• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

New York Senate Passes Bill Legalizing Abortions Up to Birth

Superman

You may worship me
Moderator
Forefather
Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
21,042
Reaction score
24,470
Points
113
Location
Trampa, FL
New York Senate Passes Bill Legalizing Abortions Up to Birth

New York Senate Passes Bill Legalizing Abortions Up to Birth
STATE MICAIAH BILGER JAN 22, 2019 | 6:13PM ALBANY, NEW YORK


The New York Senate passed a radical pro-abortion bill Tuesday that would allow unborn babies to be aborted for basically any reason up to birth.

Metro reports the bill passed after abortion activists pushed it for more than a decade in New York. Until now, it failed to pass the state Senate because of Republican lawmakers, but the November election put pro-abortion Democrats in control of both houses.

The vote was 38-24.

A New York Public Radio reporter said she heard a voice shout, “May almighty God have mercy on this state!” in the Senate soon after the vote.

The legislation goes beyond Roe v. Wade, allowing abortions even when the Supreme Court has said states may regulate them, according to the pro-life leaders. Late-term abortions, which currently are illegal in New York, would be allowed, and non-doctors would be allowed to perform them.

The bill appears to restrict late-term abortions, but it adds a broad “health” exception for abortions after 24 weeks. The exception would allow women to abort unborn babies up to nine months of pregnancy for “age, economic, social and emotional factors, rather than the biological definition of ‘health’ that normally comes to mind,” according to New York Right to Life.

State Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins celebrated the legislation at a press conference Tuesday, according to the Metro. She claimed the so-called right to abortion is threatened by the new conservative U.S. Supreme Court.

“We thought at that time, that because it was so fundamentally right for women to have autonomy over their body, we thought that it was a barrier we would never have to face again,” Stewart-Cousins said. “Whenever you have something that momentous, there’s always someone who wants to go back to the way things were. So brick by brick, they began to rebuild that barrier. … They were looking for a moment to overturn this decision that changed our lives.

“We’re saying that here in New York, women’s health matters,” she continued. “We’re saying that here in New York, women’s decisions matter.”

Pro-abortion Gov. Andrew Cuomo also supports the bill. He even went so far as to threaten to hold up the budget until the legislature passes it.

The bill, dubbed the Reproductive Health Act, redefines a “person” as “a human being who has been born and is alive,” and describes abortion as a “fundamental right.” This language will allow unborn babies to be aborted for basically any reason up to birth in New York.

The legislation poses serious dangers to women’s lives and rights as well. By removing protections from illegal abortions, the bill will open the door for abuses. According to New York RTL, back alley abortionists, abusive partners or parents and others no longer would face charges for illegally killing an unborn baby – even if the mother wanted her child.

“In early December, a resident of Saratoga County was arrested for punching the stomach of a woman who was 26 weeks pregnant in an attempt to cause a miscarriage. The man was charged with abortion in the second degree, but under the RHA, the attacker would not have been charged with a felony,” according to the Catholic News Service.

Protections for babies born alive after botched abortions also would end under the new bill. Additionally, the bill says the state cannot “deny, regulate or restrict” abortion, not even for common-sense reasons such as parental consent for minors, informed consent or limits on taxpayer-funded abortions.

New York State Right to Life predicted that the bill will lead to the suppression of pro-lifers’ freedom of speech and conscience, as well. Doctors and nurses who refuse to help abort unborn babies could lose their jobs, and pro-life advocates could be persecuted for just speaking out for life.

Already one of the most pro-abortion states in America, New York would become even more pro-abortion if the law passes. In 2016, 82,189 unborn babies were aborted in New York, with about half being taxpayer-funded, according to the local news. Of those babies, 1,763 were at least 20 weeks, meaning they may have been viable outside the womb.

Meanwhile, a new poll indicates this radical pro-abortion legislation is not what Americans want. According to a national poll conducted by Marist University, three in four Americans (75 percent) say abortion should be limited to – at most – the first three months of pregnancy. This includes most of those who identify as Republicans (92 percent), Independents (78 percent) and a majority of Democrats (60 percent). It also includes more than six in 10 (61 percent) who identify as “pro-choice” on abortion.

The Marist Poll follows on the heels of a May 2018 Gallup poll which found that 53 percent of Americans oppose all or most abortions.
 
New York Senate Passes Bill Legalizing Abortions Up to Birth

New York Senate Passes Bill Legalizing Abortions Up to Birth
STATE MICAIAH BILGER JAN 22, 2019 | 6:13PM ALBANY, NEW YORK


The exception would allow women to abort unborn babies up to nine months of pregnancy for “age, economic, social and emotional factors, rather than the biological definition of ‘health’ that normally comes to mind,” according to New York Right to Life.


“We’re saying that here in New York, women’s decisions matter.”



The bill, dubbed the Reproductive Health Act, redefines a “person” as “a human being who has been born and is alive,” and describes abortion as a “fundamental right.” This language will allow unborn babies to be aborted for basically any reason up to birth in New York.

Protections for babies born alive after botched abortions also would end under the new bill. Additionally, the bill says the state cannot “deny, regulate or restrict” abortion, not even for common-sense reasons such as parental consent for minors, informed consent or limits on taxpayer-funded abortions.


and non-doctors would be allowed to perform them.

I just left the parts in the story that matter. These parts prove that it was never about women's health.

And allowing non-doctors to perform any type of abortion? Yeah I can't see any lawsuits coming out of that.

And if the baby is born alive after a botched abortion? Kill it anyway.

How far are we really from legalized murder of anyone? I think it's a fair question. This is about as close as you can get. These people are sick.
 
Why stop there? The mother should have the right to terminate the life of the child up to its 18th birthday. WOMENS RIGHTS!
 
Next stop........euthansia for one's elderly parents who have outlived their usefullness.
 
Disgusting. Hard to believe, actually. The part about removing protections for babies born alive make this a slam dunk Supreme Court challenge. Love the way democrats label things the opposite of effect of their bills - Reproductive Health Act.

Yes, the baby was murdered under Reproductive Health Act.
 
I just read the text of the bill and didn't see the broad definition of "health" as described..
§ 2599-bb. Abortion. 1. A health care practitioner licensed, certified, or authorized under title eight of the education law, acting within his or her lawful scope of practice, may perform an abortion when, according to the practitioner's reasonable and good faith professional judgment based on the facts of the patient's case: the patient is within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient's life or health.

..and didn't see where protections for babies born alive are removed. Looked like thrust of the bill was to remove any flavor of personhood from the unborn child. So killing a pregnant women in NY carries no additional charges as a result of the death of the baby.

I don't agree with the changes in the bill, but exaggerated descriptions of it don't help the cause. Maybe there is more text to the bill, but this is what I found - https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default...e&nbspVotes=Y&Floor&nbspVotes=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y
 
I have no words. I mean, what the **** can you say to these people? Sick.
 
Next stop........euthansia for one's elderly parents who have outlived their usefullness.

Does supporting one's useless as **** on a boar millennial offspring qualify as 'useful'?
 
I just left the parts in the story that matter. These parts prove that it was never about women's health.

And allowing non-doctors to perform any type of abortion? Yeah I can't see any lawsuits coming out of that.

And if the baby is born alive after a botched abortion? Kill it anyway.

How far are we really from legalized murder of anyone? I think it's a fair question. This is about as close as you can get. These people are sick.

I'm parroting this but it was a great point I read. They'll recognize a little bacteria on the surface of Mars as life before they'll recognize the fetus as life.
 
I used to be pro-choice. That didn't stop me from feeling that my mothers' TWO abortions robbed me of two siblings. I'll never forget trying to reason with her that it would be ok to have the baby. That we would find the means to support this sibling. She would have none of it. I'm sure she puts them in her bucket of "i did the best i could" bullshit. I somewhat bought that line until i had children of my own. Once i had my oldest daughter the offhand get out of jail free card held no weight. I no longer accepted that she had done the best she could with what she had.
 
Probably some liberal plot to reduce the number of Puerto Ricans in NY. You do know liberals are the biggest closet-racists in the world?
 
Last edited:
I've said this elsewhere today, and I'm saddened by where we have gone as a people. I don't say as a country. Or as a society. As humans.

This is a stain on the entirety of humanity.

Sarge is right, where does this stop now?

It is the perfect definition and example of the "slippery slope." We used to debate when life began. Was it at inception? At 6 weeks? 14? Those arguments are dead now, like hundreds of millions of these discarded fetuses. The slippery slope worked. The Liberals won a landslide decision in Roe v Wade. That wasn't enough. Argued more. Worked the political system. And 36 years later, they now are able to abort any child until the day prior to birth.

It won't stop there. Next will be the arguments that children with ADD, or those born mentally retarded can be extinguished. The elderly.

Somewhere Dr. Kevorkian smiles.

The slide on the slippery slope will continue. And soon, in the years to come, we will debate with Liberals here and elsewhere why the mother...or the parents...or the children have the right to ask for the killing of their own living relatives or offspring.
 
If Roe v Wade was struck down tomorrow, it would have zero effect on this state law. But that doesn't stop Dems from using that as a boogie man to fund raise
 
I've said before here my daughters were born at 27 weeks. They fought to survive They cried at needle sticks, they were comforted by being held, they had unique personalities that I can still see in them somewhat even at age 18. Around us in the NICU were babies born at 25, 24 weeks...all fighting for survival with praying, hoping families and teams of doctors and nurses working 24/7 to help them make it.

The thought that anyone thinks it's ok to slaughter a baby (and in the most horrific manner imaginable, without anesthesia) like this is simply unfathomable to me. I can't see how a doctor could ever do it. I can't see how someone carrying that baby could ever do it. And their justification is "it's not a baby, it's a fetus". Just because it's inside of a uterus and not outside of one.

What kind of delusional mind do you have to have to be able to tell yourself that.
 
Last edited:
I've said before here my daughters were born at 27 weeks. They fought to survive They cried at needle sticks, they were comforted by being held, they had unique personalities that I can still see in them somewhat even at age 18. Around us in the NICU were babies born at 25, 24 weeks...all fighting for survival with praying, hoping families and teams of doctors and nurses working 24/7 to help them make it.

The thought that anyone thinks it's ok to slaughter a baby (and in the most horrific manner imaginable, without anesthesia) like this is simply unfathomable to me. I can't see how a doctor could ever do it. I can't see how someone carrying that baby could ever do it. And their justification is "it's not a baby, it's a fetus". Just because it's inside of a uterus and not outside of one.

What kind of delusional mind do you have to have to be able to tell yourself that.

You’re just being selfish. Think of all the money spent on that NICU and the hours worked by Doctors and nurses for 1 baby when they could have treated 50 illegal immigrants instead.
 
What are you conservatives whining about? There is clear proof of life in late term pregnancies... the Dems just served up the perfect counter to Roe Vs Wade on a silver platter to a conservative supreme court that really cannot ignore it... states don’t have the right to terminate self sustaining lifes on whims... its really why old school abortion proponents never fought too hard for this....
 
What are you conservatives whining about? There is clear proof of life in late term pregnancies... the Dems just served up the perfect counter to Roe Vs Wade on a silver platter to a conservative supreme court that really cannot ignore it... states don’t have the right to terminate self sustaining lifes on whims... its really why old school abortion proponents never fought too hard for this....

I can only hope you're right, but I'm not hopeful.
 
If Roe v Wade was struck down tomorrow, it would have zero effect on this state law. But that doesn't stop Dems from using that as a boogie man to fund raise

Not true... if its determined that if until they determine exactly when life begins all fetuses are protected as citizens and have rights, then states have zero ability to circumvent basic human rights... which is exactly why no one was stupid enough to touch this until the state/ city that needs population control badly did... its a very easy path forward now


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app
 
We should be able to abort the people who are for this.

I'd tell a flaming liberal to his or her face that I wish he or she was aborted.

...and they shouldn't be offended. Why? Because according to them, there's nothing offensive about abortion.
 
https://www.wnd.com/2019/01/my-interview-with-the-doctor-who-gave-america-legalized-abortion/

My interview with the doctor who gave America legalized abortion

David Kupelian's revealing conversation with NARAL co-founder Bernard Nathanson

David Kupelian | Published: 1/21/2019

During the tumultuous 1960s, after centuries of legal prohibition and moral condemnation of abortion, a handful of dedicated activists launched an unprecedented campaign, whose purpose was two-fold: first, capture the news media and thus public opinion, and then, change the nation’s abortion laws.

Their success was rapid and total – resulting in abortion being legalized in all 50 states, for virtually any reason and throughout all nine months of pregnancy. Since the Supreme Court’s controversial Roe v. Wade decision made 46 years ago today, Jan. 22, 1973, American doctors have performed well over 60 million abortions.

Although polls consistently show a vast majority of Americans oppose of unfettered abortion-on-demand, the movement’s well-crafted, almost magical slogans – appealing to Americans’ deeply rooted inclination toward tolerance, privacy and individual rights – enabled the early abortion marketers to divert attention away from the core issues of exactly what abortion does to both mother and unborn child, focusing instead on a newly created issue: “choice.” No longer was the morality of killing the unborn at issue, but rather, “who decides.”

The original abortion-rights slogans from the early ’70s – they remain virtual articles of faith and rallying cries of the “pro-choice” movement to this day – were “Freedom of choice” and “Women must have control over their own bodies.”

“I remember laughing when we made those slogans up,” recalled Bernard Nathanson, M.D., co-founder of pro-abortion vanguard group NARAL, during a lengthy interview I did with him in 1990. Reminiscing about the early days of the abortion-rights movement in the late ’60s and early ’70s, he confided, “We were looking for some sexy, catchy slogans to capture public opinion. They were very cynical slogans then, just as all of these slogans today are very, very cynical.”

Besides having served as chairman of the executive committee of NARAL – originally, the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, and later renamed the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League – Nathanson was one of the principal architects and strategists of the abortion movement in the United States. He told me an astonishing story.

Changing the law on abortion

“In 1968 I met Lawrence Lader,” Nathanson explained. “Lader had just finished a book called ‘Abortion,’ and in it had made the audacious demand that abortion should be legalized throughout the country. I had just finished a residency in obstetrics and gynecology and was impressed with the number of women who were coming into our clinics, wards and hospitals suffering from illegal, infected, botched abortions.

“Lader and I were perfect for each other. We sat down and plotted out the organization now known as NARAL. With Betty Friedan, we set up this organization and began working on the strategy.”

“We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal, enlightened, sophisticated one,” recalled the movement’s co-founder. “Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60 percent of Americans were in favor of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000, but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1 million.

“Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans, convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law.

“Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1,500 percent since legalization.”

NARAL’s brilliantly deceitful marketing campaign, bolstered by fraudulent “research,” was uncannily successful. In New York, the law outlawing abortion had been on the books for 140 years. “In two years of work, we at NARAL struck that law down,” said Nathanson.

“We lobbied the legislature, we captured the media, we spent money on public relations … Our first year’s budget was $7,500. Of that, $5,000 was allotted to a public relations firm to persuade the media of the correctness of our position. That was in 1969.”
New York immediately became the abortion capital for the eastern half of the United States.

“We were inundated with applicants for abortion,” Nathanson told me. “To that end, I set up a clinic, the Center for Reproductive and Sexual Health (CRASH), which operated in the east side of Manhattan. It had 10 operating rooms, 35 doctors, 85 nurses. It operated seven days a week, from 8 a.m. to midnight. We did 120 abortions every day in that clinic. At the end of the two years that I was the director, we had done 60,000 abortions. I myself, with my own hands, have done 5,000 abortions. I have supervised another 10,000 that residents have done under my direction. So I have 75,000 abortions in my life. Those are pretty good credentials to speak on the subject of abortion.”

At the time, CRASH was the largest abortion clinic in America.

‘A window into the womb’

After two years, Nathanson resigned from CRASH and became chief of the obstetrical service at St. Luke’s Hospital in New York City, a major teaching center for Columbia University Medical School. At that time, in 1973, a raft of new technologies and apparatuses had just become available, all designed to afford physicians a “window into the womb.”

Nathanson recounted for me the dazzling array of cutting-edge technologies coming online back then:

Real-time ultrasound: an instrument which beams high-frequency sound into the mother’s abdomen. The echoes that come back are collected by a computer and assembled into a moving picture;

Electronic fetal heart monitoring: We clamp an apparatus on the mother’s abdomen, and then continuously record the fetal heart rate, instant by instant;

Fetoscopy: an optical instrument put directly into the womb. We could watch that baby, actually eyeball it.

Cordocentesis: taking a needle, sticking it into the pregnant mother’s uterus and, under ultrasound, locating the umbilical arteries and actually putting a needle into the cord, taking the baby’s blood, diagnosing its illnesses, and treating it by giving it medicine. Today, surgery is actually performed on the unborn!​

“Anyway,” Nathanson told me, “as a result of all of this technology – looking at this baby, examining it, investigating it, watching its metabolic functions, watching it urinate, swallow, move and sleep, watching it dream, which you could see by its rapid eye movements via ultrasound, treating it, operating on it – I finally came to the conviction that this was my patient. This was a person! I was a physician, pledged to save my patients’ lives, not to destroy them. So I changed my mind on the subject of abortion.”

“There was nothing religious about it,” he hastened to add. “This was purely a change of mind as a result of this fantastic technology, and the new insights and perceptions I had into the nature of the unborn child.”

Nathanson expressed some doubts about abortion then, in an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine. “I was immediately summoned to a kangaroo court and was discharged from the pro-abortion movement, something I do not lose sleep over.”

In 1985, intrigued by the question of what really happens during an abortion in the first three months of pregnancy, Nathanson decided to put an ultrasound machine on the abdomen of a woman undergoing an abortion and to videotape what happens.

“We got a film that was astonishing, shocking, frightening,” he told me.
It was made into a film called “The Silent Scream.” It was shattering, and the pro-abortion people panicked. Because at this point, we had moved the abortion debate away from moralizing, sermonizing, sloganeering and pamphleteering into a high-tech argument. For the first time, the pro-life movement now had all of the technology and all of the smarts, and the pro-abortion people were on the defensive.​

Nathanson’s film provoked a massive campaign of defamation on the part of the pro-abortion movement, including charges that he had doctored the film. He hadn’t. “I was accused of everything from pederasty to nepotism. But the American public saw the film.”

In 1987, Nathanson released another, even stronger film called “Eclipse of Reason,” introduced by Charlton Heston. “‘The Silent Scream’ dealt with a child who was aborted at 12 weeks,” said Nathanson. “But there are 400 abortions every day in this country that are done after the third month of pregnancy. Contrary to popular misconception, Roe v. Wade makes abortion permissible up to and including the ninth month of pregnancy. I wanted to dramatize what happens in one of these late abortions, after the third month.” He explained:

They took a fetuscope, which is a long optical instrument with a lens at one end and a strong light at the other. They inserted the fetuscope into the womb of a woman at 19-1/2 weeks, and a camera was clamped on the eyepiece and then the abortionist went to work.

This procedure was known as a D&E (dilation and evacuation). It involves dilating the cervix, rupturing the bag of waters, taking a large crushing instrument and introducing it way high up into the uterus, grabbing a piece of the baby, pulling it off the baby, and just repeating this procedure until the baby has been pulled apart piece by piece.

Then the pieces are assembled on a table, put together like a jigsaw puzzle, so the abortionist can be sure that the entire baby has been removed. We photographed all this through the fetuscope. This is a shattering film.​

Thus did Bernard Nathanson, once a founder and top strategist of the pro-abortion movement, come to be staunchly committed to the cause of ending legalized abortion in America.

Nathanson is by no means the only abortionist to switch sides in the abortion war. In recent decades, hundreds of abortion providers have left their profession. On its website, NARAL has bemoaned “the dwindling number of doctors willing or trained to perform abortions.”

Putting the genie back in the bottle

Ironically, Bernard Nathanson, perhaps the closest thing to being “the man who started it all” for the “pro-choice movement” – the Edward Teller of abortion – spent the rest of his life trying to put the abortion genie back in the bottle. Like Norma McCorvey – who as the barefoot-and-pregnant “Jane Roe” was the pro-abortion plaintiff in the Supreme Court’s momentous and fateful Roe v. Wade decision – Nathanson also became utterly dedicated to putting an end to what both later came to see as a national tragedy on a par with the Nazi Holocaust.

"Let me share with you my own personal perception of the abortion tragedy,” Nathanson told one California audience:

I’m going to set it against my Jewish heritage and the Holocaust in Europe. The abortion holocaust is beyond the ordinary discourse of morality and rational condemnation. It is not enough to pronounce it absolutely evil. Absolute evil used to characterize this abortion tragedy is an inept formulation.

The abortion tragedy is a new event, severed from connections with traditional presuppositions of history, psychology, politics and morality. It extends beyond the deliberations of reason, beyond the discernments of moral judgment, beyond meaning itself. It trivializes itself to call itself merely a holocaust or a tragedy.

It is, in the words of Arthur Cohen, perhaps the world’s leading scholar on the European Holocaust, a mysterium tremendum, an utter mystery to the rational mind – a mystery that carries with it not only the aspect of vastness, but the resonance of terror, something so unutterably diabolic as to be literally unknowable to us.​

“This is an evil torn free of its moorings in reason and causality, an ordinary secular corruption raised to unimaginable powers of magnification and limitless extremity. Nelly Sachs, a poetess who wrote poems on the Holocaust in Europe and who won the Nobel Prize in 1966, wrote a poem called ‘Chorus of the Unborn.’ Permit me to give you a few lines. She said:

We, the unborn, the yearning has begun to plague us
as shores of blood broaden to receive us.
Like dew, we sink into love but still
the shadows of time lie like questions over our secret.​

‘The Hand of God’


Six years after his interview with me, Dr. Bernard Nathanson – who had long described himself as a “Jewish atheist,” including during the years when he first turned away from abortion – converted to Roman Catholicism and was baptized by John Cardinal O’Connor in New York’s St. Patrick’s Cathedral in 1996. That same year, he published his autobiography, “The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by The Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind.” Toward the end of this insightful and shatteringly honest narrative, Nathanson describes one particular experience – his presence during a 1989 Operation Rescue demonstration against Planned Parenthood in New York City – that directly precipitated his spiritual conversion to Christianity:

Now, I had not been immune to the religious fervor of the pro-life movement. I had been aware in the early and mid-eighties that a great many of the Catholics and Protestants in the ranks had prayed for me, were praying for me, and I was not unmoved as time wore on. But it was not until I saw the spirit put to the test on those bitterly cold demonstration mornings, with pro-choicers hurling the most fulsome epithets at them, the police surrounding them, the media openly unsympathetic to their cause, the federal judiciary fining and jailing them, and municipal officials threatening them – all through it they sat smiling, quietly praying, singing, confident and righteous of their cause and ineradicably persuaded of their ultimate triumph – that I began seriously to question what indescribable Force generated them to this activity. Why, too, was I there? What had led me to this time and place? Was it the same Force that allowed them to sit serene and unafraid at the epicenter of legal, physical, ethical, and moral chaos?

And for the first time in my entire adult life, I began to entertain seriously the notion of God – a god who problematically had led me through the proverbial circles of hell, only to show me the way to redemption and mercy through His grace. The thought violated every eighteenth-century certainty I had cherished; it instantly converted my past into a vile bog of sin and evil; it indicted me and convicted me of high crimes against those who had loved me, and against those whom I did not even know; and simultaneously – miraculously – it held out a shimmering sliver of Hope to me, in the growing belief that Someone had died for my sins and my evil two millennia ago.​

Bernard Nathanson passed away on Feb. 21, 2011, at the age of 84.
 
Top