Kermit Gosnell

21 posts

Flag Post

You might have heard about the “story that isn’t front page news, but should be”, which ironically, is beginning to sweep the news. Kermit Gosnell was an abortion Dr. who is on trial now for some supposedly horrific offenses, among them (beyond) late term abortion:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/why-dr-kermit-gosnells-trial-should-be-a-front-page-story/274944/

What are your feelings on this issue, particularly as it relates to abortion in general? Do you think this is criminal and unacceptable, or just an abortion Dr. who took things a little too far? What are your feelings on very late term abortion; is there a point (before delivery) at which viability makes it akin to manslaughter? Do you think better oversight by the Pennsylvania Department of Health could have prevented any of the incidents alleged in the article?

 
Flag Post

Never heard of this case before.
But it seems to me like those were essentially back-alley abortions performed by someone with some medical training.
And, surprise, surprise, back-alley abortions are dangerous, especially when performed by someone who does not respect the ideals a doctor usually has to subscribe to.

 
Flag Post

I guess the doctor had a legit clinic of some type with a good front, but yeah the whole operation seemed really creepy.

 
Flag Post

If he had snipped the babies a few seconds before they were out he could have avoided it.

@World UnLogic

 
Flag Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO4ZkL9WVh8

Yes, this is not Gosnell, but nevertheless an interesting find.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO4ZkL9WVh8

Yes, this is not Gosnell, but nevertheless an interesting find.

Did you mean to link to “Every Sophisticated Man For 10 Minutes HD”? It might have a following of some type, but I’m not sure I understand what this strange parody has to do with abortion.

 
Flag Post

I’m more concerned about him spreading venereal diseases with infected instruments. He’s a doctor, he should know how to clean his instruments properly before doing a surgical procedure. As for abortions, that’s a different issue that manages to strike a chord in some people. Personally, I’d rather have the child euthanized than be born in a financially unstable family that doesn’t love or take care of it. I can see how a lot of people would disagree with this, and I respect that.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by slasher:

I’m more concerned about him spreading venereal diseases with infected instruments. He’s a doctor, he should know how to clean his instruments properly before doing a surgical procedure. As for abortions, that’s a different issue that manages to strike a chord in some people. Personally, I’d rather have the child euthanized than be born in a financially unstable family that doesn’t love or take care of it. I can see how a lot of people would disagree with this, and I respect that.

So what you are saying is that a child is better off dead than given up for adoption.

When the attempted suicide rate among such children reaches 50%, I’ll take that as a sign that they agree with you. Until then, don’t go telling them they’re better off dead and encouraging their murder, please.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ceasar:

So what you are saying is that a child is better off dead than given up for adoption.

Adoption is not always an option.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by slasher:

Personally, I’d rather have the child euthanized than be born in a financially unstable family that doesn’t love or take care of it. I can see how a lot of people would disagree with this, and I respect that.

This argument will go on for ages, I predict. I would rather see a fetus euthanized than cut up in pieces; you would think that the way abortions are currently done is just barbaric. I mean, if we take our pets to the vet to get a $15 shot (overdose of general anesthesia) to peacefully put them down, why could they not do the same thing in this scenario?

Disclaimer: Not saying I advocate abortion with that statement, but when I think about how abortions are done, I just wonder why it’s performed in such a manner when there seems to be better things out there.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by slasher:

Personally, I’d rather have the child euthanized than be born in a financially unstable family that doesn’t love or take care of it. I can see how a lot of people would disagree with this, and I respect that.

This argument will go on for ages, I predict. I would rather see a fetus euthanized than cut up in pieces; you would think that the way abortions are currently done is just barbaric. I mean, if we take our pets to the vet to get a $15 shot (overdose of general anesthesia) to peacefully put them down, why could they not do the same thing in this scenario?

Disclaimer: Not saying I advocate abortion with that statement, but when I think about how abortions are done, I just wonder why it’s performed in such a manner when there seems to be better things out there.

Actually, doctors regard abortion as taking “foreign material” out of a female’s uterus. They can’t treat the fetus as living beings or else they become murderers.

Yes, what you are talking about is just “euthanizing” a human. The word “euthanizing” needs a quotation mark here because obviously the fetus does not request the death.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pulsaris:

Actually, doctors regard abortion as taking “foreign material” out of a female’s uterus. They can’t treat the fetus as living beings or else they become murderers.

Yes, what you are talking about is just “euthanizing” a human. The word “euthanizing” needs a quotation mark here because obviously the fetus does not request the death.

Okay, so they just give it a shot that works just like euthanasia but they don’t call it that, all problems solved.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by Pulsaris:

Actually, doctors regard abortion as taking “foreign material” out of a female’s uterus. They can’t treat the fetus as living beings or else they become murderers.

Yes, what you are talking about is just “euthanizing” a human. The word “euthanizing” needs a quotation mark here because obviously the fetus does not request the death.

Okay, so they just give it a shot that works just like euthanasia but they don’t call it that, all problems solved.

The drug costs money, and will you pay more for a “humanitarian” abortion then?

By the way, anything injected into the fetus also go into the mother.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pulsaris:

The drug costs money, and will you pay more for a “humanitarian” abortion then?

By the way, anything injected into the fetus also go into the mother.

How much money would it cost, though?

Also, it takes more to knock a fully grown adult than an unborn fetus.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pulsaris:

Yes, what you are talking about is just “euthanizing” a human. The word “euthanizing” needs a quotation mark here because obviously the fetus does not request the death.

Neither do the cats/dogs though; they are kind of at our mercy. There’s no doubt they are a life, but we decide based on emotions/finances whether they persevere when times get tough.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by Pulsaris:

The drug costs money, and will you pay more for a “humanitarian” abortion then?

By the way, anything injected into the fetus also go into the mother.

How much money would it cost, though?

Also, it takes more to knock a fully grown adult than an unborn fetus.

Not trying to argue with you, but around ten years ago I heard a bunch about a guy named Larry McNabney; I guess his wife was tired of him and dosed him with horse tranquilizers before stuffing him in a freezer. He died, but bear in mind this was a fully grown man.

 
Flag Post

This one “doctor” did bad things with abortion, this is PROOF that all abortion is evil and should be illegal.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by CROWn_Royal:

This one “doctor” did bad things with abortion, this is PROOF that all abortion is evil and should be illegal.

True dat. :3

 
Flag Post

So what you are saying is that a child is better off dead than given up for adoption.
When the attempted suicide rate among such children reaches 50%, I’ll take that as a sign that they agree with you. Until then, don’t go telling them they’re better off dead and encouraging their murder, please.

Mighty generous of you. I trust you don’t mind fielding my tax expenses in maintaining adoption? Or, everyone else’s who are not squeamish about abortion? I’ll stop telling the poor to abort, when I am no longer financing their mistakes. Until then, I think I have some say in the matter.

Also, the majority of unadopted orphans, which form the majority of orphans, go on to be repeat criminals. So, hurrah. There is a lot of good science to suggest that out growing acceptance of abortion is the leading reason our crime rate is going down.

 
Flag Post

This letter is going to be a book of revelations to many readers. In particular, many will be surprised to learn that Dr. Kermit Gosnell, M.D. doesn’t know everything. I will start this discussion by arguing that Dr. Gosnell controls a secret underground empire. Then, I will present evidence that Dr. Gosnell embraces interventionism with open arms. Now I could go off on that point alone, but gruesome, perfidious Luddites disarm us morally, make us rootless and defenseless, and then destroy us. That said, we mustn’t lose sight of who the real enemy is: Kermit Gosnell and his testy sympathizers.

I can only act as a positive role model for younger people if Dr. Gosnell’s headstrong gang is decimated down to those whose inborn lack of character permits them to betray anyone and everyone for the well-known thirty pieces of silver. I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, Dr. Gosnell once said that he’s above everyone else. Oh, please. I’m just glad I hadn’t eaten dinner right before I heard him say that. Otherwise, I’d probably still be vomiting too hard to tell you that I never intend to offend anyone, Dr. Gosnell included. Alas, the following statement may upset a few people: Dr. Gosnell’s helots should commit to a process that respects civil liberties, civil rights, and civil discourse. Some people squirm a bit when they they read things like that, but such statements are the key to explaining why Dr. Gosnell is stepping over the line when he attempts to prevent us from getting in touch with our feelings—way over the line.

There’s something fishy about Dr. Gosnell’s insinuations. I think he’s up to something, something complacent and perhaps even prissy. What Dr. Gosnell says and what Dr. Gosnell does are not necessarily the same thing. Sounds pretty beer-guzzling, doesn’t it? But is it any more so than Dr. Gosnell’s bleeding-heart vituperations? If we don’t hold him responsible for the hatred he so furtively expresses right now, then Dr. Gosnell’s ruses will soon start to metastasize until they dominate or intimidate others. His reaction to our latest crisis diligently fulfils the first law of reactive politics. That is to say, do something, no matter how loquacious. Issue orders. Look busy. Forget about how if we fail in our task of suggesting the kind of politics and policies that are needed to restore good sense to this important debate, then he will pamper blasphemous ignoramuses. Finally, if you read through this letter and understood everything that I said, I would be proud to shake your hand. Even if you followed only a few points, I avouch that you are now a step closer to realizing that like fire, Dr. Kermit Gosnell, M.D. is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:

You might have heard about the “story that isn’t front page news, but should be”, which ironically, is beginning to sweep the news. Kermit Gosnell was an abortion Dr. who is on trial now for some supposedly horrific offenses, among them (beyond) late term abortion:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/why-dr-kermit-gosnells-trial-should-be-a-front-page-story/274944/

What are your feelings on this issue, particularly as it relates to abortion in general? Do you think this is criminal and unacceptable, or just an abortion Dr. who took things a little too far? What are your feelings on very late term abortion; is there a point (before delivery) at which viability makes it akin to manslaughter? Do you think better oversight by the Pennsylvania Department of Health could have prevented any of the incidents alleged in the article?

It shows quite clearly that there are women so desperate for abortion that they will not only have them even if they are illegal, but that they will also risk their very lives in the process(will at least the poor ones, the rich have better options available than of the type of Kermit Gosnell).
This is also not a case of an abortion Dr. taking some political agenda or individual philosophical world-view to far. Its a Doctor/Clinic that was unable to manage operating a business/life. Keeping hygienic standards is a basic economic necessity for almost any business. A business that drops to far below the average standard of its type of industry tends to lose costumers(especially those that can afford to go elsewhere) it will in general fail or become a gathering point of those who can´t afford to go elsewhere and are desperate enough to come despite the bad hygienic standards. Sometimes such failing businesses start supplying illegal services too keep the influx of desperate customers steady.
This is such a case. The bad hygiene made normal customers look elsewhere, the Clinic then turned to supplying the desperate with illegal abortions to keep in business.

Better oversight by the Pennsylvania Department of Health could certainly have prevented some of the alleged incidents. But its unlikely that much better oversight by the Pennsylvania Department of Health would have been possible. Good or even adequate government management is not exactly a strong point of American culture.

To late term Abortions, i don´t think there is a time before delivery which makes it akin to manslaughter. The only restriction i see is on how its done. If the way its done does exactly the same amount of physical and emotional damage to the women as a premature-birth, which generally means if the baby is totally and wholly removed from the body women before being killed, then at that point it makes no sense to kill it.