Mike Nifong will be having a really bad day today

January 24, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: News 

Anyone want to be Mike Nifong today?

State Bar Adds More Ethics Charges to Complaint Against Duke Prosecutor Nifong

RALEIGH, N.C. — The North Carolina State Bar has added additional ethics charges to a complaint filed against the prosecutor who brought sexual assault charges against three Duke lacrosse players, accusing him of withholding DNA evidence and making misleading statements to the court.

The added charges were made public Wednesday, about an hour before Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong was scheduled to appear at a conference to discuss details of the ethics case. The changes could lead to Nifong’s removal from the bar.

More here.

HotAir weighs in Nifong slapped with second, harsher ethics complaint

From Ann Coulter:

Stripper Lied … White Boys Fried and The Stripper has no Clothes

update.png The charges at The Smoking Gun

The Attack on Kids With Down Syndrome

January 24, 2007 by · 1 Comment
Filed under: Down syndrome, Health 

The theme of Monday’s 34th annual March for Life was, “Thou Shalt Protect the Equal Right to Life of Each Innocent Human in Existence at Fertilization – No Exception! No Compromise!” But a whole lot of people, more specifically 85% of those with a prenatal diagnosis, take exception and some will compromise their Judeo-Christian ideals to terminate a baby with Down syndrome.

Look for that 85% figure to rise. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is now recommending that ALL pregnant women (regardless of age) receive prenatal genetic testing and counseling.

Yes, it’s going to lead to more termination, but it’s going to be fair to these women who are 24 who say, ‘How come I have to raise an infant with Down’s syndrome, whereas my cousin who was 35 didn’t have to?’” Dr. Andre Lalonde, the executive vice president of the SOGC, told the National Post.

To make it easier on everyone (but the baby), a non-invasive nuchal fold translucency test can be performed at 10 to 13 weeks of pregnancy, when a mom is barely showing, so no one has to know if she chooses to terminate.

Those whose results are most worrisome could then undergo a procedure called chorionic villus sampling (CVS) to confirm the diagnosis while still in the first trimester. Those whose results are less clear and are worried about the small risk of miscarriage posed by CVS can wait until the second trimester to undergo the quadruple test. If that is positive, they could then undergo amniocentesis, which also carries a small risk of miscarriage.

Women who would opt to terminate a pregnancy based on the results would be able to do so much earlier, when abortion is less risky and less traumatic, Malone said.

“By the time you’re 20 weeks pregnant, most women will be feeling fetal movement. We wouldn’t want to underestimate the psychological or emotional difficulty of undergoing pregnancy termination that late,” Malone said. “Also, at that point it’s easy to tell by looking at the woman if she is pregnant. This way she can make her decision in utmost privacy.”

Canada is recommending automatic amniocentesis for all women over 40:

The Canadian society of obstetricians and gynaecologists recommends that all women be “given” amniocentesis, and that women over 40 should “automatically be given” amniocentesis. One wonders what the word “automatically” means here. Is there a distinction between being given amniocentesis and being automatically given amniocentesis? If so, what is it? Whatever it is, you can be sure of the direction in which the eugenic screws are turning. (From Reflections on Faith and Culture Blog)

I may be reaching, but I truly believe that the push for earlier diagnosis and genetic prenatal testing for ALL women stems from John Edward’s attack on obstetricians using junk science exclaiming cerebral palsy is caused by malpractice during the birth process. Now lawyers are finding other conditions to blame on obstetricians and are filing wrongful life/birth suits on behalf of parents and children with issues like Down syndrome. Testing all women gives them the opportunity to remove less than perfect babies from their bodies and no reason to sue their ob/gyn.

After my son was born, I needed to find others who had children with Down syndrome. Among the famous were columnist, George Will, and actor, John McGinley.

George Will has always been one of my favorite columnists. Following is an excerpt from his most recent column in Newsweek. Follow the link to read the entire column.

Golly, What Did Jon Do?
By George F. Will
Newsweek

Jan. 29, 2007 issue – What did Jon Will and the more than 350,000 American citizens like him do to tick off the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists? It seems to want to help eliminate from America almost all of a category of citizens, a category that includes Jon.

Born in 1972, Jon has Down syndrome. That is a congenital condition resulting from a chromosomal defect that causes varying degrees of mental retardation and some physical abnormalities, such as low muscle tone, small stature, a single crease across the center of the palms, flatness of the back of the head and an upward slant to the eyes (when Jon was born, Down syndrome people were still commonly called Mongoloids). There also is increased risk of congenital heart defects, childhood leukemia and Alzheimer’s disease. Down syndrome, although not common, is among the most common congenital anomalies—47.9 per 100,000 births (compared with 77.7 with cleft lips or palates, which also can be diagnosed in utero, and which sometimes result in abortions).

As women age, their risk of having a Down syndrome baby increases. It has become standard practice for women older than 35 years old to be offered genetic counseling and diagnostic testing. But because of the higher fertility rates of women under 35, such women have 80 percent of Down syndrome babies. So new ACOG guidelines recommend that all pregnant women, regardless of age, be offered such counseling and testing.The ACOG guidelines are formally neutral concerning what decisions parents should make on the basis of the information offered. But what is antiseptically called “screening” for Down syndrome is, much more often than not, a search-and-destroy mission: At least 85 percent of pregnancies in which Down syndrome is diagnosed are ended by abortions.

Medicine now has astonishing and multiplying abilities to treat problems of unborn children in utero, but it has no ability to do anything about Down syndrome (the result of an extra 21st chromosome). So diagnosing Down syndrome can have only the purpose of enabling—and, in a clinically neutral way, of encouraging—parents to choose to reject people like Jon as unworthy of life. And as more is learned about genetic components of other abnormalities, search-and-destroy missions will multiply.

Nothing—nothing—in the professional qualifications of obstetricians and gynecologists gives them standing to adopt policies that predictably will have, and seem intended to have, the effect of increasing abortions in the service of an especially repulsive manifestation of today’s entitlement mentality—every parent’s “right” to a perfect baby. Happily, that mentality is not yet universal: 214 American families are looking for Down syndrome children to adopt.

Read more here

I also urge you to read La Shawn Barber’s article, Baby Killing as a Civil Right. We come to the table of right to life with different, yet simlar, ideas:

Last October, Planned Parenthood joined the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, an organization founded at the dawn of the modern civil rights movement. This isn’t news per se, but I thought it was a timely tidbit for today, the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that fashioned a Fourteenth Amendment “right to privacy” for women to kill their babies in utero.

Says conservative writer and friend Mychal Massie: “How can a civil rights group that claims to support underprivileged blacks embrace an organization created expressly to hasten the demise of black people? People of conscience should be appalled and outraged by this alignment.”

Free speech all over my yard…

January 19, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Are you kidding me?, News 

I have to admit, this cracked me up:

Political critic in deep doo-doo

DENVER — A Colorado jury will decide soon whether one person’s dog excrement is another person’s free speech.

Authorities said Kathleen Ensz was so offended by repeated mailings from Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, Colorado Republican, that she stuffed one of those brochures into the mail slot of the congresswoman’s Greeley office wrapped around a little something extra: a dollop of doggy doo-doo.

Now Ms. Ensz, a 63-year-old retired University of Northern Colorado professor living in Greeley, is facing charges of misdemeanor “use of a noxious substance.” Her attorneys, however, argue that their client was exercising her constitutional right to free speech.

“Ms. Ensz’s action in returning an unwanted mailing from Congresswoman Musgrave … with a piece of feces was expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment,” Denver lawyer Patricia Bangert said in a motion filed Tuesday. The filing does not deny that Ms. Ensz put the package through the mail slot, claiming instead that the act is constitutionally protected and thus not a crime.

Critics denounced that argument as a load of bunk, but others say it’s not as far-fetched as it might seem. After all, if flag burning is protected under the Constitution, why not poop parceling?

:: More ::

Thanks to Allah Pundit at HotAir for the link.

UK considering chemical castration for sex offenders.

January 18, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Health, News 

Sex pests ‘could have hormone injections’

Sex offenders could be forced to have hormone injections under radical plans to tackle crime being considered by Downing Street.Strategists think the injections – effectively the “chemical castration” of sexual predators to suppress their urges – would help prevent attacks.The controversial proposal is one of a number being looked at by Tony Blair’s strategy unit as part of the Prime Minister’s policy review.Other ideas include installing microchips in the mentally ill to monitor their behaviour and sending text messages to parents to warn them a paedophile is at large in their area.

:: More here ::

mrped1.pngThey’ve come up with some creative solutions there but there is old technology that may work. Facial tattoos. Kind of like the Mr. Yuk sticker of the new millenium. Schools could have special assemblies like we did in the old days pointing out what the tattoo looks like and what to do if you see someone with that tattoo near the playground.

Yes, I am saying this with tongue in cheek (sort of). But when I read about “text messaging” parents, I thought this made more sense.

Did he kidnap others?

January 17, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: News 

It now appears that Michael Devlin may be suspected of kidnapping an 11 year old Charles Arlin Henderson in 1991.

The long-missing boy, known as Arlin, was, like Ben and Shawn, about 100 pounds and from a rural town about an hour from St. Louis. Both Shawn and Arlin vanished at age 11 while riding their bikes.

“If you were to take a photo of Arlin Henderson and you place it next to Shawn’s picture, there is a striking resemblance,” sheriff’s Lt. Rick Harrell said.

It gets more interesting:

Lincoln County investigators began re-examining the 1991 case after Devlin’s arrest. Detective Chris Bartlett said a witness saw a man snapping photos of Arlin before the Moscow Mills boy vanished.

Arlin’s uncle, James McWilliams, said the boy came home from school a few months before he disappeared and told his mother a “tall, thin man” had been taking pictures of him.

I’m sure we will be finding out soon if Devlin who is currently 300 pounds was a thin man in 1991. Will we hear about others?

Read more here.

Michigan Adulterers Beware!

January 16, 2007 by · 1 Comment
Filed under: Are you kidding me?, News 

Just to be safe, I may send a copy of this article to Mr. Slice – not that he’s thinking of…well, nevermind.

In a ruling sure to make philandering spouses squirm, Michigan’s second-highest court says that anyone involved in an extramarital fling can be prosecuted for first-degree criminal sexual conduct, a felony punishable by up to life in prison.

“We cannot help but question whether the Legislature actually intended the result we reach here today,” Judge William Murphy wrote in November for a unanimous Court of Appeals panel, “but we are curtailed by the language of the statute from reaching any other conclusion.”

Advertisement
“Technically,” he added, “any time a person engages in sexual penetration in an adulterous relationship, he or she is guilty of CSC I,” the most serious sexual assault charge in Michigan’s criminal code.

No one expects prosecutors to declare open season on cheating spouses. The ruling is especially awkward for Attorney General Mike Cox, whose office triggered it by successfully appealing a lower court’s decision to drop CSC charges against a Charlevoix defendant. In November 2005, Cox confessed to an adulterous relationship.

More here.