abortion doc killed 7 babies with scissors

lord_raken

lord_raken

Tank
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
1,100
Reaction score
2
No matter your stance, this is sickening.

Gosnell, 69, was arrested and charged with eight counts of murder altogether in the alleged killings of seven babies and the death of a woman from an overdose of painkillers. Nine of Gosnell's employees — including his wife, a cosmetologist — also were charged.
Click to expand...

Before you jump to defend pro choice, this isn't what is going on.

Prosecutors said Gosnell made millions of dollars over three decades performing thousands of dangerous abortions, many of them illegal late-term procedures. His clinic had no trained nurses or medical staff other than Gosnell, a family physician not certified in obstetrics or gynecology, prosecutors said.

At least two women died from the procedures, while scores more were injured from perforated bowels, cervixes and uteruses, authorities said.
Click to expand...

This is more that a bad doctor. Legally, (if convicted) this man has committed mass murder. If a viable baby is born alive, it has all the rights of a human being. Killing it qualifies as murder.

He "induced labor, forced the live birth of viable babies in the sixth, seventh, eighth month of pregnancy and then killed those babies by cutting into the back of the neck with scissors and severing their spinal cord," District Attorney Seth Williams said.
Click to expand...

This is where it goes from horrible to creepy.

Authorities raided Gosnell's clinic early last year in search of controlled drug violations and stumbled upon "a house of horrors," Williams said. Bags and bottles holding aborted fetuses "were scattered throughout the building," the district attorney said. "There were jars, lining shelves, with severed feet that he kept for no medical purpose."
Prosecutors said the place reeked of cat urine because of the animals that were allowed to roam freely, instruments were not properly sterilized, and disposable medical supplied were used over and over.
Click to expand...

I'm mostly I'm pro choice, within rational regulations. At the very least I'm against an all out ban (which is stupid). But this makes me sick.

I hope the two sides of the abortion debate will find some common on this event, and some progress might be made in creating more reasonable regulations, and stricter enforcement.


The rest of the article is through this link.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iOM8K2HklZK17c0mbflBO7Th7Pzg?docId=97816a13b1b443f48dade38143b90132
 
Our commitment to puns is being tested.
 
lord_raken said:
I hope the two sides of the abortion debate will find some common on this event, and some progress might be made in creating more reasonable regulations, and stricter enforcement.
Click to expand...
But regulation stifles economic growth. How will the more innovative aborters expand the industry if everyone's forced to follow some arbitrary Big-brother laws on abortion?
 
Well if he's aborting past the illegal trimester point then that simply makes him a criminal. Not really applicable in the fight against abortion. It's about a man breaking the law.
 
This awful story is no more an argument against abortion than beheading is an argument against getting a haircut.
 
Raziaar said:
Well if he's aborting past the illegal trimester point then that simply makes him a criminal. Not really applicable in the fight against abortion. It's about a man breaking the law.
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

Yes he broke a law about trimester limits for legal abortions, but by breaking that law and delivering the viable fetuses before killing them he was committing murder.

You can't say this has nothing to do with abortion. He did preform other abortions, but even if they were within the appropriate time frame they were still all illegal because he was not licensed to do so and he did not follow the legal procedures. He could very well be charged for committing illegal abortions, but the main charges are murder.

I know nothing of the man's motivations, but the acts themselves and his apparent disregard for the health of his patients and the law are deplorable and sickening.
 
lord_raken said:
Yes and no.

Yes he broke a law about trimester limits for legal abortions, but by breaking that law and delivering the viable fetuses before killing them he was committing murder.
Click to expand...

Yeah which would make him a criminal like I said? I should have said murderer too, because that's what I meant. He's going beyond the point of legality to where we consider it a murder instead of an abortion. Especially if he's killing delivered babies.
 
Raziaar said:
Yeah which would make him a criminal like I said? I should have said murderer too, because that's what I meant. He's going beyond the point of legality to where we consider it a murder instead of an abortion. Especially if he's killing delivered babies.
Click to expand...

ah, ok. So we're pretty much saying the same thing.

I do maintain that because of the proximity to the abortion subject, and other crimes he committed that do involve abortion, this will be brought into the abortion debate whether we want it to or not.

I agree that the main charges brought against him do not, legally involve abortion, but he has done other things that could lead to abortion related charges.


I don't know if this guy was, ignorant, malicious, or just apathetic, but I'm having trouble understanding how he could rationalize it.
 
All kinds of wrong but not really anything to do with whether abortion is right or not. Legal abortions aren't killing live birthed babies with scissors.
 
lord_raken said:
I don't know if this guy was, ignorant, malicious, or just apathetic, but I'm having trouble understanding how he could rationalize it.
Click to expand...

I'd guess malicious and/or insane. Can't see why anyone purely malicious would also bother to keep jars of feet around.

The part that I find just as bad is that nine other people stood around and let him do that. Either they're sick and cowardly, or ten psycho nutcases somehow managed to find each other.
 
I would talk about how sick and disgusting this is, and it IS sick and disgusting, but after reading article after article about things like this nothing really surprises or shocks me anymore. I guess I'm just used to seeing sick ****s like this doctor on the news all the time.
 
Eugh, just reading the title made me shudder. Cringed all the way through the article. :(

lord_raken said:
I don't know if this guy was, ignorant, malicious, or just apathetic, but I'm having trouble understanding how he could rationalize it.
Click to expand...

Ignorance or apathy don't lead a person to store baby feet in jars, methinks.

Edit: Heh, beaten.
 
The guy is a sick ****, no doubt, and should have his own spine severed with a dull, rusty wood saw, but what about the people who went to him? They're pretty ****ed up people too if they're trying to abort a baby that is so close to being born that the doctor could force labor. People are ****ed up. How do people even hear about "services" like this?
 
While reading the OP I progressively felt a feeling of nausea spreading from my feet, right through me. Upon reading this:
Bags and bottles holding aborted fetuses "were scattered throughout the building," the district attorney said. "There were jars, lining shelves, with severed feet that he kept for no medical purpose."
Click to expand...
I want that man to die a slow, painful, agonizing death. This is honestly the sickest/most repulsive act against humankind I have ever heard. How could someone do such a thing? Babies man, effing babies suffering so horribly. I will not sleep easily tonight. :(
 
Krynn72 said:
The guy is a sick ****, no doubt, and should have his own spine severed with a dull, rusty wood saw, but what about the people who went to him?
Click to expand...

True. I was wondering what kind of person goes for an abortion in a place that's clearly not medically fit for the job. With an insane man.
 
Really ghastly. It makes me wonder what kind of alternatives those patients had if they ended up even setting foot in a clinic like that. Stories like this are what unsettle me about what would happen to the practice if abortion became illegal and only dubious crazy people are willing to perform them.
 
Well... if they don't want it, the best alternative would be to give birth to the baby and drop it off at a hospital. Seriously. It's legal, they don't ask any questions, and possibly anonymous (I think?). So it's pretty awful/stupid/selfish for anyone to wait past 6 months and then either get an abortion, or have the baby and throw it in a dumpster/let some freak chop it up.

Plus there's the part where you had SIX MONTHS to decide you didn't want it.

Also, regardless of whether you think a 6-month fetus is a "human" or not, there are other reasons why you can't get an abortion that late -- e.g., dangerous for the mother.

Add those up, and I genuinely can't see any reason (aside from serious health complications, in which case you can get real help) for anybody past 3rd trimester to have an abortion. They need to suck it up and deal with it. And give their baby away to a nice family because they're obviously way too dumb to take care of a baby anyways.
 
dfc05 said:
Well... if they don't want it, the best alternative would be to give birth to the baby and drop it off at a hospital. Seriously. It's legal, they don't ask any questions, and possibly anonymous (I think?).

They need to suck it up and deal with it. And give their baby away to a nice family because they're obviously way too dumb to take care of a baby anyways.
Click to expand...

Haha. Right. That's totally how it happens.
 
Wanted Bob said:
Rusty wood?
Click to expand...

Just in case you weren't making a joke, I merely meant to distinguish between a wood saw and something like, say, a hack saw. Both are metal, but a wood saw would hurt a lot more, especially if rusty.

woodsaw.jpg



Also, wood can have rust on it.
 
Not to go with such a cliché, but why not just use a damn rusty, wire clothes hanger? That way you save money on surgical scissors by having customers bring their own materials for proper-cruel baby shredding. Shit's so metal, dudes.
 
Bad^Hat said:
Haha. Right. That's totally how it happens.
Click to expand...

I understand that having a baby is scary and painful. But note that you left out all the highly-relevant parts where they had six months to abort if they wanted to, and the fact that it's dangerous for the mother to abort. It has to be a lot easier to find a real abortion clinic in 6 months, than to find some freak to do it in the last 3 months. At that point, it's highly irresponsible and selfish on the mother's part. I don't see how that's even arguable. Six months is a very long time to make a decision. I can't think of any other major life decisions where you're given six months. They screwed up really bad, and it sucks for them, but that's something they need to deal with on their own, not run to some guy for a dangerous abortion because they can't deal with it like a sane and responsible person.

Sure, in a "perfect" world (for stupid women who can't make up their mind in 6 months), you could abort your baby two weeks before birth without consequence.
But there are legitimate reasons why you can't, which is why it's illegal to do so. It's not a question of "oh yeah that's how how it happens, pfft" or "but LOTS of us want to abort 3rd-trimester babies, let us do it, help us do it please," but a question of whether it's actually appropriate to do so. I'd argue a strong no. If you're going to support 3rd-trimester abortion, be prepared to speak up against a whole lot of other laws against much lesser wrongs.

A lot of people seem to defend the whole abortion issue with "choice" and "your body to do what you want with" mixed in with feminist rights. Then fail to realize that there are lots of laws out there that restrict our choice of what to do with our bodies. Illegal to forge prescriptions for drugs? Yes. Illegal to be a prostitute? Yes. Both these things produce the same or lesser harm than 3rd trimester abortion, but people rarely bother to argue about them. Heck, I don't even think avid abortion supporters go so far as to support 3rd-trimester abortions. Why that's an issue of discussion here is bizarre.



tldr: Mother's fault it got to this point, not the fault of the law. Should not change legitimate laws just because people are too dumb/irresponsible to comply, even given 6 months to do so.
 
Did you um... did you even read what I quoted? I wasn't avoiding anything, I was cutting out the parts that weren't pertinent to the point I was trying to make. Specifically: you don't just plonk a baby down at some hospital and have it go to a "nice family." That's just wildly optimistic on so many levels. I mean, as an alternative to having your vagina brutalized by some sicko who'll keep trophies of your aborted, nearly-formed child, and possibly also kill you in the process? Yeah, it's pretty good, but just about ****ing anything is.
 
Ah, I see. (I thought you meant it sarcastically to point out that most women would rather kill their baby than give birth to it, rendering the hospital thing a non-viable option as nobody would even make it to the point of going through with the childbirth.)

Anyhow, at least the hospital will know how to properly care for it and what to do with the baby. It's not hugely unlikely to get a decent family. Probably easier for a hospital to adopt out a baby than a fully grown child in an orphanage. And people who adopt do have to jump through more hoops than people who don't. People who adopt babies probably have to go through even more hoops (I don't know this for a fact, it just sounds logical).

In any case, you take what you can get. And going the hospital-baby route is probably the best chance of both you and your baby getting a decent life. So maybe there's not a 100% chance of going to the nicest family ever, but it's a far better chance than through any other option (where the other options are: be dead, or be stuck living with someone who didn't want you... or perhaps the mother puts out a "free baby" offer for friends who might want babies, as if the baby were a puppy or a kitten :p)
 
Sorry, now you're saying leaving it at a hospital is more likely to get it adopted than putting it up for adoption? Where are you getting this information? Do hospitals even function that way? Would they not just give the child to a ****ing orphanage anyway?
 
http://www.wikihow.com/Drop-Off-an-Unwanted-Baby
http://galvestondailynews.com/story/195198
http://www.babymosesproject.org/
Maybe it's not every state/country, but in Texas there is a "Baby Moses" law that allows you to drop your baby off specifically at a hospital or to EMT personnel at a fire department/police station. The hospitals in Houston have posters up saying something to the point of "Don't abandon your baby, bring it here, no questions asked."
The reason to use the hospital instead of an orphanage, is that an orphanage is not necessarily equipped to deal with health problems of newborn babies. Orphanages are more for children. Details:

What happens to my baby?
If you leave your baby at a fire station or with and EMT, they will give the baby immediate medical care and then transport the baby to the closest hospital.
The hospital will take care of any additional medical needs that your baby may have.
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (TDFPS) will then take custody of your child.
After the legal responsibilities are fulfilled by TDFPS, your baby will be placed with caring family.

Why must the baby be 60 days old or less?
The intent of Baby Moses law is to provide a responsible alternative to desperate mothers.
The first days of a newborns life are the most critical, and most likely the time that immediate medical attention is required.

I was wrong to assume this applied everywhere, but it is law in Texas and is, I think, a very good and logical one -- the hospital is really best-equipped to take care of abandoned babies who might have special needs.

[edit] Yeah, sorry, it seems this might be only in Texas. I grew up there and they made a big deal about it when it was enacted, so I just assumed it was everywhere.

[edit again] nvm, there are also similar laws in most other states. They are very lenient to the mothers -- as long as the baby was not harmed, the mother is not penalized for anything.


And to address adopting-a-baby versus adopting-orphanage-children, there's some appeal for people to get to fully raise a child as their own rather than deal with the emotional baggage of taking in an older child who's already been taught by someone else, is separated from the children they grew up with, and knows they're not "yours". Although in reverse, some people might feel more pity towards older children who've been stuck in an orphanage for a long time. So it's a toss-up.
 
Well, if someone drops a baby off at my doorstep, I'm going to eat it. No, wait... I'm going to call the authorities to have them pick it up. I'm pretty sure there isn't just like a bin they toss it in. It probably ends up at the hospital and the care is written off as a tax break, and arrangements are probably made for foster care. So whether there is a policy or not, it's probably the same end result.
 
Baby bin :p

I just realized I've now googled "hospital abandoned baby" "leaving babies at hospitals" "hospital baby drop off" and "baby moses law in pennsylvania", so anyone who gets on my computer and uses my google search bar is gonna think I'm secretly preggo. gj hl2.net. I get in the stupidest arguments here. why would you leave your baby at a hospital? pfft, why wouldn't you leave your baby at a hospital? lololololol
 
dfc05 said:
[edit again] nvm, there are also similar laws in most other states. They are very lenient to the mothers -- as long as the baby was not harmed, the mother is not penalized for anything.
Click to expand...

OK, so within 72 hours they can drop it off at a designated place anonymously. Any other time or place you abandon a baby it's a crime.

Makes sense, right? So what the ****'s up with this doctor? They could have just dropped their babies off. One or two more months of labor wouldn't kill them...
 
Thank you virus for sanity, seriously <3. The main motivation I can see for having the abortion that late is that if they actually have their baby, it's likely other people will find out about it which will cause public "shame." Whereas with an illegal abortion, nobody except you and the "doc" will know. I'd like to say fear of the physical pain of childbirth, but with the high number of incidents of girls delivering their own babies (holy crap! that would be totally impressive if they weren't also psycho bitches) and leaving dead babies in boxes, dead babies in dumpsters, dead babies in toilets, and dead babies on restroom floors in high schools/walmarts/gas station bathrooms... it's not always about the act of popping out a baby. More like "I don't want this, and I don't want to have to deal with this responsibly." :|
 
Yeah, it's also possible that their [husband/boyfriend/mother/father, etc.] hadn't noticed they were pregnant yet.

HMMMM death to child by scissor spinal severing or [embarrassment/trouble with parents/shame/etc] - it's seems extremely selfish.

Grow a pair, woman! Face the music, man up, etc.
 
I read the title as Baby Doc kills 7 abortion doctors, so I thought this was about the dictator guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
Huge Tornado wrecks up the place near Oklahoma City
Replies
4
Views
2K
Bad^Hat
Bad^Hat
Fograin92
Half-Life 1 (GoldSRC) with subtitles (+translations)
Replies
3
Views
4K
Fograin92
Fograin92
CptStern
LAPD has armed standoff with Call of Duty Statue
Replies
19
Views
3K
Krynn72
Krynn72
morgs
Killing two birds with one.....wha?
Replies
9
Views
1K
morgs
morgs
CptStern
Republican blames abortion for people born with disabilities
Replies
5
Views
3K
CptStern
CptStern
Back
Top