Question for Planned Parenthood official: What should happen to a baby born alive after a botched abortion?

posted at 4:21 pm on March 29, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via John McCormack at the Weekly Standard, some words of wisdom from the Kermit Gosnell school of “women’s health.” Say this much for her: As monstrous as this is, at least she’s consistent. It’s a strange mindset that would suddenly demand that a doctor rescue a baby in peril after giving him the green light to kill it in the womb 10 minutes earlier. The only situation I can think of where someone’s typically asked to switch from assailant to savior in the blink of an eye is when cops or soldiers wound an armed enemy in the course of defending themselves. In all other cases, a person who’s made the decision to kill will, if left uninterrupted, tend to finish the job. Pro-lifers have always argued that it’s silly and arbitrary to make birth (or viability) some key threshold for personhood. In her own ominous way, she’s agreeing with that. If a mother and her doctor have decided to kill, why stop at accidental birth? Why not let them finish the job? Free Gosnell!

As a practical matter, even if Florida’s law requiring rescue is enacted, how many abortionists do you suppose would actually follow it in the privacy of the “exam room” in cases of accidental birth?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 7

What slippery slope?!

nobar on March 29, 2013 at 4:22 PM

Uhhh…and let me be clear…that baby is a punishment…you didn’t give birth to that.

Sincerely,
President Abortion

22044 on March 29, 2013 at 4:23 PM

I am at a loss for words with this. My gosh my heart aches for that wee child.
L

letget on March 29, 2013 at 4:24 PM

As a practical matter, even if Florida’s law requiring rescue is enacted, how many abortionists do you suppose would actually follow it in the privacy of the “exam room” in cases of accidental birth?

Zero. Reprobates. What a disgusting lot.

CW on March 29, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Maybe we should have a doctor ask her mother if she still wants to keep her child.

BobMbx on March 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM

This is the mentality that those in the Republican party that hate social conservatives would rather work with. This.

Choose your side.

njrob on March 29, 2013 at 4:27 PM

This is the mentality that those in the Republican party that hate social conservatives would rather work with. This.

Choose your side.

njrob on March 29, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Good perspective.

22044 on March 29, 2013 at 4:29 PM

I am at a loss for words with this. My gosh my heart aches for that wee child.
L

letget on March 29, 2013 at 4:24 PM

For every one of the 50 million souls, just unthinkable!!

fourdeucer on March 29, 2013 at 4:30 PM

It’s an impossible scenario. Mass of cells, remember?

rogerb on March 29, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Heartless Mother****ers.

El_Terrible on March 29, 2013 at 4:31 PM

As a practical matter, even if Florida’s law requiring rescue is enacted, how many abortionists do you suppose would actually follow it in the privacy of the “exam room” in cases of accidental birth?

Considering abortion clinics are treated like holy sanctuaries by public health officials, and Gosnell was only caught because he thought he was immune from normal laws in an abortion clinic? Yeah, that’s a tough one to answer…

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 4:32 PM

If a mother and her doctor have decided to kill, why stop at accidental birth? Why not let them finish the job? Free Gosnell!

…Or simply kill Gosnell. Not for justice or under any statute, but as an extremely late post-birth abortion.

Stoic Patriot on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

As one of about twelve people in America who is both pro-life and pro-gay marriage, I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t some potential for a social grand bargain, whereby gays support restrictions on abortion in exchange for allowing gays to marry and adopt. To Christians I would ask if it’s better for a child to die in an abortion clinic, or live out a full life in the loving care of a gay couple. I’d choose the latter myself, if I was the fetus in question, and I think the way a SoCon feels about it really defines just how pro-life he really is.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

It all sounds like murder to me.

locomotivebreath1901 on March 29, 2013 at 4:34 PM

As a practical matter, even if Florida’s law requiring rescue is enacted, how many abortionists do you suppose would actually follow it in the privacy of the “exam room” in cases of accidental birth?

The law says something to citizens—this is a line in the sand—this is a life to be preserved. That’s important in and of itself.

Those who don’t follow the law could be charged and prosecuted by the mother (women do change their mind when suddenly confronted with the reality of a baby) or any others attending whose conscience is shocked by killing a child.

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:34 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

What a false choice you’ve set up.

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:35 PM

Here’s one of the women born alive after a failed abortion.

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/10/03/abortion-survivor-to-blast-obama-record-in-tv-ad-during-debate/

rrpjr on March 29, 2013 at 4:36 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Children need a mom and a dad. Those who truly care about children realize this and advocate it.

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:36 PM

Also, if you really want to torque a liberal, tell him you support keeping abortion legal for all registered Democrats. You’ll find that they suddenly see abortion as something more than a medical procedure.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:37 PM

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:36 PM

So, you’d rather the child die? In this political climate, this choice is more realistic than assuming we can outlaw both abortion AND gay marriage.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:38 PM

I thought that abortion was only ‘legal’ during the first trimester, a time when the ‘fetus’ is nonviable.

So how is this question even relevant?

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:39 PM

To Christians I would ask if it’s better for a child to die in an abortion clinic, or live out a full life in the loving care of a gay couple. I’d choose the latter myself, if I was the fetus in question, and I think the way a SoCon feels about it really defines just how pro-life he really is.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

So just how much is that straw you’re selling?

Tell me would you trade your desires to marry your lover if it meant abortion would end? I bet you vote for pro choicers first due to their likely support for gay marriage. Priorities right?

CW on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

Social Science Confirms: Kids Need Married Moms and Dads

A group of social science professors present the scholarly research on a child’s need for a married mother and a father in a brief submitted to the Supreme Court.

…Recent studies claiming that children raised in same-sex homes are “no different” from those raised in traditional homes are seriously flawed…

What we do know, reliably and conclusively, is that married biological moms and dads matter to children. As the brief states:

It is not simply the presence of two parents…but the presence of two biological parents that seems to support children’s development.… Experts have long contended that both mothers and fathers make unique contributions to parenting.

The professors present a great deal of scholarship showing that mothering and fathering are different. The mother plays a critical role in a child’s neural development, communication, sense of security, problem solving, understanding and responding to feelings, and social ties to both friends and family.

The father’s involvement is linked to positive outcomes in education, physical health, and avoidance of juvenile delinquency. Children who “roughhouse with their fathers” learn that certain violent behavior is unacceptable. Fathers encourage exploration and discourage boys from “compensatory masculinity where they reject and denigrate all that is feminine and instead…engag[e] in domineering and violent behavior.”

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

Wait, how did my Sarc tag get lost..? Grrr.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

Anybody who’s paid attention to abortion issues over the years knows that the baby killers always say it’s not a life until a person is born, going to be fun to watch them try to square that circle from now on.

clearbluesky on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

The majority of hospital neonatologists will not attempt to resuscitate or perform life support on any preterm birth before 22 weeks. Which is what you’re talking here, probably way before that even. It might make you a little less emotional if you did not picture a seven pound Gerber Baby lying there.

But I’ve been here before and I’m not staying. Maybe call your local hospital with the highest level of NICU care and ask as a ballpark which “babies” born preterm are “vigorously rescuscitated” and which are not. Usually it’s (gasp!!) left up to the mother and doctor. Prior to 20 weeks, forget it. It’s not done.

Marcus on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

What a false choice you’ve set up.

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:35 PM

The StrawMan cometh.

CW on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Of course not. As I said, you set up a false choice. If you cared about children you would hold out for life and for children to grow up with a mother and a father.

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:41 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

The issues aren’t related. A life is life, period. There is no “grand bargain” that can ever be conscionable that allows innocents to be slaughtered.

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 4:42 PM

I’d choose the latter myself, if I was the fetus in question, and I think the way a SoCon feels about it really defines just how pro-life he really is.
 
EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

 
What say we try states’ rights and let people move to (or from) places depending on what they want their tax dollars to support?

rogerb on March 29, 2013 at 4:42 PM

Children need a mom and a dad. Those who truly care about children realize this and advocate it.

I agree, but we cannot waste our lives wishing for things to be as we want them to be. We live in a world where gay adoption now is much more likely than five pro-life justices on the SOTU, and so we must figure out the best way we can to save the unborn, even if it’s not perfect.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:42 PM

why stop at accidental birth? Why not let them finish the job?

Accidental birth? Now that is chilling. All birth is natural. Period. Early birth or late birth but no accidental birth please.

The interruption of birth is unnatural. To call it ‘accidental’ is a total win for the pro-child-death camp.

LetsBfrank on March 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM

So, you’d rather the child die? In this political climate, this choice is more realistic than assuming we can outlaw both abortion AND gay marriage.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:38 PM

You gave a false choice and one not supported by God. Christ did not tell us to choose between sins. He told us to g”Go and sin no more.” Surely you can see the difference.

BTW, your false choice is nothing more than the Delphi Technique to give a person the appearance of input while the choices were really made beforehand.

njrob on March 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM

This is the logical result in a society (or in this woman’s case, an organization) where everything, no matter how ghastly, is reduced to a simple pro/con argument. When I was in law school, I had a prof that asked a fellow student how she would defend a person that, like Jeffrey Dhamer, had committed an unspeakable crime. She then proceeded to do so as best she could until the professor cut her off and asked whether she had considered whether what he’d done was right or wrong. She of course replied that his actions had been wrong.

Then he proceeded to tell us that this is why in many ways society has been corrupted and along with it as students trained in distinctions and defenses, we had too. His larger point is that when one has been trained to defend the indefensible, bit by bit our soul takes a hit and our human nature degrades to a point to where nothing is truly right or wrong but rather questions of degree. Which is what this lady defending PP’s position is doing. nobody in their right mind could look at an infant struggling for life and then nonchalantly kill it. But that’s exactly what this lady and her organization are advocating.

We’re truly doomed if this type of argument (or even suggestion for that matter) is allowed to stand and those advocating for it aren’t held to account. Babies aren’t babies anymore, they’re not even people with a right to live for cripes sakes. And the redefining of what constitutes a “person” is where it starts. Just as the Nazi’s defending the final solution because those being gassed weren’t really “people” in their minds. Just as a society we can look at a defenseless child and the question as to whether their heart continues to beat is not a matter of black and white but something in between. Pathetic really, but predictable..

volnation on March 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM

Anne-Claude Girard wrote this poignant appeal in her Open letter from adopted children to France. It is a moving insight into the price that children pay for the selfishness of adults.

Today, this same Republic is about to pass a law that would open adoption to same-sex couples. The law would eliminate the right for those who were guaranteed a mother and father before….

If we were not raised by those who conceived us, with a father and a mother who adopted us, we build our selfhood by understanding that we could have been the child of their love.

Our lineage is comparable to that of the two adoptive parents; this understanding is essential to make us who we are. I understood in becoming myself a mother, that that had been a fundamental stage of my development.

A number of professionals have explained to you how much the wound of being abandoned inspires, among adopted children, a tireless search for their origins.

How then can it even be conceived — to give an abandoned child to a same-sex couple? That is to condemn the child forever to the double doubt:

“why was I abandoned, and why do I not have a dad and a mom?”

…This fight is about those who have known the frailty of the state of abandonment, who are different, and who deserve to build themselves up within a home of father-mother-child.

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:44 PM

It appears liberals hate children unless they can use them to advance their agenda.

If they can’t kill ‘em they’ll tolerate them long enough to brainwash the little tykes into becoming their obedient drones.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Marcus on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

There is a wide gulf between the Kermit Gosnell’s of the world and pediatricians working with parents who must decide whether or not heroic efforts should be made to save a child. Even children born before 20 weeks aren’t tossed in the trash in neonatal wards.

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 4:45 PM

Well, now that we’ve rung the dinner bell for Armin, thuja, and the rest of the soulless ghouls….

CurtZHP on March 29, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Planned Parenthood the ultimate death cult.
Thier battle cry, “Blood for the Blood god!”

LincolntheHun on March 29, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Mark Steyn has referred to this a legalizing “fourth trimester abortions”… as usual, he hits the nail n the head.

Blaise on March 29, 2013 at 4:46 PM

njrob on March 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM

The choices have been made beforehand. Roe V Wade isn’t going anywhere for a very long time, and gay marriage is much more likely to become legal before abortion is outlawed. You don’t get to change this reality, so which is more important to you, heterosexual parents, or life itself?

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM

volnation: Every genocidal act throughout history has started with the dehumanization of the intended victims.

This one is no different.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Anybody who is hired by Planned Parenthood needs to be forced to watch videos of “normal” abortions, partial birth abortions, and this latest abomination where a murder is committed after a botched abortion. The snipping of the spinal column with scissors should do wonders for the employment rate at Planned Parenthood.

Right now, this is all an intellectual exercise for people like this. Nothing but words on a piece of paper.

The mindset they have is just like the one the Nazis who worked in the death camps had. Their victims are not human. Who said that something like that could “never again” happen?

NavyMustang on March 29, 2013 at 4:48 PM

Ghouls.

stewati on March 29, 2013 at 4:48 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013

So your points have what to do with whether doctors kill babies that escape abortion?

Nice diversion.

FO

CW on March 29, 2013 at 4:49 PM

volnation: Every genocidal act throughout history has started with the dehumanization of the intended victims.

This one is no different.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM

And that should give us pause; because the left has absolutely no problem or hesitation in dehumanizing us to win an argument.

CurtZHP on March 29, 2013 at 4:49 PM

Eric: Your ethics may differ, but mine do not allow me to accede to a lesser evil to avoid a greater evil.

If either abortion is legal or ‘SSM’ is legal, it will be against my opposition.

And that, from a personal perspective, is more important than the end result.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Well, now that we’ve rung the dinner bell for Armin, thuja, and the rest of the soulless ghouls….

CurtZHP on March 29, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Like flies to crap.

CW on March 29, 2013 at 4:50 PM

If the media played fair they would ask every dem this question just like they ask repubs about abortion and rape.

Wigglesworth on March 29, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Most animals treat their offspring better than liberals do.

TarheelBen on March 29, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Nothing to see here unless the baby was killed by an assault weapon.

cyclown on March 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM

I agree, but we cannot waste our lives wishing for things to be as we want them to be. We live in a world where gay adoption now is much more likely than five pro-life justices on the SOTU, and so we must figure out the best way we can to save the unborn, even if it’s not perfect.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:42 PM

And your point was what, that you stand firmly for the unborn, or that are more righteous than the other pro-lifers because you would also put babies into families of gay parents?

STL_Vet on March 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM

How long before they argue that a toddler can be aborted.

ChunkyLover on March 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Caught on video – the same monstrous mindset that allowed the atrocities of WW2 and so many other unspeakable acts of uncivilized inhumane behavior.

Marcus on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

You have no sense of the difference between a premature baby and one who accidentally survives and overt attempted abortion, I presume. Good grief.

Midas on March 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Man! That Sandra Fluke woman gets around!

Vince on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Every town needs an iron Moloch.

tom daschle concerned on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

CurtZ: It has given me pause for over 10 years.

I also note that many on the political right do this to liberals as well. Particularly when you realize that, in our intelligence-obsessed culture, some insults made to the other party’s intelligence are in actuality attempts at dehumanization.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

because the left has absolutely no problem or hesitation in dehumanizing us to win an argument.

CurtZHP on March 29, 2013 at 4:49 PM

Indeed, it’s integral to the ideology.

rrpjr on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Unfortunately it is quite clear what is more important to you.

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

The StrawMan cometh.

CW on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

Time to call this site Straw Air! :)

22044 on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Well, exactly how long after birth would it be legal? Does it mean we can still abort her?

The Rogue Tomato on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Since the left never stops … there will one day be forced abortion. The state will decide if a child lives or not.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 4:54 PM

One side of the issue wants to ban the morning after pill to prevent implantation and the whole pregnancy from even getting to the 128 cells range. The other side want to allow abortion all the way until on week 30 and even after ones first breath of air.

How does one even find a common ground to make a law and rule that will make either side content to move on with life.

tjexcite on March 29, 2013 at 4:54 PM

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Again with the stupid false choices. You, sir, are an idiot, with the critical thinking skills of a kumquat. Neither unexpected nor unusual for a liberal, however.

Next.

Midas on March 29, 2013 at 4:54 PM

I’d choose the latter myself, if I was the fetus in question,

Interesting how you acknowledge the fact that a fetus has the power to reason.

and I think the way a SoCon feels about it really defines just how pro-life he really is.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Interesting false premise. Naturally, you dismiss the fact that many hetero couples are interested in adoption. Drop them, push the gay couples up in line; gotta serve your gay masters.

Kingfisher on March 29, 2013 at 4:55 PM

Chunky: Actually, it is quite easy, rhetorically, to get most pro-abortion people to admit that legalizing infanticide would be a preferable alternative to ‘outlawing’ abortion.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:55 PM

How long before they argue that a toddler can be aborted.

ChunkyLover on March 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM

I think they already have. A while ago someone proposed (theoretically supposedly) that women should be able to kill their children up to one year after birth.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 4:56 PM

I also note that many on the political right do this to liberals as well. Particularly when you realize that, in our intelligence-obsessed culture, some insults made to the other party’s intelligence are in actuality attempts at dehumanization.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Frankly, I used to try to maintain ‘the high ground’, but to what end? It’s pointless, arguing, trying to sway these people with reality and reason is an utterly fruitless effort. I’m done with it, and honestly don’t give a f*ck anymore. They’re going to continue to get precisely the level of respect their behavior merits.

Midas on March 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM

If gays actually cared about children, then they would advocate for conjugal marriage only. They would never adopt children, but would work for all children to have a mom and a dad.

INC on March 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Since the left never stops … there will one day be forced abortion. The state will decide if a child lives or not.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 4:54 PM

We already have Thomas Friedman writing masturbatory fantasies about the kings of forced abortions, China. And he is considered the intellectual vanguard on the left.

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM

So, you’d rather the child die? In this political climate, this choice is more realistic than assuming we can outlaw both abortion AND gay marriage.

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:38 PM

It wasn’t that long ago that both were already illegal.

BobMbx on March 29, 2013 at 4:58 PM

I see she’s following the crowd with that Sandra Fluke look. Cute! Spunky!

KS Rex on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

Pro-lifers have always argued that it’s silly and arbitrary to make birth (or viability) some key threshold for personhood.

Which itself is a silly and arbitrary argument. The law sets lots of arbitrary thresholds. Why is an 18-year-old an adult who can vote and join the army but a 17-year-old who is 2 days away from his 18th birthday still a child?

And if not birth, then what? Are we going to declare that microscopic fertilized eggs are people who enjoy all the rights of citizenship? Laughable. Say, what if a “person” is conceived in one country and born here? Or vice versa? Are they an American citizen or a foreign national?

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

The choices have been made beforehand. Roe V Wade isn’t going anywhere for a very long time, and gay marriage is much more likely to become legal before abortion is outlawed. You don’t get to change this reality, so which is more important to you, heterosexual parents, or life itself?

EricW on March 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Not at all. You’re offering the Devil’s bargain where no matter what I decide, my soul is forfeit. I do not accept your conditions.

njrob on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

Nothing to see here unless the baby was killed by an assault weapon.
cyclown on March 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM

They are: Liberal Assault Weapons.

whatcat on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

What slippery slope?!

nobar on March 29, 2013 at 4:22 PM

Indeed. The ghoulish proggies that are in charge of Obamacare’s Death Panels see little value in lives of pre-school children, since there’s been no investment in them made yet via K-12. Value of a human being on a graph (yes, they graph it) starts to pick up in K-12 and peaks in the twenties to forties, then starts dropping back down.

slickwillie2001 on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

even if Florida’s law requiring rescue is enacted, how many abortionists do you suppose would actually follow it in the privacy of the “exam room” in cases of accidental birth?

Probably the majority. They have their entire life of success and comfort to lose if they don’t, most wouldn’t risk it even if they thought doing so was the “right” thing to do.

Socratease on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

As a practical matter, even if Florida’s law requiring rescue is enacted, how many abortionists do you suppose would actually follow it in the privacy of the “exam room” in cases of accidental birth?

So how will Florida enforce this law? Are they seriously gonna sit back and allow doctors to commit infanticide due to the “inconvenience” of the baby being born alive?

BTW, any doctor caught violating that law should have a partial birth abortion procedure done to them in public. And I’m not kidding. Until we as a society actually put on display for everyone what exactly goes on in these abortion clinics, we’ll never succeed in eliminating these practices.

Doughboy on March 29, 2013 at 5:00 PM

It wasn’t that long ago that both were already illegal.

BobMbx on March 29, 2013 at 4:58 PM

You’re right. I have a suggestion for social “conservatives” who wish it was still the 1950′s: redirect your resources to the creation of a time machine.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Midas: I try to give everyone both the respect they deserve for being human, and the derision they deserve for their behavior.

It’s very difficult to balance it at times. I was trying to point out that this is not, exclusively, a problem on the political left, though I would concede that the right, by its nature, probably could not institutionalize it to the degree the left has.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM

Are we going to declare that microscopic fertilized eggs are people who enjoy all the rights of citizenship? Laughable. Say, what if a “person” is conceived in one country and born here? Or vice versa? Are they an American citizen or a foreign national?

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

A partial birth abortion is certainly not a “microscopic” fertilized egg. Hard to snip the spine or jab scissors into a microscopic egg.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM

Anybody who’s paid attention to abortion issues over the years knows that the baby killers always say it’s not a life until a person is born, going to be fun to watch them try to square that circle from now on.

clearbluesky on March 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

That’s easy. The baby-killers will simply redefine the meaning of the word ‘birth’.

Liam on March 29, 2013 at 5:02 PM

How does one even find a common ground to make a law and rule that will make either side content to move on with life.

tjexcite on March 29, 2013 at 4:54 PM

This is exactly where the SCOTUS screwed up in Roe v Wade when they made the right to abort a Constitutional affair because now you have competing rights at work: the right to privacy and thereby to abort vs the due process rights of the unborn child not to be deprived of life sanctioned by the State. Choicer’s scoff at the distinction of where life begins but it’s central to the argument that abortion can be legal in the first place, let alone guaranteed by the Constitution. Because once an unborn child is considered a person, the State can’t allow to be aborted, which runs afoul of Roe v Wade. So it’s a circular argument created by the Nine Wise Ones that could have been avoided by simply leaving it to the states to decide all along. Instead we’ve had 40 years of legal wrangling and nonsense which leads to PP’s silly argument caught on tape. If there ever was an argument and example of judicial overreach and it’s ridiculous consequences, Roe v Wade was it.

volnation on March 29, 2013 at 5:02 PM

And if not birth, then what? Are we going to declare that microscopic fertilized eggs are people who enjoy all the rights of citizenship? Laughable. Say, what if a “person” is conceived in one country and born here? Or vice versa? Are they an American citizen or a foreign national?

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

Actually you make it rather simple. I have no problem with conception being the starting point of citizenship. And once sperm meets egg, BOOM!, human being with all the rights enjoyed by any child in the United States. “Difficult” philosophical dilemmas solved. What else ya got?

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 5:02 PM

A partial birth abortion is certainly not a “microscopic” fertilized egg. Hard to snip the spine or jab scissors into a microscopic egg.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM

“Partial birth abortions” also account for a tiny, tiny fraction of the abortions performed in this country. Of course, “pro-lifers” try to misrepresent this fact and pass them off as the rule and not the exception.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM

Since the left never stops … there will one day be forced abortion. The state will decide if a child lives or not.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 4:54 PM

In Cuba, this is one method they utilize that has resulted in a reduction of infant mortality that is so often praised by the Michael More’s of the world.

They seem to forget that the state (Cuba) doesn’t allow less-than-specification babies to be born, so any baby born in Cuba has a built in higher probability of surviving, ergo, the mortality rate drops. They have also criminalized failure to obtain pre-natal care if you’re pregnant. They’ll send you to preggers prison and force you to behave until you deliver. Thats an inconvenient truth.

BobMbx on March 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM

You guys are lightyears behind this story … which was played out in the Illinois State Senate during Barry O’Bozo’s otherwise meaningless tenure there. O’Bozo single-handedly prevented a bill from coming to a vote, which aimed to prevent the murder of children born alive after a failed late-term abortion attempt.

We elected such a monster President … twice.

Jaibones on March 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM

Armin: I reject your unstated premise that the 2010s are ‘better’ than the 1950s.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Anybody who is hired by Planned Parenthood needs to be forced to watch videos of “normal” abortions, partial birth abortions, and this latest abomination where a murder is committed after a botched abortion. The snipping of the spinal column with scissors should do wonders for the employment rate at Planned Parenthood.

Right now, this is all an intellectual exercise for people like this. Nothing but words on a piece of paper.

The mindset they have is just like the one the Nazis who worked in the death camps had. Their victims are not human. Who said that something like that could “never again” happen?

NavyMustang on March 29, 2013 at 4:48 PM

More; these procedures must be shown on TV, and billboards, and shown to kids in school. They need the opportunity to learn more about the democratic party platform.

slickwillie2001 on March 29, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Jaibones: I’m actually surprised that this wasn’t pointed out in AP’s post.

Scott H on March 29, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Actually you make it rather simple. I have no problem with conception being the starting point of citizenship. And once sperm meets egg, BOOM!, human being with all the rights enjoyed by any child in the United States. “Difficult” philosophical dilemmas solved. What else ya got?

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 5:02 PM

Unfortunately, this logic isn’t really amenable to people who are not raging morons. The proposition that fertilized eggs should be treated as persons is absurd, on its face.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Partial birth abortions Mass killings with high capacity magazines” also account for a tiny, tiny fraction of the abortions murders performed in this country. Of course, “pro-lifers gun control fanactics” try to misrepresent this fact and pass them off as the rule and not the exception.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM

And yet, the Obama administration can’t live without gun control.

BobMbx on March 29, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Unfortunately, this logic isn’t really amenable to people who are not raging morons. The proposition that fertilized eggs should be treated as persons is absurd, on its face.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Why is it a felony to smash turtle eggs?

BobMbx on March 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM

“Partial birth abortions” also account for a tiny, tiny fraction of the abortions performed in this country. Of course, “pro-lifers” try to misrepresent this fact and pass them off as the rule and not the exception.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM

Who cares what the fraction is? They’re fully developed babies.

darwin on March 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM

ChunkyLover on March 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM

I guess you’ve never heard of the Princeton academician, Peter Singer?

Cleombrotus on March 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM

At what stage do you end a mother’s ability to legally kill her child? The only bright clear line that I think most people would agree is too late and is clear cut, is when the baby is out of the womb and alive. If we go beyond that point, where does the right to kill end? If I can kill a viable child outside the womb in an abortion clinic after birth, why not in my own home or wherever the mother gave birth? What is the difference? There has to be some standard and live birth may be as good as we can get the Supreme Court to accept once there is an Obama appointed majority.

KW64 on March 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM

“Partial birth abortions” also account for a tiny, tiny fraction of the abortions performed in this country. Of course, “pro-lifers” try to misrepresent this fact and pass them off as the rule and not the exception.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM

Yeah, pro-baby killers never do that with rape or incest which account for a tiny, tiny fraction of all pregnancies.

The number of procedures aside, are you for or against partial birth abortions?

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM

Unfortunately, this logic isn’t really amenable to people who are not raging morons. The proposition that fertilized eggs should be treated as persons is absurd, on its face.

Armin Tamzarian on March 29, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Why?

NotCoach on March 29, 2013 at 5:08 PM

If the GOP was smart they would post a video of this soul less woman speaking on the RNC website, and Reince Preibus would be out on Fox News decrying how “extreme” the Democrat party has become. And than he would call on all the Dems in the House and Senate to state their position on this.

Sadly the GOP is spineless, so don’t expect any of that. That’s why the GOP will soon go the way of the British “conservatives.” Always offering token opposition the LEFT, but never doing anything.

Raquel Pinkbullet on March 29, 2013 at 5:09 PM

when you find yourself in a contradiction, check your premises…

burserker on March 29, 2013 at 5:09 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 7