Gruesome Gosnell case illustrates lack of regulations in abortion industry
While media attention was turned this week on gun control and the explosions at the Boston Marathon, members of Congress were attempting to bring notoriety to the atrocities mentioned in the trial of Kermit Gosnell, an abortionist in Philadelphia. The prosecution rested its case, one with gruesome details, on Friday. The grand jury report says that throughout the years there were hundreds of babies born alive whose necks were punctured and spinal cords severed. Sometimes Gosnell would 鈥渃rack鈥� the neck of the baby while the torso was still inside the mother. Found throughout his office were fetuses in formaldehyde, jars containing baby feet and even frozen body parts.
The case brings multiple questions to the forefront. First, where was the government oversight? Though Gosnell had been cited for violations in the 1980s, there was no follow-up. In 1993, Pennsylvania basically stopped inspecting abortion clinics, and nobody checked on Gosnell鈥檚 work for seventeen years until the FBI raided his clinic for unrelated drug violations.
When asked for comment, Planned Parenthood stated that new regulations would not hinder 鈥渦nsafe鈥� abortion practices, and no set of laws can stop an abortion provider who decides to disregard the law. Interestingly, this idea is labeled as extreme when applied to guns (tools which can kill people) but not when applied to abortion providers (people ending others鈥� lives).
Another question the case brings to light is when is too late to kill a baby or fetus? While Gosnell aborted many pregnancies after the Pennsylvania cutoff, but different states have different cutoffs. Is it a baby when it is drowning in a toilet after 鈥減recipitating鈥� from its mother鈥檚 womb, or is it still a 鈥渇etus鈥�? Within three weeks after conception, a heartbeat is detectable, yet Pennsylvania鈥檚 abortion cutoff is 23 weeks and six days.
Perhaps the answer lies in a recent Florida legislature hearing with Planned Parenthood. There, the Planned Parenthood lobbyist, Alisa LaPolt Snow, was questioned as to what should happen if a baby is born alive in a botched abortion. Her answer: 鈥淎ny decision that鈥檚 made should be left up to the woman, her family and the physician.鈥� When pressed if the living child on the table would now be a patient, Snow responded, 鈥淭hat鈥檚 a very good question. I really don鈥檛 know how to answer that.鈥� How difficult is it to say that a living baby should be protected? Is there an age cutoff for living children that Planned Parenthood would like to implement?
This case serves to illustrate the underlying purpose of Planned Parenthood not only to disrespect human life at any stage before birth, but also apparently for a short period of time after birth. Perhaps they are just acting on the words of their founder, Margaret Sanger: 鈥淭he most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.鈥�