Media blackout of Gosnell's trial...the msm is okay with killing babies, it seems.

[koshergrl]

"Gosnell's trial is to abortion what Sandy Hook is to gun ownership.
Both are emotional cases with horrific details that cry out for public policy debates. And in each case, the debate pits public safety against something widely considered a constitutional right.
The two cases are different in that Sandy Hook received wall-to-wall coverage and thus facilitated a national conversation about mental health and gun control -- a debate whose outcome is yet to be determined.
Not so with the Gosnell trial, which has been completely blacked out by the media."

Guns and babies: A tale of two massacres | WashingtonExaminer.com

 

[Mr. H.]

Unfortunately, it is a constitutional right.
So is the right to choose to own a firearm.
Choosing to end a life by one of those means is not only accepted but condoned. Unfortunately.
The other... no so much. Fortunately.

 

[koshergrl]

It should never have been made an constitutional right, as it isn't constititional. What can be done, can and should be undone.

 

[Pogo]

"Media blackout"... sheesh.
Guess I must have dreamed it when I heard that story a while back, there being a "media blackout" and all.

Washington Examiner -- 'nuff said.

 

[JoeB131]

The only reason why this case is a big deal is some oppurtunistic politicians want to bootstrap their anti-choice agenda onto a case of malpractice.

The only crime here is an adult patient was given enough Demerol to knock out a horse and she died.

Otherwise, no one would care that fetuses were terminated at an abortion clinic... because that's what abortion clinics are for.

So instead of just going after the guy for the malpractice, they are going to create INSTANT appeal material by introducing this inflametory crap about fetuses.

Hey, here's a whacky idea. Let's give poor women the same access to reproductive health services that rich white women get.

 

[koshergrl]

That's right. And the msm is committed to promoting abortion.

If the good doctor had been shot by a kook waving a gun, this would be all over the place, with the adage that guns are bad and must be removed from the hands and homes of the dangerous American citizenry.

 

[JoeB131]

That's right. And the msm is committed to promoting abortion.

If the good doctor had been shot by a kook waving a gun, this would be all over the place, with the adage that guns are bad and must be removed from the hands and homes of the dangerous American citizenry.

Well, yeah, a kook shooting a doctor is a crime.

A doctor terminating a fetus isn't.

 

[koshergrl]

This doctor was killing viable babies by cutting their spinal cords after delivery. It is illegal, which is why he's being tried.

 

[JoeB131]

This doctor was killing viable babies by cutting their spinal cords after delivery. It is illegal, which is why he's being tried.

You mean why he's being persecuted.

They wouldn't have a case if an adult woman hadn't died.

Unfortunately, they are taking a pretty straight forward case of negligent homicide and trying to bootstrap an anti-choice agenda onto it.

It will probably backfire on them.

 

[tinydancer]

Unfortunately, it is a constitutional right.
So is the right to choose to own a firearm.
Choosing to end a life by one of those means is not only accepted but condoned. Unfortunately.
The other... no so much. Fortunately.

I'm telling you when I read the woman confessing to snipping their heads off.....

I ran up that road. I must have run a million miles trying to get that image out of my head.

For true. My heart still has not healed. I hope it never does.

And we shine on. It's worth the fight.

 

[yidnar]

This doctor was killing viable babies by cutting their spinal cords after delivery. It is illegal, which is why he's being tried.

You mean why he's being persecuted.

They wouldn't have a case if an adult woman hadn't died.

Unfortunately, they are taking a pretty straight forward case of negligent homicide and trying to bootstrap an anti-choice agenda onto it.

It will probably backfire on them.

you are one sick bastard !! if you can't see the crime in cutting a babies spinal cord after birth you are stupid as well !! proof positive that when it comes to weather the child is destroyed before or after birth [remember according to libbs it isn't a baby until it is born] is just a bunch off bullshit to allow children to be murdered.

 

[tinydancer]

This doctor was killing viable babies by cutting their spinal cords after delivery. It is illegal, which is why he's being tried.

You mean why he's being persecuted.

They wouldn't have a case if an adult woman hadn't died.

Unfortunately, they are taking a pretty straight forward case of negligent homicide and trying to bootstrap an anti-choice agenda onto it.

It will probably backfire on them.

No it wont.

 

[JoeB131]

This doctor was killing viable babies by cutting their spinal cords after delivery. It is illegal, which is why he's being tried.

You mean why he's being persecuted.

They wouldn't have a case if an adult woman hadn't died.

Unfortunately, they are taking a pretty straight forward case of negligent homicide and trying to bootstrap an anti-choice agenda onto it.

It will probably backfire on them.

No it wont.

Yeah, actually it will.

If you don't have a hung jury, you'll have an appeal court overturn the whole thing for allowing inflametory evidence.

 

[JoeB131]

This doctor was killing viable babies by cutting their spinal cords after delivery. It is illegal, which is why he's being tried.

You mean why he's being persecuted.

They wouldn't have a case if an adult woman hadn't died.

Unfortunately, they are taking a pretty straight forward case of negligent homicide and trying to bootstrap an anti-choice agenda onto it.

It will probably backfire on them.

you are one sick bastard !! if you can't see the crime in cutting a babies spinal cord after birth you are stupid as well !! proof positive that when it comes to weather the child is destroyed before or after birth [remember according to libbs it isn't a baby until it is born] is just a bunch off bullshit to allow children to be murdered.

First, no one has really proven he cut the spinal cords after "birth".

Second- they went to that clinic to end their pregnancies, that should be the expected result.

Not being handed some mess and say, "Here's your baby!"

 

[Jroc]

You mean why he's being persecuted.

They wouldn't have a case if an adult woman hadn't died.

Unfortunately, they are taking a pretty straight forward case of negligent homicide and trying to bootstrap an anti-choice agenda onto it.

It will probably backfire on them.

you are one sick bastard !! if you can't see the crime in cutting a babies spinal cord after birth you are stupid as well !! proof positive that when it comes to weather the child is destroyed before or after birth [remember according to libbs it isn't a baby until it is born] is just a bunch off bullshit to allow children to be murdered.

First, no one has really proven he cut the spinal cords after "birth".

Second- they went to that clinic to end their pregnancies, that should be the expected result.

Not being handed some mess and say, "Here's your baby!"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Ibbc2HXZs]Baby-Killer Gosnell Charged ????? Watch Him Laugh at 0:18 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[koshergrl]

If you go to a clinic when you're 7-9 months along, you are seeking infanticide.

And that's what he gave them. The babies were born alive, and he killed them.

 

[Jroc]

If you go to a clinic when you're 7-9 months along, you are seeking infanticide.

And that's what he gave them. The babies were born alive, and he killed them.

Miserable people like Joe don't care if the babies were born alive. if a woman goes to an abortion clinic those babies should be killed

 

[JoeB131]

If you go to a clinic when you're 7-9 months along, you are seeking infanticide.

And that's what he gave them. The babies were born alive, and he killed them.

First, no one has really proven that he was terminating fetuses that old.

All they really have are eyewitness testimony.

Second- sorry, it isn't an infant until it's gone full term.

 

[JoeB131]

you are one sick bastard !! if you can't see the crime in cutting a babies spinal cord after birth you are stupid as well !! proof positive that when it comes to weather the child is destroyed before or after birth [remember according to libbs it isn't a baby until it is born] is just a bunch off bullshit to allow children to be murdered.

First, no one has really proven he cut the spinal cords after "birth".

Second- they went to that clinic to end their pregnancies, that should be the expected result.

Not being handed some mess and say, "Here's your baby!"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Ibbc2HXZs]Baby-Killer Gosnell Charged ????? Watch Him Laugh at 0:18 - YouTube[/ame]

Guy, you can try to bootstrap your anti-choice agenda all day, but honestly, you've taken a straight up and down case of medical homicide and made it political.

Chances are, you have at least ONE juror who doesn't think of spooge as people.

Hung Jury.

 

[yidnar]

If you go to a clinic when you're 7-9 months along, you are seeking infanticide.

And that's what he gave them. The babies were born alive, and he killed them.

First, no one has really proven that he was terminating fetuses that old.

All they really have are eyewitness testimony.

Second- sorry, it isn't an infant until it's gone full term.

this little one was not carried to full term.would you be ok with killing it??