bravery and fear. The murder of Dr. Tiller is still very fresh in the minds of everyone here, a constant reminder of the violence at the fringe of the anti-abortion movement.
Ms. Hamel worked for Dr. Tiller's political action committee, and after his death got a job with Dr. Means. She didn't intend to land right back in the same fight, but at least she knows her opponents well:
I feel that these people can be very intimidating. They attack you in a way that kind of makes you wonder, if you're driving home, are they following you? And do you have to worry about your family being harassed, that kind of stuff. It is very intimidating.
Dr. Means hasn't yet started offering abortions. She'll have to move to a new office, since her landlord doesn't want to deal with the kind of disruptive harassment and protesting that never stopped outside Dr. Tiller's practice.
We'll have more for you on the show tonight.
Leave a Comment:
Apparently they think abortion is murder but killing the abortionists is not murder. And if these so-called Christians would read their bibles, they would see numerous references to vengeance and that it belongs to the Lord, not to them.
Katherine, very glad you reminded us of "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord" --
I just wish those fringe group people would remember it and act accordingly.
You've reminded me of something else. Paul expands on the warning against vengeance in Romans 12:19, writing, "Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."' But the religious right can't just back off and let the big guy handle things in mysterious ways. No, they just appoint themselves God's hammer and pound every nail they imagine they see.
Murder is murder, plain and simple. Abortion is murder, and killing adults is murder. It does not make a difference the age, and it does not make a difference if the cord is still attached to you. If you kill your child, you not only have to answer to god, you will have to live with it until your judgment day. Saying "it is OK to kill your unborn child" is not only irresponsible; it is unethical, inhumane, and barbaric. Just because you are not ready for a baby is not an excuse to terminate your pregnancy. Just because you want to be promiscuous does not mean your child should pay the price. We as responsible adults should know right from wrong, we should not pass irresponsible behavior to our youth....if they are given the opportunity to be born. I find it amazing to think that women consciously choose to take the life of their unborn child. Do they do it out of panic? By the pressure of their parents? By the influence of their boyfriends? All of these excuses should not be an excuse for partial birth abortions.
Because we all know unwanted pregnancies are all due to promiscuity.
Geeze Mike...you are entitled to your opinion, however...
This is may be your wish...or your thoughts...but not the law.
Because we happen to differ in perspective and world view does not make me wrong and you right...or visa versa. It's just perspective. You are a man and pretty much don't know @!$%# about it.
However, by LAW ...hello...Abortion is legal and not murder....ugggh.
No malice -> not murder. Justified -> not murder.
Anyone who says "abortion is murder" is, ipso facto, a troll (among other things) and should be treated like one.
Wish you could broadcast this clip from Hillary Clinton in response to a senator in a hearing. It is the very best short statement on the subject I've seen. Joan Walsh posted the link on twitter. See it at
I'm a white female who grew was in jr&high school in the south in the 50's & college in the 60's. I knew knew far too many girls who used backroom abortionist...or coat hangers on themselves and then went to the hospital. There were a very few good doctors who would do this procedure then...all of them were black and many, many of the white girls would use them. It was a very scary time. I'm so glad that my daughter has decent options today and would hate to see this hateful condition rise up again in the US for my granddaughter.
We should NEVER again go back to those dark days! We should be BETTER than that!
I've never been prouder of Hillary Clinton than after listening to this clip. She is right where she should be for our country at this time. I didn't vote for her during the presidential primary, but am so glad she is now Secretary of State!
Pat in CO
Katherine, you're asking them to use logic and common sense. Those are two things in short supply in the world today, unfortunately.
Good for you Andrea! Keep up the great work!!
Katherine, you are stereo-typing Christians. MOST Christians, do not support killing abortionists. Those that commit these acts are the "crazy" fringe and do not represent Christians as a whole. You are absolutely right that the bible does not advocate these killings, just as it does not advocate killing the unborn. Both are equally wrong.
Then you and those Christians, Dana, need to speak up more to prevent what I call "the lunatic fringe" from dominating these protests. There is no reason why you cannot stand with those who support access to these clinics. It does not mean you support abortion, but you support their RIGHT TO CHOOSE...
I think they are, Lou, at least in many cases. They're just not identified because they DON'T actively push their religion onto other people.
Lou, there is much in what you say. But there is also a strong echo of the continuing islamophobic insistence from the right that Muslims must strongly denounce their radicals. Anyone listening knows that mainstream Muslim leaders have, repeatedly, but too few people hear. Perhaps the peaceful Muslim majority aren't speaking out loud enough. Or perhaps there's no speaking out loudly enough when some people have their fingers jammed into their ears.
But I think maybe that American Christians, actual or merely pretend, aren't as far along this curve as Muslims. Anti-choice terrorists have been pretty small-bore. A killing here, a little bomb there, some glue in keyholes. And big crowds with signs, while intimidating, lack that certain psychotic something. They've yet to fly passenger jets into tall buildings. Maybe that's what it takes to wake people up. Offler help us if it is.
Christians do rain death on third world peoples from thousands of feet in the air and miles and miles away.
That only makes sense if you equate waging war with terrorism. Even if you are against a particular war, and there has not been any war in my lifetime that I have been in favor of, that is an absurd equation...to put it as politely as I can.
Excuse me??? To put it as politely as I can, your "objections" display a shocking naivete about the nature of war and human history. Why yes, I would like to Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar (?), and many others of that ilk on trial at the Hague for crimes against humanity. I would also like to see GWB, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and others on trial for the same thing. Human history is quite ugly, and the US is not exactly pure as the driven snow.
You know perfectly well I never made any claims for the purity of the United States. And, naive about history? Are you serious? I suppose you must be, and that's a pity.
Since you seem determined to demonstrate your personal virtue* at my expense, there is obviously no sense trying to have any sort of discussion with you. You will no doubt be enormously relieved to know that I will not bother to comment on any of your comments.
* Despite Darth Cheney's misuse of the term, there most definitely is such a phenomenon as "personal virtue". I've been seeing rampant examples of it ever since I started on the internet. Any sort of "discussion" about the First Amendment usually features displays of personal virtue. One example that I haven't seen so much of these days, and which I don't miss, is the way that militant pacifists would go ballistic if anyone dared to express a willingness to use deadly force in self-defense if necessary. Personal virtue is, in my experience, usually seen in groups/sites dominated by a clique, such as the Usenet newsgroup soc.motts.
OK...please yourself.
I agree with Katherine fully. Some of these Christians get "selective amnesia" when the cause does not match their way of thinking.
Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land, ladies and gentlemen. That ALLOWS those doctors licensed to provide the service to do so.
Do they have a right to protest? Absolutely! That's the free speech portion of the First Amendment of the Declaration of Independence. However, another part of that amendment states the following:
"...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble..."
The key word there is PEACEABLY. The protesters need to keep that word in mind when they gather at these clinics. By chaining themselves to doors etc., they VIOLATE that amendment and therefore are in violation of local, state, and FEDERAL LAW!
@!$%#, did not mean to hit the thumbs up for you thinktank. I apologize, you wouldn't want some idiot heathen like me supporting you anyway.
Another thing anti-abortion protesters need to remember. Most of those you call "pro-abortion" are really "pro-choice". We support a woman's RIGHT TO CHOOSE whether to have an abortion or not. As long as Roe. Vs. Wade is the "law of the land", the right to make that choice stands.
Operative question: if you are someone who supports choice but not abortion, how can you mitigate the incidence of abortion without affecting a woman's autonomy?
Thinktank, when you claim to know a lot about abortion it's best to be able to at least spell the word correctly.
DNFT should read DNFST
Oh, Thinktank. Poor, poor thinktank. A disdain for education is a hallmark of a fascist society. Something you would know, if you were educated... You don't even realize what you're doing to the world.
thinktank is obviously a man. He never has to worry about getting pregnant. Blames the woman for getting herself pregnant. Forces her to have babies and take care of them without help from anyone. (Gee, think, how much child support YOU must owe, I can only imagine). Better keep that tiny, little wee wee of yours in your pants if you're going to think like that.
Do you know the reasons why - SO FEW - abortions happen so late in pregnancies? Do some research! Abortions just don't happen at 8 months because a woman decides she doesn't want to be pregnant anymore. When women don't want to be pregnant (because it isn't only uncomfortable, it completely turns your life upside down), we do something about it as soon as possible. That means a majority of the time there's no brain to suck, there's no chance of survival because what's removed cannot survive outside the womb.
And for you to threaten the death penalty on women who have abortions... do you know that 1 in 3 women have abortions? That's possibly your sister, your mother, your daughter, your best friend's wife, your aunts, your cousins. No matter how conservative and religious you are, these people still have abortions in huge numbers. So you should think twice about who you want to punish, it could be someone you love.
All men should be forced to have a vasectomy until they are married and ready to sire an offspring.
Improve access to birth control measures including condoms, contraceptives including the "morning after" pill, and educate/empower women (especially young women) to say "no" to unprotected sex no matter what. These are mainly what Planned Parenthood advocates, BTW.
Or we could just employ (selective) castration of men. Not an avenue I would advocate, but it would do the trick.
Mightbealiberal: Excellent suggestions. The downside is that the extreme right is also opposed to contraception.
Ever read Louis McMaster Bujold's Miles Vorkosigan books? On Beta Colony, men and women have their fertility switched off by default until, by mutual consent, a couple decide to have children. Athos is a little more radical (in more ways than one) in that a person cannot reproduce until they are financially able to cover the costs of raising a child.
No I haven't. It's a series?
@MeddlingMonk --- Thank you for the author reference. I'm going to take a look at those books.
@Mickey Mouser --- Thank you for being you!!!
Not exactly a series, Mickey. More of a clump. The novels and stories don't follow a plan or even a chronological sequence. They're science fiction adventure stories, mostly centered on Miles Vorkosigan, who because of an assassination attempt on his parents when he was not yet born is very short and has brittle bones that frequently break. And yet he gets caught up in insanely dangerous events with his intelligence and powers of persuasion as his only means of surviving. Like I said, the emphasis is on adventure but McMaster Bujold takes the time to think through the social implications of the technologies she invents.
Glad you guys came to Wichita to get the info first hand. Too bad you misspelled Andrea's last name. :)
Troy Newman is a slum lord and manages some run down houses and apartment complexes (he diverts the anti-choice money into side businesses). I wonder if he'd like it if we went to his properties and harassed his tenants?
You can help stop abortion by:
Providing health care for the infants and moms.
Providing schooling and free daycare for unwed mothers.
Providing a sound diet for the newborn and his/her mom.
Wait, most of these right to lifers believe that once the child is out of the womb, it and it's mom are on their own.
You mean help like Planned Parenthood? Republicans are trying to put an end to that help as well.
The second largest social service provider besides the federal government is the Catholic Church.
Yeah, we've all seen what the Catholic church does to children.
You didn't deny my statement.
We've seen what 1.4% of Catholic priests do to children. The "Church" is the laity.
I'm a recovering Catholic...I've seen enough thanks.
Agree!
I might add that more comprehensive education at ALL grade levels would not only cut the rate of abortion but provide young people a basic guide for childcare and the ramifications therein contained!
Religionists and politicians alike need to climb down off thier "High Horse"and start looking a little further than the end of thier noses! This is a Human problem and requires Human solution!
We have the critical thinking,the basic goodness and dignity within us to deal with this issue without resorting to imaginary friends or lobbyrats!
Education will likely not be the sole answer but it is certainly a good place to begin! Wingnuts included!
If you claim to be against abortion maybe You should adopt and care and pay for all those lives you are supposedly saving!
Catholic Charities receives a lot of its funding from the federal government.
MacNasty: I thoroughly agree with your comment. You deserve a star!
Abortion is such heated debate. Pro-life doesn't seem to give a chit about the baby once born as long as the kid is born - I find that SO strange.
Pro-choice say it's none of our business what a woman chooses to do with her pregnancy and we will offer all services to avoid having a pregnancy ended by a coat hanger. We are saving lives by offering services.
Yes, absolutely, at the expense of the life you won't acknowledge.
Allow me, if you will, to civilly complicate the matter for you, Dalis. Would you allow an abortion to a mother who had two options: abort, or they both risk death?
The easy answer is that it's a selfish choice for the mother to make, but it also happens to be the one that makes the most sense. I'd rather not see a woman go get casual abortions every couple months but I'm still pro-choice because it can't be outlawed, for situations like the one I just gave.
First off, Charlie, let me say that I am in no way trying to say that there is only one reason or circumstance in which a woman seeks an abortion, but it's disingenuous to exploit hard cases in order to justify elective abortions. The conditions where an abortion becomes medically necessary are rare (thankfully), and the abortion is done as an absolute last resort. Even then, the mother can choose not to abort, as has happened in at least one case I know of where a woman named Bernadette Mimura put off cancer treatment rather than risk miscarriage.
I wasn't trying to be particularly original, to be frank. I was stating a case where both would die if abortion was outlawed entirely, which I feel is the ultimate aim of these bullying sociopaths. If they get an inch they will take a mile so I'm going for the pro-choice crowd.
As abortion is always safer, elective abortions are justified.
Actually in the bible the prescribed punishment for causing a miscarriage is to pay a fine. So it is not treated the same as murder. Exodus 21:22
Yeah but come on. Bill O'reilly also said, when confronted with "it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than is it for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven," his exact words were "I don't care what the Bible says."
Just because the Bible says so doesn't mean anything, unless it says they get to kill and maim people who don't obey.
Lou from NH is right, in my opinion. I am a Christian and I do not think I could ever have an abortion.... yet it's pretty easy to decide this when I'm not faced with an unwanted pregnancy. I am pro-choice. I believe that this is a morality issue and it's wrong for the government to try to legislate this kind of moral choice. The choice to have an abortion should be between the woman and God. God should be the judge. We should not judge. I find it so hypocritical that some of the most judgmental people I know claim to be Christians.
No, it's not the problem at all. You also don't get to say a thing about other programs you disagree with.
And you have obviously no clue about Planned Parenthood. They fight a hard fight in some states where children are told nonsense in sex education, thanks to people like you.
hatenomore was at least semi-interesting as a troll.
Sort of Mech...I think it really is the stupid trolls that should be ignored and they are usually the ones who personalize it. hate on occasion would do that when we frustrated him...
Yay MT ;-) You've gone silent. I think hatenomor is blogger JV. I still haven't figured it out yet; the argument styles are different enough that I can't tell, however the arguments raised are fairly similar (as well as the supporting evidence). It's fun (to me at least) to try to figure out when it's Hatey and when it isn't.
Thinktank is, more than likely, a younger person. My experience has been when they spew a lot of hate and can't spell things correctly they are teenage boys from the ages of 12-15. Something about that age makes you really hostile towards views different than your own (so has been my experience anywho). It's always struck me as very odd.
Really? To me, intolerance by the very young makes 'sense'. They have no depth of experience, especially what you get just by having lived for decades. Whatever they happen to know they think is normal. They haven't had the chance to learn by experience that different isn't necessarily wrong. The less you know, the more rigidly certain you can afford to be; and teenagers know next to nothing.
Well I suppose that is true. I was pretty open minded as a kid and was always willing to admit what I didn't know. Having said that I also was an asshat about certain things (like gay rights)...so yeah I guess it does make sense ;-)
I've cut way back on my online participation. It's been better for me. I miss you guys, though. :)
Aren't you in your 20s, Mickey? Kid-hood is relative. Just wait and see. **Evil laughter fills the chill night air.**
Yeah early 20's.
Recently at work, one of the women there started whinging about her upcoming birthday. She was turning 25 and that's so old! She didn't quite get the sympathy she thought she deserved from the two middle-aged people who work near her. She may not have enjoyed her birthday, but we certainly did.
Lol i can relate. I turn 25 next year and I'm like unghhhhh I'm going to be an old fart then. ;-)
Hey, Mech Trek, we miss you too. Check in once in a while, 'k?
Is it me, or aren't there a couple of tactics, people who believe protecting women's reproductive rights can use to neutralize these bullies?
1. They are nothing but bullies; so deal with them like bullies. Bloody their nose. The people who incite these kooks need to be put in spotlight; if they are, they will scurry like the cockroaches they are. We need to make their personal lives as miserable as they make everyone else. If they publish an address, We publish their addresses; they harass people at clinics, we harass them; we put everything under video surveillance and asks for the names and addresses of all the protesters. If they commit assault or battery (either civil or criminal), file criminal complaints or civil lawsuits, and make them all spend thousands to defend themselves.
The second thing I thought of is use private property ownership as a barrier. How about getting the money together to buy a large tract of land (a couple of acres or so in a low density area) and build the clinic in the middle. Fence off the property line with razor wire and other barriers often used by corporations (plant trees around the inside so that it is pleasant to those inside) and use private security to transport people in and out of the compound in motorcades with black tinted windows; just blow by those kooks in and out. Render their protests ineffective.
I'm in sympathy with what you're saying, but a women's health clinic is a single target. It's easy for the mob to congregate at one spot in order to harass, while they all have individual, widely scattered homes. Your other suggestions would cost and would make these services available only to the wealthy. Although, on a visceral level, having women escorted in and out by ostentatiously-armed protectors has a certain appeal. But it's probably not very practical.
@NYCheesehead1971 -- I have thought of the same things but using the technology we have today. Since these people seem to be immune from being prosecuted for "stalking" or "harassment" based upon their actions, then it wouldn't be a problem to go to their protests, video there faces and post it on the internet with Wanted Posters as a defamation again God.
As seen in Egypt, Geeks can change the world!!!
There are many reasons a woman may consider abortion. This one may seem harsh and indelicate but I haven't seen this particular reason discussed. There are many women in this country utterly addicted to drugs like Crack Cocaine, methamphetamines, heroin, etc. They know they won't be able to stop using drugs, on a dime, because of pregnancy. Malnutrition and the addiction and poverty that go hand in hand with it have very likely already caused a folic acid deficiency at the time of conception or in the early weeks of gestation. The result may very likely be a multitude of birth defects, including spina bifida, heart defects, blindness, retardation, etc. I've heard it costs about one million dollars a month to keep an infant in neonatal intensive care. Add in heart surgeries and other procedures and it could top 2 Million a month . If they survive they may end up in a nursing home or medical foster care forever. Figure about 300-400 million dollars society must pay for each of these accidental pregnancies. Now the radical fundamentalist Republicans demand an end to pregnancy prevention. Anyone have a spare 100 Trillion laying around?
A good friend of mine who had an abortion conceived with an ex-boyfriend while under the influence of drugs. I know that addiction was at the root of her decision to abort, in addition to wanting to end any bond with said ex-boyfriend. She was afraid she had already poisoned the fetus, and she knew she couldn't kick the habit. She regrets the abortion; she always did, even while she was in the stirrups.
Supporting or condemning the abortion at that point misses the point of everything else that was going on with her life at that point. Not that those around her didn't try: some of her friends condemned her for having the abortion, despite the fact she was so ill-equipped to choose life. Others of her friends reassured her that the abortion was the right decision and said she was an empowered woman, despite the fact that right in their midst she was a slave to her addictions.
For that reason, it's going to take a good deal more than sex education to mitigate abortion in America. And it's also why it is essential that a pro-life person cannot merely be anti-abortion - because life demands holistic solutions and because saving one life at the expense of another is ultimately anti-life. We have to reexamine the War on Drugs, and I know this is an unpopular notion, but we have to examine how we use (or abuse) sex. Drug and sex addiction are medical problems, yes. They also bely a deeper spiritual disturbance. Help her, meet her needs, and she'll save the child. She's the only one who can.
Someone mentioned Exodus before, so I went to find the quote:
22 And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall be surely fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
If someone hurts a woman and the woman survives but miscarries, the attacker pays the husband financial restitution. But if there is continuing injury to the woman 'eye for an eye' kicks in.
This implies the woman is treated as a person, but the fetus is 'property'.
Read the passage again. Nothing implies that the child has died, only that he has been delivered prematurely. The original Hebrew says only "the child comes forth" - and the word used is יֶלֶד or yéled which means "child" - not that the child is stillborn as in Numbers 12:12. In this context, the restitution may be to pay for the child's care.
I have struggled all my life with this issue... ever since I fully understood the consequences of having been born female. Even if I never dated, even if I never married, even though I knew by age 6 I was a lesbian -- just walking out the door was a calculated risk, since rapes occur at the rate of 350,000 per year (reported; estimates are far higher)… the odds were fair that I could be a victim of assault.
I wasn't raised "Christian," per se -- Unitarian/Universalist -- but I learned a strong moral ethos from many long days and nights in a huge hospital as a child, surrounded by suffering people of all ages, ethnicities, languages and faiths. It is difficult not to be empathetic under such circumstances, especially when one is not yet jaded by the world, and one's neural pathways are still forming… for decades I could not look at someone else's cut finger without feeling the pain in my own, and in my heart.
"Love One Another" and "Do unto others as you would have done to you" became the standards by which I strive to live; I have not always succeeded, to my everlasting regret. But even though I'm an agnostic, even though I do not embrace any kind of organized religion, even though I know I am imperfect, I still have a moral compass within me… which has evolved over time to an understanding that everyone does, unless they have never been forced to see their own flaws and had to live with their consequences.
When I understood what those health class illustrations meant in defining my life and actions, I also understood how enormous a decision this is for ANY woman, or any girl. Because it means that we are also deciding what life is, in our worldview, and what life is worth. It is the most awesome, and most far-reaching, set of questions a woman must answer. When does life begin? At what point does a set of cells become human?
Having birth defects myself (none, thankfully, that restricted my enjoyment of life more than momentarily), I'm personally discomfitted with a decision to abort a fetus if a test of amniotic fluid shows problems -- just as I'm aware that I might very well have aborted such a fetus, rather than pass along those mutated genes, or ones with a more terrible impact, had this ever been a decision for me to make. I will never have to know, thankfully… but I'm certain that there would have been more questions in my mind than answers.
The only question that would not have come up is, "What will my government say?" -- but only because the Supreme Court already decided that the government has no right to tell an American woman what that decision must be. No one does. We do not live in a theocracy; women are free and equal citizens, not chattel (as determined by the American People when they ratified the 19th Amendment) or subservient to their husband's decisions (as they are in some countries). American women are free to make this decision, guided by their faith, or family, or their deep personal belief; they are free to make the decision without consulting anyone -- including priest, rabbi, husband or best friend.
Medical science cannot define the instant a fetus becomes a human being. Only its creator does.
Abortion is a private, solitary decision, and must remain so.
Dear RoughAcres---Truth is Poetic