Because otherwise I'd have to cry.
According to clinic worker Kareema Cross, Gosnell resorted to regularly killing babies after birth because he was not skilled enough to kill the baby in utero with a digoxin injection, a usual means of late-term abortion.
The report noted that one unlicensed worker at the clinic attempted to justify Gosnell’s practice of cutting of the newborns’ spinal cords as a “partial-birth abortion.” The Grand Jury concluded that the two procedures were different, however, because sucking the brains out of the baby’s head in a partial-birth abortion occurred while the head was still inside the mother, and thus served to make delivery of the evacuated head easier, whereas Gosnell’s victims were killed “when there was clearly no need or medical reason to collapse the skull.”
“Despite his various efforts to fool her, the evaluator from NAF readily noted that records were not properly kept, that risks were not explained, that patients were not monitored, that equipment was not available, that anesthesia was misused,” states the report. “Of course, she rejected Gosnell’s application.
So let's get this straight....
If Kermit Gosnell had been able to inject potassium chloride into the baby's heart;
... or if he had snapped the baby's neck while the body was half out of the birth canal (and had a 'medical' reason to do it);
... if he had been licensed and board certified--
... if he had kept proper records, monitored patients, informed them about abortion, used proper equipment and anesthesia...
THEN all the killing would have been permissible.
But because he didn't kill the babies the right way, didn't have the right credentials, didn't use the right equipment and didn't apply correct bureaucratic procedures...
He did a bad thing.
The babies would have been just as dead and suffered just as much if all the criteria had been fulfilled.
Do the pro-aborts care?
Noooooooooo. Of course not. Caring is such a darn burden on one's reproductive autonomy.