May 13, 2013

"Justice was served to Kermit Gosnell today and he will pay the price for the atrocities he committed."

"Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell."

The Naral spin on the Gosnell verdict, quoted in a NYT report, which I arrived at via National Reviews Kathryn Jean Lopez, whose blog post is "Fetus. Fetus. Fetus. Fetus. Fetus. Fetus." ("The New York Times piece on the Gosnell verdict screams euphemisms over the trial results.")

I'm not quite getting Lopez. Did the NYT rewrite its piece? What I'm seeing at the NYT begins (boldface added): "A doctor who was responsible for cutting the spines of babies after botched abortions was convicted Monday of three counts of first-degree murder in a case that became a sharp rallying cry for anti-abortion activists."

ADDED: Apparently, the NYT did rewrite it!

150 comments:

Methadras said...

"Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell."

You have to laugh at a comment like this. The utter maudlin self-contradictions are rife with ignorance and vapid stupidity. Gosnell was the very thing they lauded and yet he is now a back alley butcher that these women 'had' to go to. He was legal, operated legally and yet still committed these atrocities and they deny the very thing that he was. He was one of them. Hey death cultist leftists, Gosnell was one of yours. Own it. Oh wait, that would be racist. Oh wait, how many black babies did he kill? I guess you got what you wanted after all.

Jay said...

Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care,

So in other words, they go about "condemning" Gosnell by reminding us why doctors like him are needed.

Gee, that's a great argument.

Titus said...

First of all love Katy Jo Lopez-she constantly has a new do but it can't mask the ugly fatty. And how sad that she is surrounded by all those conservative men but yet can't find one to bang her?

The only good news about this story is that most the babies aborted were future democrat voters.

tits.

Jay said...

As I've said before, Planned Parenthood fundraises off of any type of proposed restrictions on partial birth abortions.

The idea that these same people care about 20 school children killed in a school shooting is laughable.

SteveR said...

Ms Lopez as well as NRO folks like Ramesh take things too intensely so I end up ignoring them. Too predictable and humorless

Saint Croix said...

Wow, they totally rewrote it!

Jay said...

This is bizarre:

Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said Gosnell will "get what he deserves" now that he's been found guilty.

"Now, let's make sure these women are vindicated by delivering what all women deserve: Access to the full range of health services including safe, high-quality and legal abortion care,” she said in a statement.


edutcher said...

NARAL is in a very bad place.

A month ago, all the little man-haters would have applauded him. Now they have to act outraged. The only difference between him and some doctor in a high class hospital is he got caught.

Saint Croix said...

That baby was a fetus two hours ago.

Jay said...

They did rewrite it Ann. This was all over Twitter.

Methadras said...

And oddly, NYT comments section is a non-starter. HA!!!

Michael K said...

"The idea that these same people care about 20 school children killed in a school shooting is laughable."

Very late term abortions.

Lem said...

Lopez sought to correct the NYT?

mariner said...

"Now, let's make sure these women are vindicated by delivering what all women deserve: Access to the full range of health services including safe, high-quality and legal abortion care,”

Apparently she doesn't give a shit about what unborn babies deserve.

Oh, wait--they deserve to be killed at the whims of morally bankrupt mothers.

Got it.

EMD said...

It was a pro-choice governor and politicians who enabled Gosnell. Nice try, NARAL.

Saint Croix said...

Jon Hurdle had the by-line by himself. Now it's Jon Hurdle and Trip Gabriel.

The entire story is rewritten. That's a new story. And the old story is down the memory hole. Weird.

Is that typical for the NYT? Do they revamp on-line stories?

It's particularly odd to make these changes without any comment when there has been extensive criticism of the original story.

Drago said...

"Justice was served to Kermit Gosnell today and he will pay the price for the atrocities he committed."

"Atrocities" = standard, average, everyday abortion practices that leftists overwhelmingly support.

It's just that in this case the truth of liberal policy was exposed so the left is pretending to be outraged.

Pretending.

Who was it that said that liberalism is a religion and abortion is it's sacrament?

Mary Martha said...

It has been stealth edited... just not very stealthily.

Quaestor said...

The Most Repellent Comment of the Week Award goes to Titus for this classic: The only good news about this story is that most the babies aborted were future democrat voters.

Tell me, Titus, do you regard your style as a typically queer, or are you just an outlier?

Saint Croix said...

Hurdle always says "fetus." He's got some mental block about using the "baby" word. It makes his copy kinda incoherent.

grackle said...

They forgot to change this - Under the article's image of Gosnell's lawyer the caption reads:

Jack J. McMahon, Dr. Kermit Gosnell's lawyer, speaking on Monday. The verdict came after a five-week trial in which the prosecution and the defense battled over whether the fetuses Dr. Gosnell was charged with killing were alive when they were removed from their mothers.

Not babies delivered but fetuses "removed." Like a tumor or something.

Drago said...

BTW, garage is in typical company with msnbc (maddow) as the lefties there are reporting on supposed Bush Admin overreach while showing only blurbs from left wing sources (like the LA Times) with no followup to official and or judicial rulings/findings.

Poor garage. He's just part of the herd.

Lem said...

"The idea that these same people care about 20 school children killed in a school shooting is laughable."

Keep your hands up!

(says the self-appointed referee)

Anonymous said...

safe and legal abortion care

They've quit pretending they give a damn about "rare".

Drago said...

grackle: "Not babies delivered but fetuses "removed." Like a tumor or something."

"I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby,.."

Obama

Anybody see a pattern?

Anonymous said...

A legit abortionist "was responsible for cutting the spines of babies after botched abortions".

A former Illinois senator voted against a state law to render medical care to babies born after botched abortions. So if the abortionist left the babies in the trash bins and let them expire in slow motion, he could be invited to the WH for being a "pro-choice" hero fearlessly liberating women from unwanted mistakes against the wishes of the anti-choice Neanderthals.

Coketown said...

This is standard practice for the NYTs--which isn't a criticism, just a fact. Jill Abramson wrote an editorial a few months back on this very topic. That is, why are so many NYTs stories published and then entirely re-written?

I didn't read it too carefully, but it had something to do with first edition versus afternoon edition blah blah blah 24 hour news cycle blah blah blah internet makes it necessary to publish shoddy stories instantly blah blah blah then it's re-written into something remotely publishable blah blah blah.

I recall it being a lot of horseshit--breathless horseshit, as fits a woman who's trying to rid the publication of its reputation for liberal bias by explaining why that obviously biased news story disappeared and was replaced with something less controversial a few hours later.

Saint Croix said...

Newbusters jumped all over the Times earlier today

Quaestor said...

I have often thought that today's abortion lobby and antebellum slavocracy have much in common in that both knew full well the strength of the moral argument of their opponents and the moral weakness of their own. In the case of the apologists for slavery their moral weakness led them to oppose any restrictions on the peculiar institution for fear that one crack in the wall of slavery's teetering edifice would lead to its utter collapse. NARAL hysterical spinning of this well deserved verdict in Philadelphia derives from the same fear.

jr565 said...

"Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell."

Puh-lease. Planned parenthood and groups like that were were the prime defenders of maintaining the status quo in abortion care. Because they viewed regulating abrtion clinics as republicans trying to violate womens fundamental rights to abortions. THey are more extremist than the NRA on gun control. Far more extremist.

Browndog said...

Standard template-

Liberals, pointing to failed liberal policies as evidence for the need of liberal policies.

Coketown said...

The piece I was thinking of was in response to this controversy, which if you follow the link, you'll see Althouse makes an appearance!

It's regarding that "in my house, the Times substituted for religion" controversy, in which a bunch of people wrote about that quote in the story and then the quote disappeared from the NYTs article.

I can't find the actual editorial I was thinking about, because if you google "Jill Abramson" followed by ANYTHING, all you get are pages and pages of results focused on gender issues.

mesquito said...

Just never ever ever call it a baby no matter how many months it lives without the consent of SCOTUS.

jr565 said...

A former Illinois senator voted against a state law to render medical care to babies born after botched abortions. So if the abortionist left the babies in the trash bins and let them expire in slow motion, he could be invited to the WH for being a "pro-choice" hero fearlessly liberating women from unwanted mistakes against the wishes of the anti-choice



And that same FORMER Illinois senataor can't comment on the case. Why, beucase it would make him seem like an extremist monster?

Coketown said...

A scotus is a fetus that's been born.

Saint Croix said...

Guess what? ABC just discovered the house of horrors.

Hey, welcome to journalism! Glad you could join us. I know, I know, you've got a limited budget. Rush Limbaugh called somebody a slut and you've only got so much air time to spare.

Anonymous said...

I'm torn:

On one hand, he was murdering children.

On the other, he got rid of a lot of black people legally, and was even cheered by them for it.

What's a racist hatemonger who understands justice and innocence to do?

Enjoy the decline, sheeple!

Saint Croix said...

A scotus is a fetus that's been born.

I want that bumper sticker.

Lem said...

Rick Santorum

Banning what Gosnell was doing was argued as extreme in the floor of the Senate.

jr565 said...

Wehn it was the Trayvon Martin case Obama no problem weighing in and saying if he had a son Travon may have looked like his son.
What about the fetus who had its spine cut? No similarity between the baby with its spine cut and Obama's son?

All Obama said said is "Well, I’m familiar with it. I can’t comment on it because it’s an active trial,”
Trials over, bub. So, lets have the commentary now.

Drago said...

BTW Ann, it's time for another IRS posting now that it's clear that IRS personnel in DC (and others) were well aware of what was happening via the Cincinnati office regarding the targeting of conservative groups.

On top of that, the IRS illegally provided the applications for tax-exempt status from conservative groups to liberal Propublica.

Again, it's all just a big, big misunderstanding.

El Pollo Raylan said...

@Coketown: That piece you linked at 8:42 may explain why the NYT didn't mind the scrubbing of "terrorist" from the Benghazi spin. They had enough self-respect to not be hypocritical about "wordwashing."

Lem said...

NARAL and that whole cadre are in some measure responsible for what Gosnell was doing.

They fought long and hard for it... now they should be made to own it.

By that I mean, use it to try and save some babies via the legislatures.

You people that come here and say how appalling this is and that... write to your congressman/woman get busy and add your voice of protest to turn the culture of death into a culture of life.

edutcher said...

Quaestor said...

The Most Repellent Comment of the Week Award goes to Titus for this classic: The only good news about this story is that most the babies aborted were future democrat voters.

Repellant, maybe, but also very true.

One of the reasons the Roe Effect is the good guys' secret weapon.

If Chuckie Schumer can't get AmnestyCare through Congress and onto the desk of a Demo or RINO POTUS, the Lefties are screwed. They've been aborting themselves out of existence for 40 years and, as Rev Jeremiah said, the chickens are coming home to roost.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the honesty Whores. I was just waiting for you to finally admit you don't mind all those black babies being aborted and even killed after being born. Don't stop now, be completely honest and admit you're actually not "torn" at all.

AprilApple said...

Pro-abortionists: What Gosnell did was late term abortion (or -killing a full term baby)

Pro-abortionists want women to have full access to abortion no matter what or when.
Right?
Please correct me if I am wrong.

cdw said...

I said this first: "If travon martin was obama's son, kermit gosnell is his father."

This is the true nature of liberalism and the death cult that attends it.

Pogo said...

Inga, in that he is perfectly in sync with the founder of Planned Parenthood.

AprilApple said...

Rachel Maddow is an asshole.

El Pollo Raylan said...

Titus said...

The only good news about this story is that most the babies aborted were future democrat voters.

whoresoftheinternet said...

On the other, he got rid of a lot of black people legally, and was even cheered by them for it.

Birds of feather

Lem said...

"There is no right to destroy a child that has been born alive."

George W Bush.

Anonymous said...

edutcher said... "the Lefties are screwed. They've been aborting themselves out of existence for 40 years"

Not so fast. Haven't you heard MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry says kids belong to the state which can raise them better and not to their parents who only get in the way of the state? MSNBC is a known Democrat propaganda machine, a mouthpiece that spiels Democrat's trial balloons.

Keep your enemies close, keep you kids closer. They are ridded of theirs, they are coming for yours.

AJ Lynch said...

You are being obtuse Althouse. Of course,the NYT changed the story.

http://twitchy.com/2013/05/13/disgraceful-nyt-on-gosnells-living-breathing-victims-fetuses-removed-from-their-mothers/

Drago said...

Inga: "Thanks for the honesty Whores. I was just waiting for you to finally admit you don't mind all those black babies being aborted and even killed after being born. Don't stop now, be completely honest and admit you're actually not "torn" at all."

When your side has just been exposed as supportive off lopping off babies heads, I guess this kind of comment is all you really have left.

Own it Inga.

It's who and what your side represents.

Own. It.

CWJ said...

Ann's opening quote gave me a head shaking chuckle.

Abortion illegal, problem = "back alley butchers"

Abortion legal, Problem = "back alley butchers"

Well there you go. I'm glad that's settled.

furious_a said...

That is, why are so many NYTs stories published and then entirely re-written?

...because the SUBMIT button is the finest edit tool known to man.

edutcher said...

elkh1 said...

the Lefties are screwed. They've been aborting themselves out of existence for 40 years

Not so fast. Haven't you heard MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry says kids belong to the state which can raise them better and not to their parents who only get in the way of the state? MSNBC is a known Democrat propaganda machine, a mouthpiece that spiels Democrat's trial balloons.


As the former SOS once observed, it takes a village.

Or is it a Reich?

somefeller said...

Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell.

It's understandable why statements like this annoy anti-abortion rights activists. They were hoping that the Gosnell case would bring in more support for their cause, but instead it has shown people what a post-Roe world would look like and the case hasn't moved public opinion in their direction as they had hoped. Most thoughtful people can see the difference between Dr. Gosnell and what goes on at a Planned Parenthood facility and that must be irritating for those who had hoped otherwise. Another opportunity lost for the Santorum crowd, like the 2008 and 2012 elections. Alas. But there's always next season and I'm sure they've done some good fundraising off the publicity from that case.

jr565 said...

Lem wrote:
Rick Santorum:

"Banning what Gosnell was doing was argued as extreme in the floor of the Senate."



Yep. And note his references to the senator from California who suggested that banning this type of procedure where a baby is taken out of the womb and then killed is extreme.

And I bet Inga was against Rick Santorum when he said this and with Barbara Boxer who was defending the pro choice position.

jr565 said...

somefeller wrote

They were hoping that the Gosnell case would bring in more support for their cause, but instead it has shown people what a post-Roe world would look like and the case hasn't moved public opinion in their direction as they had hoped. Most thoughtful people can see the difference between Dr. Gosnell and what goes on at a Planned Parenthood facility and that must be irritating for those who had hoped otherwise. Another opportunity lost for the Santorum crowd, like the 2008 and 2012 elections. Alas. But there's always next season and I'm sure they've done some good fundraising off the publicity from that case

So please explain the difference to us.

Drago said...

somefeller: "Most thoughtful people can see the difference between Dr. Gosnell and what goes on at a Planned Parenthood facility and that must be irritating for those who had hoped otherwise."

Actually they can't.

Because they don't want to.

And they don't want anyone else to either.

Oh, and I'll bet Planned Parenthood isn't doing any fundraising off this........snort.

Kermit Gosnell was enabled and protected by the left.

Your concern for the children he murdered is touching.

Really.

Matt said...

somefeller,

Have you seen this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uax-FrhOioY

Renee said...

No mention of the victims in the statement?

He was convicted for murder.

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lem said...

The idea that they would have been democrats or black or Hispanic is not as compelling as the act that people like Gosnell are legally doing every day 24/7.

Whatever you or I may say about how this looks or whatever... the tragedy as I see it is that it was all done in the open... as we recognize that to mean not in secret. It was done 'legally'.

There is something seriously wrong about that and now we have a jury that said so... a panel of everyday common folks looked down the dark precipice of so called partial birth and said NO.

Æthelflæd said...

somefeller,

The Planned Parenthood in Wilmington, DE was shut down for the same kind of filthy conditions, and endangering patients.

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=9059172

Tim said...

Fetus = DIY murder, in the name of "choice."

Baby = "...ah, shit! If we'd done this five minutes ago, we'd be golden."

CEO-MMP said...

Lem said...

Rick Santorum

Banning what Gosnell was doing was argued as extreme in the floor of the Senate."


Just like the peeps that killed Ambassador Stevens!

Anonymous said...

JR. Why focus in on me? Try being honest too. Several conservative commenters here at Althouse have come out to say they are also in favor of limited abortion.

El Pollo Raylan said...

@jr565: You should cut Inga a little more slack. She did change her personhood cut-off from further out to about 8 weeks IIRC. Some of her comrades maintain abortion is OK well into the second trimester so long as it still resembles a sea horse or has no apparent brain activity.

What Gosnell did is by far and away at the outer fringe. And I recall that Inga was one of the first to denounce him.

jr565 said...

Inga wrote:
"Thanks for the honesty Whores. I was just waiting for you to finally admit you don't mind all those black babies being aborted and even killed after being born. Don't stop now, be completely honest and admit you're actually not "torn" at all."

While whore's may be arguing the racist position, it's not the pro life one. Pro lifers arent happy when blacks are killed. In fact it's often pro lifers who point out what a cunt Margaret Sanger was (Yes, I said it!) and that she viewed blacks as undesirable and that abortion should be legal to weed out said undesirabled from society. Like the good little eugenecist bitch that she was. Blacks were human weeds and reckless breeders.

And, for all your CARING Inga, you are for the eradication of not only black babies, but white babies and chinese babies, and gay babies and women babies, etc ad infinitum and wear that with a badge of honor. You cant then really get mad at someone who doesn't care that blacks are aborted can you?

Big Mike said...

Let me try to understand what Kathryn Jean Lopez is saying. Is she saying that if you're pro-life you really stand for Kermit Gosnell and the rest of the back-alley butchers, but if you're pro-choice then you have to accept Kermit Gosnell and back-alley butchers because it's a woman's right to choose.

Is that about right?

jr565 said...

Inga wrote;
JR. Why focus in on me? Try being honest too. Several conservative commenters here at Althouse have come out to say they are also in favor of limited abortion.

Because when push comes to shove your pro life position is outweighed by your anti republicanism. There is NO way you stood with Rick Santorum against this type of procedure when he spoke out against it in 1999, and when Boxer defended it. Not if you are pro choice, you don't.
You should really get off the fence and stop trying to straddle the position from both sides.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Chickie.

Lem said...

Its been my experience that whenever something wrong is done it is done away from prying eyes.

A bank robber avoids the cameras... a white collar thieve tries to cover his tracks by forging documents and what not.

Gosnell was 'found out' because he had jars and ... well... he acted as a man with a clear conscience as clean and pure as the wind driven snow... as Rush would say.

Instead of asking how did Tsarnaev became a jihadi... I want to know How did Gosnell get that way?
How did Kermit Gosnell become a baby butcher?
Where did he picked this up?

Tim said...

Gosnell is, indisputably, the natural, expected result of Roe v. Wade.

If one is pro-choice, and shocked by Gosnell, one has not thought through what it truly means to be "pro-choice" in America today.

The "pro-choice" movement can no more disclaim Gosnell than Catholics can disclaim the Pope, or humans can disclaim gravity. The relationship is not only completely natural; it would only be shocking if it did not exist.

Tim said...

"Instead of asking how did Tsarnaev became a jihadi... I want to know How did Gosnell get that way?
How did Kermit Gosnell become a baby butcher?
Where did he picked this up?"


The law, and countless political campaigns and fund-raising drives told him it was not only legal, but imperative.

There are probably dozens, possibly many dozens, of Gosnells spread throughout America.

They probably run cleaner abattoirs, with "professional" support staff, and have all the appearances of being within the law at all times, with patient records kept with German precision, but...

Lem said...

We may not get another opportunity like the one we have now to fix this wrong.

I really do hope that there are no more Gosnell out there doing this kind of thing... but the likelihood is that this is not an isolated case.

We need to stop the killings.

I hope we do the right thing.

end of rant.

jr565 said...

Lem wrote:
Whatever you or I may say about how this looks or whatever... the tragedy as I see it is that it was all done in the open... as we recognize that to mean not in secret. It was done 'legally'.

And I bet he's genuinely surprised at the reaction he got. What do you mean murder? That's the thing he does every day as an abortion doctor. Why would a woman come to him for an abortion but then people should be outraged that he actually killed kids. That's kind of the whole point.

If he didnt snip their spine but pumped poison into the uterus, what's the diff?

It's the difference of knowing how the sausage is made and not knowing how the sausage is made and getting mad at the guy who makes the sausage when he shows you how the sausage is made
Simply because pro choicers cant see a baby being killed because its in a mothers womb doesnt mean that an abortion doctor isn't killng it.
So Gosnell cut some spines. If he instead used poison and it wasn't breathing on the table before its spine was snipped that's somehow ok?

jr565 said...

"Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell."

Considering Rick Satnorum didn't actually pass the legislation he wanted it's kind of hard to blame his unrelenting efforts for driving women into the arms of a Gosnell. They are free to do so becuase Gosnell operated legally.

And what, these womend didn't get the memo for the 7 months prior to the their late term abortion that they could, I don't know, have an abortion?

Isn't THAT the reason that they wound up in Gosnell's clinic? IT has nothing to do with Republicans, it has to do with THEIR choice. They wanted to kill their kid late term. Period.

Sam L. said...

Titus at 8:05, you are so manly.
Steve R, you must not get righteous indignation.

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell.

It's understandable why statements like this annoy anti-abortion rights activists. They were hoping that the Gosnell case would bring in more support for their cause, but instead it has shown people what a post-Roe world would look like and the case hasn't moved public opinion in their direction as they had hoped. Most thoughtful people can see the difference between Dr. Gosnell and what goes on at a Planned Parenthood facility and that must be irritating for those who had hoped otherwise. Another opportunity lost for the Santorum crowd, like the 2008 and 2012 elections.


Keep telling yourself that. This is finally getting some press, so even "low info" voters like some phony folksy are being exposed.

As Æthelflæd noted, PP has been cited for the same things. Now, people know what went on inside.

PP can no longer be seen as the alternative. One abattoir is just like all the others.

Again, it must be panic at Troll Central if some phony folksy has to be called out after a hard day's "work" at the "office".

jr565 said...

"Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell."

What exasctly is the crime that NARAL is arguing against here? The baby should have had its spine snipped in a less brutal fashion? Gosnell should have used extra strong poison instead?
It's still all about the women with the broads.
I dont care if the conditions at gosnell's place are not quite as immaculate as Planned Parenthoods clinic. If at the end of the day they are disposing of a late term baby that is crying on a table, albeit more humanely THAT is the issue.
The argument apperas to be, the problem is that the late term abortion should have been performed at a nicer clinic, not that the late term abortion shouldn't have been peformed.

El Pollo Raylan said...

We need to stop the killings.

In the end, only the mothers can do that. They conceived the child and they contrived its death. Enablers like Gosnell were just a pair of hands, acting under a mother's wishes, using his specialized "know-how."

There will always be mothers who don't want their own children. But it must help enormously not to even think of them as children--which is exactly what the NYT author did before changing his mind.

Lem said...

The law, and countless political campaigns and fund-raising drives told him it was not only legal, but imperative.

Well then we have to not only match that but surpass it in the opposite direction.

The pro-life movement suffered when some people took it beyond the bounds of the town halls and legislatures. You know the operation rescue and the abortion clinic bombings and the targeting of abortion doctors.

That hurt the pro-life cause.

We cant let that... to the extent that can possibly be avoided we got to avoid that kind of law breaking... let me call it for what it is.




jr565 said...

"Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell."

That and that they waited 8 months before going for an abortion. Which, NARAL is suggesting should be acommodated. But for the mean republicans who oject to babies having their spines cut while they are alive on the table. Boo, Republicans!
NARAL are a bunch of sick puppies.

Teri said...

Gosnell had JARS of preserved babies feet. (I originally thought it was just one jar, but no, it was multiple.) He took a device that was primarily razor blades imbedded in wax and inserted it into pregnant women to cut up the baby. It cost most of those women the ability to ever have a child.

He deliberately hired unqualified people, paid them under the table and had them killing the babies that survived as well as administering anesthesia. And the only reason he ever went to trial, was because he got greedy and sold oxycontin. Women at that clinic got venereal disease because he was using unsterilized instruments. (He liked to reuse disposable stuff. Saved him money.)

You're wrong about which group gets a boost out of this. People that considered themselves pro choice have had to take a good look at what that means. And if we have a choice between legal abortion with no restrictions and no legal abortions, I'm going with no legal abortions. If you don't agree, I suggest you spend a little time looking at that picture of the 30 week old baby that he killed. If you think that this is acceptable behavior, you haven't been following this case very closely.

Æthelflæd said...

The light switch in the kitchen has been switched on and the roaches think it is indecent. Turn the light off so we can eat in peace!

kentuckyliz said...

I have thought all along that Gosnell must be thinking, what's the big deal? If the woman doesn't want her fetus, and no one is going to miss the fetus, no one is getting hurt. What's the crime, if it is legal for a woman to eliminate her fetus problem?

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jr565 said...

The light switch in the kitchen has been switched on and the roaches think it is indecent. Turn the light off so we can eat in peace!

The reaction to Gosnell from many pro choicers reminds me of the Febreze air freshener commercial. WHere they have people blindfolded and they put them in a room with garbage but then a Febreze is put in there and the announcer asks them what they smell. And they all say it smells like "springtimey" and "very flowery".
Then the blindfold is removed and they realize they are in a room of trash and they laugh and laugh at how the Fabreze hid the odor. If they only knew.

The blind fold was just removed in this case. How does it smell? All springtimey?

Michael K said...

"Several conservative commenters here at Althouse have come out to say they are also in favor of limited abortion. "

Yes, I agree with Bill Clinton that abortion should be "safe, legal and rare."

Except I'm not lying.

Lem said...

In the end, only the mothers can do that.

Yea... but by shifting from the all permissible 'you-can-wait-to kill-your-baby-until-he-can-practically-walk-himself-to-the bus-stop' to... say the second trimester?

We would be, at the very least, going in the right direction.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

Don't understand how pro-abortion people can dare open their mouths on this one.

Baby killed outside the womb=atrocity

Baby killed inside the womb=A-OK

In both cases the woman gets what she came for, which is a dead baby.

pjckmen said...

My occupation is in the field of entertainment. Hoping to bring people relaxing moments on the computer. I mainly do in the field of online games. As is the page: Kizi |
Juegos

Æthelflæd said...

Pro-lifers have been warning there were roaches in the kitchen for years. "Just turn the lights back off," says NARAL, "and there will be no problem".

jr565 said...

Yes, I agree with Bill Clinton that abortion should be "safe, legal and rare."

Rare to me kind of implies something that doesn't happen too often. Like, I don't know, a school shooting.
If it happens more than a million times a year you can't really say it's rare.

If it were a steak it woudln't be rare it would be well done.

traditionalguy said...

It's a tangled web they weave when they start a narrative at the Media Kitchen.

So now the higher moral ground is that pro abortionists take is that abortionists are like executioners doing a legal job, but if by chance or act of God a condemned thingee survives the hanging/head cutting off attempt, then the condemned thingee CANNOT BE EXECUTED TWICE, so the second execution becomes cold blooded murder.

So it's the GOP in Congress' fault for not funding the training of better executioners and making them practice their skills more.

Got that?

Lem said...

And if we have a choice between legal abortion with no restrictions and no legal abortions, I'm going with no legal abortions.

That's a big part of the problem...imho... while we perpetually argue, like the Israelis and the Palestinians, more babies die rather than less. Because we rather focus on an all or nothing struggle.

William said...

There has to be something suspect about a doctor who specializes in late term abortions. I think there's a good possibility that Gosnell is more typical than not of those who so make their money. It's just not the kind of profession that going to attract a lot of idealists......You guys can argue the rest of the night about the pros and cons of abortion, but there can be no debate about the rights and wrongs of snipping a baby's spinal column. To paraphrase Lincoln, if that's not wrong than nothing on earth is wrong.

Tim said...

"The pro-life movement suffered when some people took it beyond the bounds of the town halls and legislatures. You know the operation rescue and the abortion clinic bombings and the targeting of abortion doctors."

Agreed.

Sadly, their sin of excessive zeal in defense of life turns people off, compared to the sin of excessive zeal in defense of "choice."

And that's not to make light of, or in anyway diminish or rationalize clinic bombings or killing abortionists. It's more a commentary are single-issue voters and protesters, on both sides.

Two wrongs still do not make a right.

And while we citizens argue, the roll of 50 million dead since 1973 simply, inexorably grows longer... Culture of Death, indeed. Indisputably so, thanks to "pro-choicers."

Lem said...

Tim I think you and I are on the same page.

Tim said...

"That's a big part of the problem...imho... while we perpetually argue, like the Israelis and the Palestinians, more babies die rather than less. Because we rather focus on an all or nothing struggle."

Agreed, again.

I would take any limit on abortion, even one that fell far short of my hopes, to save some lives.

Tim said...

Lem: Yes.

As well as on Marco Scuturo and Cody Ross.

Don't know where you stand on the DH though...I hate it.

It's an abomination.

God fully intended pitchers to hit.

Check our Barry Zito. Carrying the bat quite well for his Giants, despite starting the first seven or so years of his career in Oakland, lol!

JAL said...

I suggest you spend a little time looking at that picture of the 30 week old baby that he killed. If you think that this is acceptable behavior, you haven't been following this case very closely.

One of my kids was a 28-30 week preemie. 2 lbs 14 oz. NICU back in the day before NICU was all high tech.

Flies a Black Hawk on occasion. Supports and defends the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and bears true faith and allegiance to the same.

Amazing what a 30 week old fetus can grow up to be and do if you don't snip the neck.

Lem said...

Boston went to Texas and it was never the same again.

We aren't hitting... its gotten so bad Lester had to pitch a one hitter for us to win 1 out of the last 8.

I think they got to shake up the team before its too late.

Levi Starks said...

News flash!
Dr who made a career of murdering babies is.....
Convicted of murdering babies.

Gahrie said...

On a day in which a man was convicted of murdering newborn babies, NARAL decided that it was all about them.....

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

I don't see what the defense could say to the obvious question, which is why anyone would make it a usual practice to take a stillborn infant and cut through its spinal cord. If the purpose wasn't to kill, what the hell was it?

Franciscan44 said...

Doesn't the NY Times have a professional responsibility to at least publicly acknowledge that they have substantially changed this article? Isn't what they did a significant no-no?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for sharing the updated news with us.Keep good work in the blog.

Caregiver In San Diego

Barbara said...

Yesterday I cared for a neighbor's baby while she took care of some business she had. He was born in January at 24 weeks gestation, labor induced because his mother suddenly became eclamptic and they both might have died. When I fed this now beautiful infant, changed him, played with him and he grinned at me, all I could think about was Dr. Gosnell and his clinic -- what happened to others who were in the womb even longer than this adorable child. In addition to hating Gosnell for his crimes, I hate him for what we had to hear about those horrifying murders, images I suspect we'll carry for a lifetime.

sabeth.chu said...

America has a long tradition of classifying Humans as property - even fought a bloody war about it. I don't think this socalled doctor thought he was involved in a matter concerning humans. He was concerned in getting the woman's property, called fetus, in the proper shape for disposal, as agreed between the parties beforehand.

This Gosnell has been dealt with. What bothers me is that nobody, but really nobody here reflects on the guilt of the women? They disposed of their property - my fingernail, my wart, my fetus - and thus they accepted what happened to their offspring.
Nothing has changed. They take their fetus to the butcher's, as their great grandmothers took their horses and their hogs and their slaves into Kansas. It's even worse, because they let their slaves live - mostly at least - because they were useful as long you could get work out of them. A Child cannot offer you service.

As for NYT - this is nothing - they still peddle the inanities of the last Century, and who cares. PC till you drop, and the sooner the better

Saint Croix said...

Justice was served to Kermit Gosnell today and he will pay the price for the atrocities he committed.

That is just a really quick gear-shift between "right thing to do" and "atrocity."

I looked up the word "atrocity."

1. Appalling or atrocious condition, quality, or behavior; monstrousness.

2. An appalling or atrocious act, situation, or object, especially an act of unusual or illegal cruelty inflicted by an armed force on civilians or prisoners.


Justice Breyer in Stenberg v. Carhart, describing the "right":

Considering the fact that those procedures seek to terminate a potential human life, our discussion may seem clinically cold or callous to some, perhaps horrifying to others.

So it's an unenumerated right to horrify the American people, apparently. How long does the Supreme Court think that sort of logic (way to go, Harvard!) will hold up? Are you just relying upon ignorance and our Pravda media?

Sooner or later, people will find out. And then where will you be?

Jay said...

somefeller said...
They were hoping that the Gosnell case would bring in more support for their cause, but instead it has shown people what a post-Roe world would look like and the case hasn't moved public opinion in their direction as they had hoped


You're funny dude;

solid 58 percent majority of adults believes abortion should be legal (a) never, or (b) “only in a few” circumstances. By contrast, just 39 percent hold the traditional “pro-choice” view that abortion should be legal in “all” or “most” cases.

- Among those selecting one of the two pro-life options (never or rarely legal) are 57 percent of women and 57 percent of young people.

- Americans are overwhelmingly opposed to second (64 percent) and third (80 percent) trimester abortions.


Don't worry, you're not actually interested in facts intruding on your world view.

Carry on.

Saint Croix said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Saint Croix said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Saint Croix said...

I will no longer tinker with the machinery of death.

Justice Harry Blackmun, talking about the death penalty.


rhhardin said...

Not so much justice as fallout from a confused political system running on opposed and incoherent dogmas.

I'd say the result is right but unjust because of the legal confusion about it. It's a matter in this case of one side's dogma winning with the jury that could as easily go the other way.

The correct dogma would be that being a person is not a property of the fetus or baby but of society taking the fetus or baby as a person.

The line is birth, and don't cross it.

Dogmas of personhood relying on properties of the fetus or baby will find no such line and slide into incoherence.

My dogma has the advantage of being an account of how the word person is actually used.

For a while it's a "taking-as" matter, just as you take your toddler as having paid for a meal if he hands the cashier the money.

He learns to pay for meals, as a result. Grows into it.

Just as he learns to be a person if you take him as a person.

Saint Croix said...

while we perpetually argue, like the Israelis and the Palestinians, more babies die rather than less. Because we rather focus on an all or nothing struggle.

No, you can't blame pro-life people, or even pro-choice people. You can only blame the Supreme Court. They did it. They decided to write a (very bad) abortion statute for the entire country. We're not allowed to fix it or tinker with it.

Saint Croix said...

he learns to be a person if you take him as a person.

You call that a line?

What if I decide your toddler is not a person, and I stab him?

The line is birth, and don't cross it.

The baby crosses your line. So now, in the middle of birth, she's half-person, half-thing?

And you are defining a preemie at six months as a person, while you define an unborn baby at nine months as property?

A person is a live human being.

Pogo said...

NARAL's response, blaming prolifers for Gosnell, is the wife-beater's argument:
See what you made me do?"

Pogo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pogo said...

NARAL tweet of the day: "Everyone else seems afraid to say it, but fetuses are kind of a c*nt, right?"

Saint Croix said...

Dogmas of personhood relying on properties of the fetus or baby will find no such line and slide into incoherence.

And I do not think "live human being" slides into incoherence. But I do think giving authoritarians the power to strip people of humanity leads to Nazism and slavery. And infanticide.

Nor is there "incoherence" in noting that all 50 states have rules in place in regard to when people die.

Saint Croix said...

rhhardin, you reason like Plato. Which is an insult, since he was a baby-killing slave-owner. But unlike Plato, you've had 2000 years of Judeo-Christianity to get your mind right. And still you think like a pagan.

AprilApple said...

Somefeller - Then you agree with Obama. Obama is for all forms of abortion no matter what, including late term abortion.

Saint Croix said...

In fact I'm insulting pagans by comparing them to you! Hippocrates was a pagan, and yet he had a better grasp of ethics than the modern socialist mind.

Matthew Sablan said...

Gosnell, by definition, was not a back alley abortionist, by virtue of getting a clean bill of health from the state until outside investigators found the bodies in plain view.

AprilApple said...

"Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell."


What a load of horseshit. Same tired leftwing pro-abortion talking point.

Matthew Sablan said...

Usually when the NYT or someone does a stealth edit, though, there are places all over the Internet with screen grabs; anyone got one of the original article?

X said...

Gosnell is the face of Inga, phx, Planned Parenthood, and the Democrat Party. own it. and even if you deny you own it, you'll still own it with your actions, so own that.

AprilApple said...

So the NYT did re-write and changed "fetus" to "baby".

Hope and change!

wait... Hope choice and change!

The only "choice" progressive leftwing democrats care about.

dc said...

Naral claims that Gosnell was a back-alley butcher.
Okay, so why were upstanding abortion clinics sending clients to a back-alley butcher?

Scott M said...

Okay, so why were upstanding abortion clinics sending clients to a back-alley butcher?

Matter, meet Crux.

Phil 3:14 said...

Pro-choice:

Would you like your baby killed in the womb

-OR-

outside?

El Pollo Raylan said...

Aborted word choices in NYT article survive attempts to expunge.

AprilApple said...

Will the NYT investigate all the other "back alley butchers" who perform late term abortions?

What happened to investigative journalism in this nation? With the election of their super hero, it seems to have vanished.

Saint Croix said...

I'm continually struck by how stupid our Supreme Court Justices are. Consider John Paul Stevens.

In FCC v. Pacifica he makes it a crime to say bad words on the radio. Despite a free speech clause that clearly says the federal government has no authority in this area. Stevens wants to punish people for saying "obscene" things.

But killing a baby outside the birth canal? Not obscene at all, apparently. In fact, the Constitution requires it.

It's just a blatant inability to think or reason. Stevens was an embarrassment. The entire Supreme Court has made clowns of themselves. And it's all because of their contempt for words--the basis of law--and their secret belief that they are so morally superior they can and should impose their morality on the American people.

Saint Croix said...

And I realize large numbers of Americans are offended by the word "fuck." But you would think an Ivy league jurist would realize that this offense is based on fears of infanticide. Fucking--sex without love--is what leads to baby-killing. That's why it's a bad word!

Stevens apparently has no idea why he thinks the word "fuck" is obscene. He can't be bothered to use rational thought. Punishing people for saying bad words is not only unconstitutional, it's utterly mindless. Especially since Stevens does not give a fuck for the baby's life.

Saint Croix said...

Sexually repressive is perhaps a better term than "stupid." The Supreme Court is made up of people who are extremely uptight about sex. They want those bad words to go away. And if you make a baby, they want the baby to go away, too.

Repression, repression, repression.

EMD said...

In the end, only the mothers can do that.

"Mother" is too generous a term for these women.

Matthew Sablan said...

Whoa. Some of those quotes aren't even close. "Clinic workers who appeared as witnesses" for example doesn't even appear -at all.- Neither does the "kept the severed feet" appear (using a quick CTRL+F method of searching.) This is so different I don't know if it is actually a re-write, or if they scrapped the previous article and just posted a new one.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

Women should remain available for sex, taxation, and democratic leverage. They went from "barefoot and pregnant" to barefoot and perpetually pregnant. I suppose that's some kind of "progress", but it is wholly unqualified.

Women, and men, dream of material, physical, and ego instant (or immediate) gratification. There are opportunistic individuals, cooperatives, and activists who promise them fulfillment without perceived consequences. The outcome of incorporating human and civil rights was denigration of individual dignity and devaluation of human life.

The Left needs to review their various and diverse dreams, the various and diverse promises they have made, and understand that they sponsor corruption of individuals, society, and humanity. They need to appreciate why their principles are the foundation for a philosophy of death.

As for people who support normalization of dysfunctional behaviors, and this nonsense generally, they need to remember that individuals are only eligible for liberty if they are capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior. The crises of their making.

n.n said...

A scotus is a fetus that's been born.

Exactly! We need to stop arbitrary discrimination against a human life based on its age or stage of development. Women, and men, need to voluntarily accept responsibility for the potential, but predictable, outcome of their voluntary behavior.

It seems that without a name, and a face, a human life loses its emotional appeal. It is certain that without a voice and Arms, a human life will suffer involuntary exploitation, even in a so-called "civilized" society.

n.n said...

Saint Croix:

It's a clinic of horrors. The association must be made correctly in order to limit the actors' dissociation of risk. The people who support normalization of this nonsense cannot be allowed to evade responsibility for their advocacy and actions. The causes of this nonsense must be exposed for scrutiny, beginning with women and men having irresponsible sex, and continuing to their patrons in government, Planned Parenthood, etc.

Methadras said...

Mary Martha said...

It has been stealth edited... just not very stealthily.


Those are known as ninja edits.

Saint Croix said...

Althouse went on a very funny rant about how the Washington Post stuck its Benghazi story (or rather its story about a reporter who was covering Benghazi) in the Style section, right next to weddings.

Well, the Washington Post has put the Gosnell conviction in the Health section.

Maybe one day infanticide will break through the glass ceiling of the Washington Post?

Saint Croix said...

Gosnell has avoided the death penalty.

And I see the Washington Post is finally putting this story under "National" news.

Apparently the death penalty is not Health. Or Style!