Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

Child Murderer Convicted

by Sam Huntington

Kermit Gosnell has been convicted of three counts of murder in the first degree, and found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of Karnamaya Mongar, along with a number of other charges, which include infanticide, conspiracy, and corruption. Many of the 250-counts were tied to violations of state abortion law the state of Pennsylvania left unchecked for 30 years.

As a consequence of these convictions, Dr. Gosnell could face the death penalty, except that his case will be appealed forever and a day until Gosnell finally expires from old age. He is presently 72-years old.



Abortion has joined race and war as the most debatable topics in the United States. It involves human relationships, ethics, emotion, religion, and law. There are also moral, social, and medical aspects to this debate. While there are many points of view, we seem to have politicized it into two camps: pro-life, and pro-choice. In the United States today, 1.6 million pregnancies end in abortion every year. Poor women are three times more likely to abort their children; black women three times more likely to abort than white women (503/1,000 live births); unmarried women four to five times more likely to abort than married women, and this has doubled among teenaged girls.

The legal field has not made the debate any easier. In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decided that abortion is a woman’s own right and choice. The author of the court’s opinion, Justice Harry Blackmun, was a Nixon appointee. He opined, “Few decisions are more personal and intimate, more properly private, or more basic to individual dignity and autonomy, than a woman’s decision —with the guidance of her physician and within the limited specified in Roe— whether to end her pregnancy. A woman’s right to make that choice freely is fundamental.”

In 1973, however, fetuses weren’t regarded as children. Nor can we say that Justice Blackmun gave enough consideration to the dignity and protection of human life accorded to the viable child yet unborn. Now that view is changing —as it should, in my opinion. A nation that allows mothers to murder their own children at-will is immoral. More than one and a half million abortions annually is nothing short of infanticide on an unimaginable scale —and we permit this unconscionable situation to exist, for the most part, because of one of these possibilities: women are either too licentious to keep their legs closed, or they are too stupid to use contraception.  Yes, there are exceptions to this, and we must discuss those caveats also.

It is time for a renewed debate on the issue of abortion. Not a political debate, as in the past, but an honest dialogue about the sanctity of life vs. the convenience to women of ridding their bodies of the evidence of their immorality.  It has become entirely too easy to abort a child.  It is unthinkable that leftists continue to cling to the madness of Margaret Sanger, who saw abortion as part of the solution to increasing minority populations.  And it is minority populations who continue to have the highest percentages of abortions, per capita, today. 

15 comments:

  1. In my view, Gosnell exhibited one specific trait of a serial killer: the keeping of trophies (babies' feet, for example). I call these body parts "trophies" because there was no scientific value to the keeping of these body parts. Abortion was his method of serial killing, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I keep hearing it was a fetus. These were babies, children. The whole thing is sickening

    ReplyDelete
  3. There wasn't much mention about the babies, only the "women" coming from the MSM. What a shame.

    As Judge Napaletano said, if it is illegal to kill a baby once is is out of the womb, why is it legal to kill one when it is in the womb?"

    Debbie
    Right Truth
    http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

    ReplyDelete
  4. Aborting black babies is okay because ... well, because they're only black babies. I think the left is a terrible state of mind.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't think it is any longer possible to have an honest conversation in this country, Sam. I say this because at this point, no one is willing to come to the table with a willingness to listen to someone else's point of view. Of course, it is understandable when there are individuals in this country who think that a mother’s right to abort must take precedence over an infant’s right to live.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @Thersites: I placed your last comment in Spam because of the language. AOW can post it if she deems the language appropriate.

    FYI, Louis is a black conservative. I think he was agreeing with me about the left’s irrational love affair with Margaret Sanger.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've ranted on this so much I won't say much. IMO, a debate needs to happen, but we have to set (like in a formal debate) the terms first, namely: what do we define as life, and alive? That is a debate in and of itself, but I think, a needed one. Roe v. Wade is life at birth. Science doesn't allow for that clean-cut line anymore. Abortion frankly cannot be argued unless we can agree on if the baby is alive or not, and if so, when.

    Unless the debate stays at choice-vs-life, which in my mind isn't working. If a woman thinks the baby in utero is not alive, she won't care if she aborts it. The Left, of course, likes and needs that. For us on the pro-life camp, we need to bring up the simple question, when does life begin. And facts man, not sentiment!

    -Wildstar

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thersites,
    Sam's assessment about Louis H. is correct.

    I also agree with Sam about placing your comment in the spam folder because of the misunderstanding about Louis's intentions with the comment the latter made.

    One of the drawbacks of written language is our inability as readers to hear the tone of voice and see the body language of writers.

    ReplyDelete
  9. On second reading, I concur. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thersites,
    No worries!

    As you know, I consider you a friend. I realize how the misunderstanding occurred.

    ReplyDelete
  11. What is THIS?

    Except:

    Tom Ridge And Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s Other Co-Conspirators

    ...As early as 2002, Marcella Stanley Choung, a former employee of Gosnell's practice who refused directions to administer anesthesia, which she was not qualified to do, filed a complaint with the Department of State -- but the department never acted on it.

    How could no one know the horrors – the murders – Kermit Gosnell was perpetrating?

    The answer is that Gosnell’s crimes did not occur in a vacuum. People did know, Gosnell’s crimes were (at least in outline) reported, but those in authority did nothing.

    And they did nothing, because they were told to do nothing by their superiors in the hierarchy of government.

    Chief among those who facilitated Gosnell in his depravity was establishment Republican Governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Ridge.

    During his entire political career, Governor Ridge has been pro-abortion, and when he became Governor of Pennsylvania, his administration suspended all inspections of abortion clinics....


    Is the above article accurate?

    ReplyDelete
  12. One point I'd care to make:

    If the death penalty didn't exist, the deal wouldn't have been able to be made.

    Another plus for the death penalty: as a bludgeon for the egregious.

    BZ

    ReplyDelete
  13. I got five bucks on this guy falling on a mop handle to death while nobody saw nothing within the next year of his incarceration.

    ReplyDelete

  14. Let’s see. The man is in his 70s; he’s a doctor. So he’ll go to prison, be excused from hard labor, and no doubt work in the prison infirmary where he can begin a robust drug trade … at our expense.

    As for Gov. Ridge, can a chief executive be prosecuted for a crime of omission? I doubt it. Plus, look at whom the people of PA have voted for since Ridge got the hook. All communists … so do we really care if the entire state aborts itself?

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective