For anyone who knows who Dr. Kermit Gosnell is, rest assured the title of this post is meant for hardcore pro-abortion choice defenders. I hope it’s safe to presume that even the majority of pro-abortion choice defenders would not hesitate to condemn the actions of this so-called doctor.
(CBS) — Opening statements and the start of testimony got underway today in one of the most gruesome and disturbing criminal cases in Philadelphia history.
Abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell is charged with seven counts of first-degree murder, and one count of third-degree murder (see related stories).
The prosecution alleges he induced labor and delivered live babies, then killed them by cutting or snipping their spinal cords with scissors. Witnesses who worked at the clinic are expected to testify that it was a common practice.
[…]
According to Pescatore, babies were born alive but Dr. Gosnell — or untrained, unlicensed staff members — plunged scissors into their necks and killed them.
News stories with more gruesome descriptions as well as some very troubling photos can be found elsewhere if more details of the case are needed by the reader.
There are some out there who believe a mother has the unalienable right to abort her pre-born child unencumbered. These are the people to whom I am posing this question: Except in the incident in which a woman died under his care, has Dr. Gosnell done anything morally wrong? Does the method of completing the abortion hold any bearing in whether or not the procedure is morally acceptable?
UPDATE: Something quite odd has happened. I noticed that not a single defender of on-demand abortion has weighed in on this post, not even from the usual suspects. I can only speculate one plausible reason: conscience. Could it be that abortion-choice defenders have for so long been able to philosophically defend abortion for any reason, at any time because this kind of horror — undeniable horror — has never seen the light before? It was always hypothetical and always in theory, now it’s real.
I brought this topic and question up to intentionally force on-demand abortion defenders to do just that, stare their opinion right in the face, in all its gore and defend it, if they have the stomach to. It turns out they don’t (apparently) and I’m not surprised.
Sifting Reality 
Interesting. If he hadn’t let the “things” become persons (apparently actually legally a matter of location) before he killed them, he would have been completely “in the right”. Apparently, the woman’s intention has nothing to with the personhood of a fetus.
AND we have to give this guy some credit for one amazing talent. He GAVE the fetus personhood! Truly a powerful individual! Almost like a god!
Here’s the real question to those who would give him a pass if only he had killed a fetus instead of a person: Just what in the EFF was the person just before he pulled it out??
This law that gives him the right to kill the same thing, while in the womb, that he killed “unjustifiably”, simply because it had crossed a physical plane, borders on insanity! It’s not ok to murder human beings! There is no time or place for it!
This case may just shed some light on the reality of the situation. “Born alive” is the problem? Really? That he killed it after it was born alive makes it wrong? Before… No problem! After… LOCK HIM UP!!
I know I’m ranting. It just makes me want to shake the crap out of these STUPID PRO-CHOICE PSYCHOS!
HEY! Before or after birth, IT’S THE SAME THING, KNUCKLEHEADS! IT’S A HUMAN BEING!!
Being pro-choice requires one of a few things: complete ignorance, delusion, deceit, or some combination. No clear thinking, honest person says that killing a fetus is any different than killing a born baby. None.
I’ve had only one pro-abortion person speak up on the topic, and that was in a comment when I shared an article about it. She is a fellow Canadian and, while pro-abortion, she does believe we need to have laws to limit abortion by gestational age. Her comment was that this proved the need to have safe, legal abortions for desperate women, so that they wouldn’t need to resort to going to a clinic like this. I pointed out that that state already has “safe legal” abortion up to 24 weeks. So far as I’ve seen (I’ve been away from the computer for a while), she has not responded.
No other pro-abortion people that I know have made a peep.
Kunoichi
The problem is these women weren’t getting abortions in their earliest stages of pregnancy. Every state allows for “safe” legal abortions in the early stages. These were performed well after that time frame. Your commenters caveat is irrelevant.
I know. I’m not sure what her logic was. To her, this case is somehow proof that … earlier stage abortions aren’t easy enough to get? I don’t really know. I know she read the article, so she knew what the gestation limits where in Philidelphia.
John,
Where are your pro-choice readers? I’d like to hear what they think about the difference between the right and wrong time and place to kill a human being. Certainly, they could have an opinion on these seven persons'(?) deaths.
C2C
The silence is deafening. It really says more about them than their own words ever could. Don’t worry, every abortion post they do weigh in on I will direct them here for a response!
I’ll give it a shot as a die-hard pro-choice nut:
What Gosnell did was wrong because there’s this magical thing that happens when the clump of cells crosses the plane. It becomes a person! And only believers in an outdated fairy tale can’t see that!
How’s that? Man, I wish someone would take this on!
If we wish for our laws to have logical consistency in light of the Gosnell case, we have two choices: Either legalize post-natal infanticide and acquit Gosnell, or declare that all human beings from conception onwards are legally entitled to a right to life. If this trial proves anything, I’d say it’s the glaring fact that we can no longer have it both ways.
Mj
I think the case does have that kind of significance. Now the question is will it sink in? We now have planned parenthood basically saying “well, when a woman wants an abortion, she deserves a dead baby.” We shall see.