Kline's "Sin" According to the Religion of Liberalism

The religion of liberalism has declared that Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline committed what they view to be a "sin." He had the nerve to appear on the O'Reilly Factor and explain his investigation into allegations of abortion mills failing to report rape, which is required by law.

As part of this investigation, Kline subpoened medical records without names or contact information from abortionists. On the O'Reilly Factor, he made a generalized statement about these records. As this investigation may have the longterm affect of causing some rapists to be reported and put in prison where they belong, this might reduce the number of abortions that occur. If these rapists are out of circulation and would-be rapists stop raping due to fear of the consequences, abortion mills might make less money. Phill Kline has committed a grave "sin" according to the religion of liberalism.

Apparently, Kline has "violated privacy" in making a generalized statement. I think that those who want to complain about "privacy violations" when it comes to a generalized statement need to take a look at state health departments which collect abortion statistics. They need to complain about doctors who make generalized statements about patients without releasing names or specific details. Clearly, if one is truly worried about privacy, they must be consistent. Or are there special considerations when it comes to killing babies?

I need to have my gall bladder removed. My doctor told me about another patient who had the surgery and drove himself home the same day. He gave away medical information in that he basically told me that the patient was well enough, after having a part of his body removed, to drive himself home. He told me nothing that could identify the patient. Would those who are allegedly concerned about "privacy" be able to tell me how Kline's statement is any different? Or is it just that baby killing must be handled with kid gloves?

We often hear about how abortion is allegedly "safe" and "legal." There have been a number of women who have died from complications related to their abortion. The object of an abortion is to kill an innocent human being. Thus "safe" is not something I would use to describe abortion. If an abortion is "legal," that means the abortionist complies with the law in every aspect of the abortion. Thus, if the law requires cases of rape to be reported, the abortionist must do so. Otherwise, we do not have a "legal" (per secular law) abortion. One would think that those who believe in legalized child slaughter would at least want secular law to be followed (even though they are in open rebellion of God's Holy Laws).

Are those who oppose the investigation into whether abortion mills are reporting rapes concerned about rapists running loose in society? I certainly hope they are. But sadly, it is my opinion that they are not. It is my opinion that their chief concern is ease of being able to have an innocent child killed.