Originally Posted by TonyR
Don't shoot the messenger, but you have to admit that this is a good and interesting point:
Gosnell is precisely the kind of butcher the pro-choice movement opposes. No one endorses bad medicine and unrestricted, unregulated, cowboy surgery like Gosnell practiced — what he represents is the kind of back-alley deadly hackery that the anti-choice movement would have as the only possible recourse, if they had their way. If anything, the Gosnell case is an argument for legal abortion.
Not a good point.
This case does one thing: it illustrates the depravity and horror of partial birth abortion.
Partial birth abortion is legal because radical factions of the left whose values do not coincide with those of the larger american body populace want it to be so.
They use arbitrary, meaningless designations to deprive the person in utero of their rights as a living human being so that they can kill poor peoples' children. Its the most disgusting practice ever conceived by American minds. Abortion was literally created here to kill black children by using the same eugenics philosophy that the Nazis used to kill the Jews. http://blackgenocide.org/negro.html
Margaret Sanger on helping the poor:
"Organized charity itself is the symptom of a malignant social disease. Those vast, complex, interrelated organizations aiming to control and to diminish the spread of misery and destitution and all the menacing evils that spring out of this sinisterly fertile soil, are the surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding and perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents and dependents
But hey, that racist elitist Margaret Sanger is a feminist hero, right?