Thursday, January 20, 2011

Abortion Gang Poster (and Commenters) Fail to Address the Obvious in the Gosnell Case

I was looking for poor-choice commentary on the Kermit Gosnell case and didn't find it. Today I found this post from The Abortion Gang.

Naturally, they use this sitaution to argue for better abortion services.

But they don't make the link.

What exactly would have been the difference to the babies if Gosnell had snapped their necks with scissors while they were in the womb? What if he had performed a partial birth abortion (which they support)?

If Gosnell had been accused of partial birth abortion, these feminists would have been outraged.

But they only start caring about the suffering of these babies once the umbilical cord is cut.

Which is ludicrous, because the umbilical cord would not have changed who these babies are, and what they would have suffered.

A mother's will and her right to control her body is not more important than these babies' lives.

You have to laugh out loud when you read the comments.

JenInCanada writes:

So many women put in harms way, and so many babies. What a horror

But if Gosnell had stabbed their necks in the womb (which would have been completely legal in Canada) she would have shown no concern and she would have been outraged at the suggestion that such an act be prosecuted.

Tenya writes:

Because this will inevitably bring up the “late-term elective abortion is still wrong!” argument, I wonder how many of these women would have been likely to commit infanticide had they carried to term?

Oh, like that makes ALL the difference. Kill them in the womb so they don't have to be killed when the umbilical cord is cut.

Maybe the mothers wouldn't have committed infanticide. Maybe they would have looked into their babies' eyes and spared them. Maybe they would have dropped them off in a safe haven.

Julie writes:

Kill the Tillers of the world, and we’re left with the Gosnells.

Yeah, because Tiller stabbing a baby in the neck through partial birth abortion is no different than Kermit Gosnell stabbing a newborn in the neck.

Once again: mother's autonomy and "right to control her body" is more important than a baby's life.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: it's feminist supremacy. One woman's will is more important than her own baby's life.

Operation Rescue posted pictures of some of the baby victims. Tell me, pro-abortion feminists, what is the difference between these dead babies and those dead in the womb?