The Case of Kermit Gosnell

April 26, 2013

601665_475635862505601_1401537960_nWhy is it that most Americans are not familiar with the case of Kermit Gosnell or at the very least, do not even know his name?  This case is so horrific and scandalous that normally it would be all over the newspapers, broadcast news, and 24/7 on the cable networks.  However, it is not.  So the question begs, why?

For those of you who don’t know, Kermit Gosnell is a doctor who ran an abortion clinic in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  He is currently on trial for 8 counts of murder.  The Grand Jury Report states, “This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women.  He regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors.” It further adds “The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels – and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths.”  He is charged with seven counts of first-degree murder.  Once you read up on the evidence in his trial it gets much worse.  His clinic was called a “House of Horrors”.  If you don’t know what I’m talking about Google Kermit Gosnell.

The liberally biased mainstream media does not want to report on this story because they know it will prick the conscience of American people.   Marc Lamont Hill, who is a liberal commentator for Fox News and a Columbia University professor, blatantly admitted “For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the Left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights.  Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the Left.”

Yes, folks, they don’t want to prick the American peoples conscience that abortion is murder, infanticide.  They don’t want you to think beyond their mantra that abortion is “The woman’s right to choose”.  They don’t even want a discussion that abortion is a human rights issue.  They will never address the victims as babies, only as fetuses, because they don’t want to humanize the victims.  I contend that yes, a woman has a right to choose whether or not she wants to be pregnant.  However, that decision should be made before she chooses to have sex, not after.  Just so I don’t sound callous I am not talking about the 7% of woman who have been raped or been victims of incest.  I am talking about the other 93%.  

I contend that fetus’s are babies…. human babies.  They have a right to life just as the rest of us.  Why?  Because we all have a Right to Life.  Once that life is created, it has a Right.  Who gets to judge whose life is important and whose is not?  Who gets to judge whether that life is wanted or not?  Why have we come to a point in “civilized” society that a baby only has a Right to Life based on whether the “mother” wants it or not?  Trust me, whether that mother wants it or not, other women do want it and will gladly adopt it.  How do we know that? Look at all the cases of babies thrown away in places like dumpsters.  The media will report on it and hundreds of people will contact the authorities wanting to adopt the thrown away baby.

If this very same profession that is spending billions of dollars on Neonatal Intensive Care Units and is going to great lengths to save babies, then why do we deem it acceptable that babies even later than that are being killed?  Most of these doctors consider it bragging rights if they save the earliest born.  Right now the record of the earliest life saved is 21 weeks.

We as Americans need to stop and reevaluate the issue of abortion.  The Kermit Gosnell case is the perfect time to reignite this discussion.  We need to reevaluate our stance on the Right to Life.  If not, where will we end up as a society?  If infanticide is acceptable then what other kind of ~cides will be deemed acceptable?  Who is or will be at risk?  The elderly?  The disabled?  The disabled are already at risk because parents can abort if their child is deemed to be physically or medically imperfect.

This is already happening.  Peter Singer, a Princeton Bioethics Professor, has said, “There [is a] lack of any clear boundary between the newborn infant, who is clearly not a person in the ethically relevant sense, and the young child who is. In our book, Should the Baby Live?, my colleague Helga Kuhse and I suggested that a period of twenty-eight days after birth might be allowed before an infant is accepted as having the same right to life as others.”  He also has stated “..that it would be ethically OK to kill 1-year-olds with physical or mental disabilities, although ideally the question of infanticide would be “raised as soon as possible after birth.”

If your stance has always been that it’s a woman’s right to choose, please take a moment to reflect beyond the woman.  Take time to reflect on the most innocent among us who can’t use their voice yet to defend their Right to Life.   Whose right is more morally important?

Jeremiah 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart…”

Maria Solorzano


Fatal error: Uncaught Exception: 12: REST API is deprecated for versions v2.1 and higher (12) thrown in /home/mainecon/public_html/wp-content/plugins/seo-facebook-comments/facebook/base_facebook.php on line 1044