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.
Late term abortions are against the law for good reason. But these weren't just late term abortions. These were near full term labor inducements combined with post delivery murder of viable human beings. The Pennsylvania Department of Health knew exactly what was going on there, and willfully chose to ignore it. At least, that's what the grand jury report states. That is as good as endorsing it IMO. There are plenty of places that provide competent medical care for abortions in the first 20 weeks. Are you saying that this maniac is an argument for pro-choice absolutism?