Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at 
A few weeks ago, Phill Kline swore to the Wichita Eagle's editorial board that he would not make a 15 year-old lawsuit, long since dismissed, an issue in his campaign. A newly released video of the event shows that he even told them specifically that he wouldn't make those unproven charges part of TV commercials.
But, of course, he did.
I guess we're all used to politicians – especially the lawyers – being slimy liars, but we still can hope for better. And with Paul Morrison on the ballot, we can have better. An attorney general who won't go on fishing expeditions through patients' sexual histories and psychological profiles. One who won't hold illegal meetings with creationists on the Board of Ed, and who won't offer to defend them if they put warning labels on science textbooks. An attorney general who won't hire convicted criminals for his staff, and who won't have his staff waste time making sure the lyrics on library CDs aren't icky.
Comments
When a very yound underage girl gets pregnant and is taken for an abortion, it means child abuse and statutory rape has taken place.
Will Morrison do anything about it?
Do YOU even think anything should be done about it?
Or is that just her choice?
Posted by: Grady | October 28, 2006 6:32 AM
When a very yound underage girl gets pregnant and is taken for an abortion, it means child abuse and statutory rape has taken place.
Will Morrison do anything about it?
Do YOU even think anything should be done about it?
Or is that just her choice?
Posted by: Grady | October 28, 2006 6:37 AM
When a fox is among the chickens, one doesn't hunt it with a shotgun . . .
. . . unless one wants something extra.
Posted by: archy | October 28, 2006 10:24 AM
When a very yound underage girl gets pregnant and is taken for an abortion, it means child abuse and statutory rape has taken place.
No, it doesn't.
You're not very smart, are you?
Posted by: gwangung | October 28, 2006 2:02 PM
Grady, answer me this: if an underage girl gets pregnant by an underage boy, does child abuse occur? Is it statuatory rape? Does it warrant illegal searches of medical records by a man who is practically frothing at the mouth?
Posted by: Sean | October 28, 2006 2:19 PM
Some patients whose records were subpoenaed were over 18. What's the excuse there? Why did Kline need the full medical records, when simple confirmation of the patient's age and pregnancy would suffice to prove sexual activity. Why did he need the psychological background?
Why did he feel the need to violate a judicial gag order?
One can pursue evidence of a crime without violating the victims' civil liberties, and without stepping on the rights of the public at large.
Posted by: Josh | October 28, 2006 10:14 PM
phil kline is a good man and naturally the libtards are crucifying him because he has the audacity to try and protect the most innocent and precious life there is, which is the unborn.
abortion ought to be illegal, period. but activist liberal judges made new laws when they had no right.
Posted by: merle jennings | October 29, 2006 11:03 AM
Phill Kline is a career hack politician who let his law license lapse more than once. Any Kansan who thinks that this guy is qualified to be the state's top lawyer is not putting the best interests of ALL of the state's citizens as a top priority. And "activist liberal judges" are, per usual, a red herring.
Posted by: Albatrossity | October 29, 2006 1:42 PM
Josh, what is the excuse you will have for not investigating cases where the girl is 13 or YOUNGER?
And Sean, if the case is not investigated, how do you know it was an underage boy involved and not her middle aged neighbor or uncle.
You don't.
Posted by: Diane | October 30, 2006 6:17 AM
"Diane," the point Sean was making was a response to your – I mean "Grady's" – point that "When a very yound underage girl gets pregnant and is taken for an abortion, it means child abuse and statutory rape has taken place."
That isn't necessarily the case.
And my point was not that we shouldn't investigate, but that we can investigate without violating judicial orders and without violating a victim's privacy even more.
Posted by: Josh | October 30, 2006 10:14 AM
These trolls (merle has been trolling on Dispatches too) are very good at getting everyone off topic.
I believe the point of the OP was that Phil Kline lied....again. He said he wouldn't dredge up a 15 year old case, and he did. He said he wouldn't dig into medical records of women who were over 18, and he did. He said he wouldn't iolate Kansans' privacy, and he did.
So how about the Phil Kline jock straps....I mean supporters....address these very real issues.
Cheers.
Posted by: Fastlane | October 30, 2006 10:23 AM