Infanticide in the City of Brotherly Love

by Sal on January 21, 2011

in Bioethics,Law,Media,Media Bias,Right to Life

A Philadelphia Grand Jury recently issued an indictment against Dr. [sic] Kermit Gosnell, a Philadelphia abortionist, accusing him, among other things, of six counts of murder, multiple counts of infanticide, abuse of corpses, and several other charges.  Gosnell is being charged with murder because in at least six cases, he delivered a third-trimester otherwise viable baby, and then proceeded to cut the baby’s spinal cord, thus murdering it.  The sad part about this is, that in hundreds of other cases, he performed almost the same procedure, but killed the baby that was partially born (a partial-birth abortion).

Gosnell also kept parts of the aborted babies in glass jars in his lab, calling them “research”, and routinely disposed of the babies in shoe boxes.  The media has tried to say that Gosnell has nothing to do with Roe v Wade*, but as Michelle Malkin points out, the politically-correct religious fervor of the pro-abortion movement prevented any intervention into stopping Gosnell, despite repeated warning signs.

Gosnell is the culmination of the natural progression towards a lack of respect for unborn life that the pro-abortion movement has fostered.  Whatever your feelings on abortion in general, most people agree that this is sick.  Most people agree on that point.  So when is abortion acceptable or reasonable?  Is it a partial birth abortion, which typically takes place mere moments before the murders that Gosnell is accused with take place?  Again, most people on reflection would probably say no.  Is it up to the point of viability?  More people would agree with this, but how do you define viability as the definitive point when the definition of viability keeps changing?  Is it some arbitrary “trimester” categorization?  What makes the first trimester so different from the second?  What is so different on day 90 of the first trimester and day 1 of the second trimester?

The truth of the matter is that there is no reasonable scientific definition to when a baby becomes a person.  Are we as a culture prepared to say that our respect for human life is arbitrary and just based on the whims of legislators?  What defines our respect for life in this world and makes a person a person?  I defy anyone to give me a definition that includes abortion and is not arbitrary.

* Sidenote:  In another example of Media Bias, Time published an article, Why the Pa. Abortion Doc’s Case is About Poverty, Not Roe v. Wade.  If a nutcase killed an abortion doctor, Time and the rest of the media would be happy to place the blame on all pro-lifers.

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: