Where do we go from Gosnell?

Last week, Philadelphia abortion provider, Kermit Gosnell, was found guilty on three counts of first-degree murder for cutting the spinal cords of three babies who were born alive. A lesser-known fact of the trial is that he was also convicted of 21 counts of abortion of the unborn who were 24 weeks or older, a violation of Pennsylvania law.

This case, after a period of obviously being underreported on by many major news outlets, has been on the public stage. I will not outline in detail the unspeakable conditions of Gosnell’s abortion facility or the graphic nature of what takes place during an abortion.  I do believe that responsible adults must be educated in regards to the nature of the abortion process, down to the graphic details (especially before they decide they want to defend the practice).  Be sure to be mentally prepared as possible for what you will learn (www.abort73.com and www.liveaction.org).

It seems that the “pro-life” and the “pro-choice” (terms used accommodatingly) sides are both rejoicing in Gosnell’s conviction.  The “pro-life” side rejoices that this man is being brought to justice and the horrors of abortion are being put out in public view.  The hope is that more people will see that Gosnell is not an isolated incident, but rather an only slightly exaggerated model of what is taking place in abortion clinics all over the country, namely the violent murder of innocent human beings in the name of a “woman’s right to choose.”

The “pro-choice” side believes that Gosnell is being brought to justice.  Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a statement: “Justice was served to Kermit Gosnell today and he will pay the price for the atrocities he committed.”  Hogue continues, “We hope that the lessons of the trial do not fade with the verdict.  Anti-choice [i.e. “pro-life”, TJC], and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell.”

Notice how the “pro-choice” advocate attempts to separate what Gosnell has done and what normally takes place with “safe and legal” abortion care.  This is common rhetoric of cowardice for those who will not own up to what takes place during a “safe and legal” abortion.  This is the same rhetoric set forth by Bill Clinton and repeated by our current President.  When asked about the Gosnell trial on April 17, President Obama said, “What I can say is this: … I think President Clinton said it pretty well when he said, ‘Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.” The sentiment might sound nice, but reality slices off two of those ideals.  Courtesy of Roe v. Wade, abortion is certainly legal.  But is it safe and rare? 

Is it rare? Consider this: two out of every five pregnancies in New York City end in abortion.  If you were conceived in the Bronx, you would almost be more likely to be aborted than born alive (Bureau of Vital Statistics).  The Guttmacher Institute reported that almost 20% of all pregnancies in the United States end in abortion.  Conclusion: Abortion is not rare.

Is it safe? It depends on how one would define safety.  Safety can be defined as “the condition of being protected from or unlikely to cause danger, risk, or injury.” Does what takes place in any abortion facility fit that definition?  I’m not referring to the statistically insignificant situations where a mother’s life is in real and present danger because of the life in her womb (less than 1% of abortions according to abortionfacts.com). 

Is the elective abortion procedure safe for the mother? Actually, even under “sterile” conditions, abortion is more dangerous to the mother than childbirth. One researcher states, “The evidence overwhelmingly proves that the morbidity and mortality rates of legal abortion are several times higher than that for carrying a pregnancy to term” (abortionfacts.com/facts/11).  That is not to mention other significant physical and mental health issues that come to mothers who have abortions.  Not only are these facts seemingly ignored by the “pro-choice” lobby, they are also not adequately communicated by so-called “health care providers” to mothers considering abortion.

How about the safety of the child?  Should not the mother’s womb be the safest place in the world for a baby?  Has it not been so designed?  Oh, but many would argue that the baby in the womb is not technically a human life and therefore does not have a right to be protected.  Really?  The logic for this does not exist.  From a scientific, moral and common sense point of view, human life begins at conception.  The only difference between a newly conceived human being and a full-grown adult human being is size, level of development, environment and degree of dependency.  We would never apply this same logic in determining a person’s “humanness” outside of the womb.  If so, small people would be less human than big people.  A twelve year old would be more human that a toddler.  Someone’s humanness would differ depending on his or her spatial location.  A person who is dependent on dialysis would have less human value than someone who was completely healthy.  Are “pro-choicers” willing to accept these conclusions?  If not, why is this logic applied to life in the womb?

When pressed on the real issues, “pro-choicers” are forced to retreat to pathetic and misleading rhetoric about “rights”, “choice”, “freedom”, and “safety.”

Murder is defined as “the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.” The overwhelming majority of abortions are premeditated by the parties involved. To “kill” is to “cause the death of.”  Abortions are performed to cause the death of an already living being.  If that being is a human being, abortion is murder.  If the being is not a human, by definition, abortion is not murder.  The crux of the abortion debate should be whether or not the life in the womb is a human being.  As I have already shown, it is absurd to argue that the life in the womb is not human.

Where do we go from Gosnell?  Will we turn a blind eye to the “silent holocaust” going on around us?  Will we leave it for someone else to handle?  Will we pretend that Gosnell is an isolated incident and we have nothing more to worry about? I certainly hope none of these are viable options for you.