If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic)   In a masterpiece of goalpost-moving, columnist opines that the Gosnell case is the anti-abortion movement's fault because they didn't badger his clinic enough   (theatlantic.com) divider line 184
    More: Interesting, Kermit Gosnell, Dr. Kermit Gosnell, RH Reality Check, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Amanda Marcotte, Nexis, gag orders, intelligence  
•       •       •

1535 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Apr 2013 at 9:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



184 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-17 12:40:55 PM

kronicfeld: YixilTesiphon: vernonFL: Another detail I find disturbing is that some of the workers at the clinic complained to the state board about it - and nothing was done.

That's the real story here - the stunning incompetence of the Pennsylvania government seems to be demonstrated several times a year.

If this is going on in Philadelphia, what the hell is happening in the rest of the state?

I for one am shocked at this unprecedented example of Pennsylvania public employees deliberately turning a blind eye toward systematic violent crimes against children.


Win
 
2013-04-17 12:42:15 PM

Dwight_Yeast: Nice to see that skullcrusher is still the thick-headed asshole he's always been.


care to elaborate or are you content with the cowardice you usually display?
 
2013-04-17 12:44:16 PM

CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.


Extrapolate that. You've hit upon exactly the problem: many of them truly do not see a difference. Once you understand that fundamental core belief, you can understand why they're uncompromising about it. You must change that core belief if you want to change their minds. "Keep your laws off my body" doesn't resonate.
 
2013-04-17 12:45:46 PM

Marcus Aurelius: The anti-abortionists drove the procedure out of hospitals and into back alleyways.  This is the result of all their hard work.


This needs to be repeated often and loudly.  As the anti-abortion mob is more and more successful oppressing women's rights, more and more of these houses of horrors will spring up.

Religion is nothing more than a good intention to evil transducer.
 
2013-04-17 12:49:03 PM

skullkrusher: you made a blanket statement about suburban housewives. I don't think this dick operated under the radar because of bias against black kids as these anti-abortion activists like to stand in front of clinics with signs and rosaries rather than actually taking steps to close clinics like Kermit the Butcher's.


No, suburban housewives are willing to stand in front of clinics in reasonably safe neighborhoods. They will leave their cloistered suburbs for mixed neighborhoods or clinics near a university where there are still plenty of white folks walking around. But this clinic was in a very poor neighborhood and all the people around it were minorities. That is WAY outside of their comfort zone.

This asshole operated under the radar because operated in an area and on a population that our society just ignores. It takes a travesty like this to drag it out into the sunlight.

Oh, and I don't think the doctor is really a monster. He runs a bad business, doesn't pay for maintenance, and doesn't follow the damn rules. He is the medical equivalent of a factory owner that allows terrible conditions that result in contamination, injury, and death. Hardly anything new, but still morally offensive.
 
2013-04-17 12:50:29 PM

vygramul: CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.

Extrapolate that. You've hit upon exactly the problem: many of them truly do not see a difference. Once you understand that fundamental core belief, you can understand why they're uncompromising about it. You must change that core belief if you want to change their minds. "Keep your laws off my body" doesn't resonate.


It also helps if that same core belief system has no regard for the rights of women
 
2013-04-17 12:52:16 PM

Bloody William: Wessoman: Government is designed for the safety and welfare of the people. HERE is where I want more government oversight. To make sure the doctor you go to doesn't kill you. To make sure the car I drive won't fall apart. To make sure the food you eat won't poison you. To make sure the company I work for isn't polluting our natural resources.

The free market can do that better than any government!


Poe's law?
 
2013-04-17 12:55:23 PM

CPennypacker: vygramul: CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.

Extrapolate that. You've hit upon exactly the problem: many of them truly do not see a difference. Once you understand that fundamental core belief, you can understand why they're uncompromising about it. You must change that core belief if you want to change their minds. "Keep your laws off my body" doesn't resonate.

It also helps if that same core belief system has no regard for the rights of women


That's not central to that belief system, although it certainly helps if that is a belief one holds concurrently, which I would admit has a high incidence.

It's interesting - Evangelicals and other protestants really didn't care all that much about abortion until Phyllis Schlafly convinced them they would lose control of their women. Catholics, like Schlafly, were anti-abortion entirely because they see no difference between the baby and the fetus - certainly once the fetus was recognizable as a human.
 
2013-04-17 12:56:19 PM

madgonad: No, suburban housewives are willing to stand in front of clinics in reasonably safe neighborhoods. They will leave their cloistered suburbs for mixed neighborhoods or clinics near a university where there are still plenty of white folks walking around. But this clinic was in a very poor neighborhood and all the people around it were minorities. That is WAY outside of their comfort zone.


"Every Saturday morning," clinic neighbor Bill Baumann said in the Gosnell documentary 3801 Lancaster, "the priests and the antiabortionists were out front praying the rosary.""

madgonad: This asshole operated under the radar because operated in an area and on a population that our society just ignores. It takes a travesty like this to drag it out into the sunlight.


I can't respond to this because I have no idea why he was allowed to go on for as long as he did

madgonad: Oh, and I don't think the doctor is really a monster. He runs a bad business, doesn't pay for maintenance, and doesn't follow the damn rules. He is the medical equivalent of a factory owner that allows terrible conditions that result in contamination, injury, and death. Hardly anything new, but still morally offensive.


are you joking? This motherfarker (allegedly) killed babies. He (allegedly) killed a women. He ran a "medical" practice under the most abhorrent conditions. What else does he have to do to be called a "monster"?
 
2013-04-17 12:58:39 PM

skullkrusher: madgonad: Oh, and I don't think the doctor is really a monster. He runs a bad business, doesn't pay for maintenance, and doesn't follow the damn rules. He is the medical equivalent of a factory owner that allows terrible conditions that result in contamination, injury, and death. Hardly anything new, but still morally offensive.

are you joking? This motherfarker (allegedly) killed babies. He (allegedly) killed a women. He ran a "medical" practice under the most abhorrent conditions. What else does he have to do to be called a "monster"?


Vote for Fartbongo.
 
2013-04-17 01:00:18 PM

vygramul: CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.

Extrapolate that. You've hit upon exactly the problem: many of them truly do not see a difference. Once you understand that fundamental core belief, you can understand why they're uncompromising about it. You must change that core belief if you want to change their minds. "Keep your laws off my body" doesn't resonate.


The hypocrisy of blaming a lack of regulatory oversight while wanting laws kept off their bodies doesn't help either.
 
2013-04-17 01:00:27 PM

Wessoman: Aaaand the Free Market has given us a serious global warming problem, and GMOs in our food. It actually does hold back technology at times. But it's dumb to say that the Free Market has the answers to all problems. It's like saying God is the answer to everything. It sounds good on paper, but it's laughably impractical in practice.


William was being sarcastic.
 
2013-04-17 01:05:31 PM

skullkrusher: are you joking? This motherfarker (allegedly) killed babies. He (allegedly) killed a women. He ran a "medical" practice under the most abhorrent conditions. What else does he have to do to be called a "monster"?


Actually, he performed a D&X.... poorly. Because he was a lousy doctor. A D&X is a procedure done in some third trimester abortions (which he shouldn't even be doing). It involves damaging the brain/severing the spinal column during extraction (while still in the mother). The reason for this is while a 24-28 week fetus will die very shortly after being removed, it doesn't happen immediately and the procedure was designed to guarantee that fetus would not be alive outside of the mother at all. This farkstick apparently did an intact extraction and didn't terminate the fetus until the end. It is a vague area of law, but technically abortions are allowed when fetal life signs are terminated in utero while terminating them outside of the mother can be considered infanticide.
 
2013-04-17 01:08:41 PM

madgonad: skullkrusher: are you joking? This motherfarker (allegedly) killed babies. He (allegedly) killed a women. He ran a "medical" practice under the most abhorrent conditions. What else does he have to do to be called a "monster"?

Actually, he performed a D&X.... poorly. Because he was a lousy doctor. A D&X is a procedure done in some third trimester abortions (which he shouldn't even be doing). It involves damaging the brain/severing the spinal column during extraction (while still in the mother). The reason for this is while a 24-28 week fetus will die very shortly after being removed, it doesn't happen immediately and the procedure was designed to guarantee that fetus would not be alive outside of the mother at all. This farkstick apparently did an intact extraction and didn't terminate the fetus until the end. It is a vague area of law, but technically abortions are allowed when fetal life signs are terminated in utero while terminating them outside of the mother can be considered infanticide.


arbitrariness of the law notwithstanding, that is what he's accused of. He performed illegal 3rd trimester abortions. He had stacks of aborted fetuses in farking cat food containers. I think you have the bar for monstrosity set a bit high
 
2013-04-17 01:18:08 PM

pagstuff: vygramul: CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.

Extrapolate that. You've hit upon exactly the problem: many of them truly do not see a difference. Once you understand that fundamental core belief, you can understand why they're uncompromising about it. You must change that core belief if you want to change their minds. "Keep your laws off my body" doesn't resonate.

The hypocrisy of blaming a lack of regulatory oversight while wanting laws kept off their bodies doesn't help either.



Regulatory oversight of a clinic /= laws restricting a woman's right to do what she wants with her body. But you knew that, didn't you?
 
2013-04-17 01:49:11 PM

Lord_Baull: pagstuff: vygramul: CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.

Extrapolate that. You've hit upon exactly the problem: many of them truly do not see a difference. Once you understand that fundamental core belief, you can understand why they're uncompromising about it. You must change that core belief if you want to change their minds. "Keep your laws off my body" doesn't resonate.

The hypocrisy of blaming a lack of regulatory oversight while wanting laws kept off their bodies doesn't help either.


Regulatory oversight of a clinic /= laws restricting a woman's right to do what she wants with her body. But you knew that, didn't you?


Actually, I had no idea abortions were self-performed
 
2013-04-17 01:50:55 PM

pagstuff: Lord_Baull: pagstuff: vygramul: CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.

Extrapolate that. You've hit upon exactly the problem: many of them truly do not see a difference. Once you understand that fundamental core belief, you can understand why they're uncompromising about it. You must change that core belief if you want to change their minds. "Keep your laws off my body" doesn't resonate.

The hypocrisy of blaming a lack of regulatory oversight while wanting laws kept off their bodies doesn't help either.


Regulatory oversight of a clinic /= laws restricting a woman's right to do what she wants with her body. But you knew that, didn't you?

Actually, I had no idea abortions were self-performed


wtf are you talking about?
 
2013-04-17 01:52:26 PM

skullkrusher: YoungLochinvar: skullkrusher: YoungLochinvar: skullkrusher: QuesoDelicioso: Marcus Aurelius: The anti-abortionists drove the procedure out of hospitals and into back alleyways.  This is the result of all their hard work.

Exactly right. Bloody coat-hangers and dead women are what they apparently wanted, and I suppose it's what they're gonna get.

no, quite false. This is Philly. There are a number of Planned Parenthood locations and other safe and clean women's health clinics a short distance away from Kermit the Monster's clinic.

You realize that only 3 of the 20 Planned Parenthood clinics in PA offer abortion services, and that the closest one to Philly is still about 10-15 miles away, right? (Which, for somebody relying on public transportation, is quite far away, and potentially impossible...)

that means nothing to the point. According to the Yellow Pages, there are 3 abortion providers within the city itself and 4 more within 10 miles. 7 places to receive an abortion is hardly supportive of the notion that anti-abortion activism has driven abortion to the "back alleys". They'd like to but that is not the case here.

My Yellow Pages search turned up two in Philly, two more in Cherry Hill, nothing else within ten miles.

There's also the issue of funding - public funding (either through insurance for public employees or state aid) is only available in cases of endangerment, rape, or incest. That's also going to be a big deterrent.

http://www.yellowpages.com/philadelphia-pa/abortion-clinics

funding is irrelevant to the immediate question but I am cool with no public funding for abortion except in those cases you mentioned


Yeah...    read that list more closely. It's the same list I had; based on the website (for the clinic) the first three listings are the exact same place (despite different listed addresses), two others are simply larger organizations with no actual clinics near Philly.

Funding, as a potential barrier, is absolutely relevant. My understanding was a number of Gosnell's client were there because they couldn't afford legitimate places, which is a problem that public funding solves...

I mean, if you wanna make abortions more difficult to obtain that's your prerogative - I'm just not sure why you think it'll be any more effective than, say, the war on drugs. Market demands are usually met, legally or otherwise, and this is the type of stuff that happens on the black market for abortion...
 
2013-04-17 01:53:20 PM

Fluorescent Testicle: Well, one could certainly argue that the anti-abortion movement helped him out by over-regulating all the other clinics in the area into closure, forcing women to attend his horrific death shop instead. Of course, that doesn't make him any less guilty or disgusting, before any trolls jump on me for "Defending" his oxygen-thieving ass.


You reap what you sow. Real life has shown that when abortion is illegal, the same number of abortions are performed but more women die from them. But I guess it's the "right kind" of women, so that makes it okay to the conservative "pro-life" camp.
 
2013-04-17 02:02:43 PM
Talk about a miscarriage of justice.
 
2013-04-17 02:04:06 PM

jake_lex: The article does make an interesting point: how can there be people camped out there with the stated intent of shutting the place down not have noticed anything?


listen jake, it actually is a very stupid point only a moron or someone who is so ideologically bent they can even remain objective for 3 seconds it takes to analyze the retarded point would say it was interesting.
they are protestors.
they are not invited in to interview and verify the staff's medical credentials. they are not invited in look for unsafe practices. they are required by law to stay away from the clinic if they've ever been taken to court.
this guy had violation going back 20 years, but no one gave a shiat, perhaps because the only victims were the poor and probably pricks like you are so remarkably ideologically compromised you'd perform almost any task short of active cover up participation to defend and operation like this from regulation you find so remarkably in literally every other facet in commercial and medical life besides this one. you're what is f*cked up with america jake.
 
2013-04-17 02:04:16 PM

skullkrusher: He had stacks of aborted fetuses in farking cat food containers


Which is terrible, when you think about it. You can buy tupperware at the dollar store.
 
2013-04-17 02:06:27 PM

skullkrusher: Fluorescent Testicle: Well, one could certainly argue that the anti-abortion movement helped him out by over-regulating all the other clinics in the area into closure, forcing women to attend his horrific death shop instead. Of course, that doesn't make him any less guilty or disgusting, before any trolls jump on me for "Defending" his oxygen-thieving ass.

one could not argue that because it isn't true.


Well since you say it's not true I guess that just wraps it up. Nice talk, I really learned a lot.
 
2013-04-17 02:12:02 PM

YoungLochinvar: Yeah... read that list more closely. It's the same list I had; based on the website (for the clinic) the first three listings are the exact same place (despite different listed addresses), two others are simply larger organizations with no actual clinics near Philly.


The Philly clinics are all different. The S Jersey Woman's Center has 2 addresses but I don't know if that means 2 locations where services are provided. There's another unique clinic in there too within 10 miles. So at least 5, maybe 6 places to go

YoungLochinvar: Funding, as a potential barrier, is absolutely relevant. My understanding was a number of Gosnell's client were there because they couldn't afford legitimate places, which is a problem that public funding solves...


Look at the fees for the S Jersey Women's Clinic. Far less than what Doctor Demento charged

YoungLochinvar: I mean, if you wanna make abortions more difficult to obtain that's your prerogative - I'm just not sure why you think it'll be any more effective than, say, the war on drugs. Market demands are usually met, legally or otherwise, and this is the type of stuff that happens on the black market for abortion...


abortion should be safe and legal (to a point with restrictions). I am opposed to them from a personal perspective but if you want to get one, by all means. Just don't expect me to pay for it unless it is necessary to save your life or the result of rape.
 
2013-04-17 02:13:11 PM

hobberwickey: skullkrusher: Fluorescent Testicle: Well, one could certainly argue that the anti-abortion movement helped him out by over-regulating all the other clinics in the area into closure, forcing women to attend his horrific death shop instead. Of course, that doesn't make him any less guilty or disgusting, before any trolls jump on me for "Defending" his oxygen-thieving ass.

one could not argue that because it isn't true.

Well since you say it's not true I guess that just wraps it up. Nice talk, I really learned a lot.


yeah, I countered a claim without basis with a claim that has basis, I just didn't provide it at the time.
 
2013-04-17 02:13:41 PM

skullkrusher: madgonad: skullkrusher: are you joking? This motherfarker (allegedly) killed babies. He (allegedly) killed a women. He ran a "medical" practice under the most abhorrent conditions. What else does he have to do to be called a "monster"?

Actually, he performed a D&X.... poorly. Because he was a lousy doctor. A D&X is a procedure done in some third trimester abortions (which he shouldn't even be doing). It involves damaging the brain/severing the spinal column during extraction (while still in the mother). The reason for this is while a 24-28 week fetus will die very shortly after being removed, it doesn't happen immediately and the procedure was designed to guarantee that fetus would not be alive outside of the mother at all. This farkstick apparently did an intact extraction and didn't terminate the fetus until the end. It is a vague area of law, but technically abortions are allowed when fetal life signs are terminated in utero while terminating them outside of the mother can be considered infanticide.

arbitrariness of the law notwithstanding, that is what he's accused of. He performed illegal 3rd trimester abortions. He had stacks of aborted fetuses in farking cat food containers. I think you have the bar for monstrosity set a bit high


a monster? he's practically a hero!
see skull, you just way over analyze this. you need to see things as pure black and white right and wrong like pro choicers do around here.
they have a very simple test, in the grand scheme of things do I agree with what he was doing? well you like having late term abortions available right?
then the's charges are overblown, and the people who would like to string him up are really to blame for not being diligent enough.
if the answer is yes and the man is being attacked you must downplay his alleged crimes and attempt to defend what he did in any way possible while also attacking the people that disagree with you.
 
2013-04-17 02:16:17 PM

skullkrusher: YoungLochinvar: Yeah... read that list more closely. It's the same list I had; based on the website (for the clinic) the first three listings are the exact same place (despite different listed addresses), two others are simply larger organizations with no actual clinics near Philly.

The Philly clinics are all different. The S Jersey Woman's Center has 2 addresses but I don't know if that means 2 locations where services are provided. There's another unique clinic in there too within 10 miles. So at least 5, maybe 6 places to go

YoungLochinvar: Funding, as a potential barrier, is absolutely relevant. My understanding was a number of Gosnell's client were there because they couldn't afford legitimate places, which is a problem that public funding solves...

Look at the fees for the S Jersey Women's Clinic. Far less than what Doctor Demento charged

YoungLochinvar: I mean, if you wanna make abortions more difficult to obtain that's your prerogative - I'm just not sure why you think it'll be any more effective than, say, the war on drugs. Market demands are usually met, legally or otherwise, and this is the type of stuff that happens on the black market for abortion...

abortion should be safe and legal (to a point with restrictions). I am opposed to them from a personal perspective but if you want to get one, by all means. Just don't expect me to pay for it unless it is necessary to save your life or the result of rape.


You pay other people's medical bills? You're an even nicer guy than I thought
 
2013-04-17 02:17:45 PM

skullkrusher: YoungLochinvar: Yeah... read that list more closely. It's the same list I had; based on the website (for the clinic) the first three listings are the exact same place (despite different listed addresses), two others are simply larger organizations with no actual clinics near Philly.

The Philly clinics are all different. The S Jersey Woman's Center has 2 addresses but I don't know if that means 2 locations where services are provided. There's another unique clinic in there too within 10 miles. So at least 5, maybe 6 places to go

YoungLochinvar: Funding, as a potential barrier, is absolutely relevant. My understanding was a number of Gosnell's client were there because they couldn't afford legitimate places, which is a problem that public funding solves...

Look at the fees for the S Jersey Women's Clinic. Far less than what Doctor Demento charged

YoungLochinvar: I mean, if you wanna make abortions more difficult to obtain that's your prerogative - I'm just not sure why you think it'll be any more effective than, say, the war on drugs. Market demands are usually met, legally or otherwise, and this is the type of stuff that happens on the black market for abortion...

abortion should be safe and legal (to a point with restrictions). I am opposed to them from a personal perspective but if you want to get one, by all means. Just don't expect me to pay for it unless it is necessary to save your life or the result of rape.


relcec: skullkrusher: madgonad: skullkrusher: are you joking? This motherfarker (allegedly) killed babies. He (allegedly) killed a women. He ran a "medical" practice under the most abhorrent conditions. What else does he have to do to be called a "monster"?

Actually, he performed a D&X.... poorly. Because he was a lousy doctor. A D&X is a procedure done in some third trimester abortions (which he shouldn't even be doing). It involves damaging the brain/severing the spinal column during extraction (while still in the mother). The reason for this is while a 24-28 week fetus will die very shortly after being removed, it doesn't happen immediately and the procedure was designed to guarantee that fetus would not be alive outside of the mother at all. This farkstick apparently did an intact extraction and didn't terminate the fetus until the end. It is a vague area of law, but technically abortions are allowed when fetal life signs are terminated in utero while terminating them outside of the mother can be considered infanticide.

arbitrariness of the law notwithstanding, that is what he's accused of. He performed illegal 3rd trimester abortions. He had stacks of aborted fetuses in farking cat food containers. I think you have the bar for monstrosity set a bit high

a monster? he's practically a hero!
see skull, you just way over analyze this. you need to see things as pure black and white right and wrong like pro choicers do around here.
they have a very simple test, in the grand scheme of things do I agree with what he was doing? well you like having late term abortions available right?
then the's charges are overblown, and the people who would like to string him up are really to blame for not being diligent enough.
if the answer is yes and the man is being attacked you must downplay his alleged crimes and attempt to defend what he did in any way possible while also attacking the people that disagree with you.


Everyone wants him strung up, you goddamned moron.
 
2013-04-17 02:19:42 PM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: YoungLochinvar: Yeah... read that list more closely. It's the same list I had; based on the website (for the clinic) the first three listings are the exact same place (despite different listed addresses), two others are simply larger organizations with no actual clinics near Philly.

The Philly clinics are all different. The S Jersey Woman's Center has 2 addresses but I don't know if that means 2 locations where services are provided. There's another unique clinic in there too within 10 miles. So at least 5, maybe 6 places to go

YoungLochinvar: Funding, as a potential barrier, is absolutely relevant. My understanding was a number of Gosnell's client were there because they couldn't afford legitimate places, which is a problem that public funding solves...

Look at the fees for the S Jersey Women's Clinic. Far less than what Doctor Demento charged

YoungLochinvar: I mean, if you wanna make abortions more difficult to obtain that's your prerogative - I'm just not sure why you think it'll be any more effective than, say, the war on drugs. Market demands are usually met, legally or otherwise, and this is the type of stuff that happens on the black market for abortion...

abortion should be safe and legal (to a point with restrictions). I am opposed to them from a personal perspective but if you want to get one, by all means. Just don't expect me to pay for it unless it is necessary to save your life or the result of rape.

You pay other people's medical bills? You're an even nicer guy than I thought


I am pretty awesome, tis true
 
2013-04-17 02:20:55 PM

relcec: skullkrusher: madgonad: skullkrusher: are you joking? This motherfarker (allegedly) killed babies. He (allegedly) killed a women. He ran a "medical" practice under the most abhorrent conditions. What else does he have to do to be called a "monster"?

Actually, he performed a D&X.... poorly. Because he was a lousy doctor. A D&X is a procedure done in some third trimester abortions (which he shouldn't even be doing). It involves damaging the brain/severing the spinal column during extraction (while still in the mother). The reason for this is while a 24-28 week fetus will die very shortly after being removed, it doesn't happen immediately and the procedure was designed to guarantee that fetus would not be alive outside of the mother at all. This farkstick apparently did an intact extraction and didn't terminate the fetus until the end. It is a vague area of law, but technically abortions are allowed when fetal life signs are terminated in utero while terminating them outside of the mother can be considered infanticide.

arbitrariness of the law notwithstanding, that is what he's accused of. He performed illegal 3rd trimester abortions. He had stacks of aborted fetuses in farking cat food containers. I think you have the bar for monstrosity set a bit high

a monster? he's practically a hero!
see skull, you just way over analyze this. you need to see things as pure black and white right and wrong like pro choicers do around here.
they have a very simple test, in the grand scheme of things do I agree with what he was doing? well you like having late term abortions available right?
then the's charges are overblown, and the people who would like to string him up are really to blame for not being diligent enough.
if the answer is yes and the man is being attacked you must downplay his alleged crimes and attempt to defend what he did in any way possible while also attacking the people that disagree with you.


dude, there's no one praising this guy. One example of someone who has an incredibly high tolerance for monstrosity but no one cheering this guy
 
2013-04-17 02:21:31 PM

CPennypacker: All of my pro-life friends are surprised that I think this guy is a monster because I'm pro-choice. That will tell you how one dimensional their grasp of this issue is. You either murder babies or you don't.


To me, that's the real take-home of the Atlantic article linked here.  Why didn't the anti-abortion crowd find out anything about Gosnell?  Because in their minds he was already a monster simply for performing abortions; the methods he used were irrelevant.  Which also makes all of the coverage of this affair seem so upside-down to me: yes, it was conservatives who pushed it into the national conversation, but that's only because they seem to think that exposing conduct that's already illegal affects the abortion debtate generally.  (Aren't conservatives the same people who, in the recent gun debates, refused to discuss fully automatic weapons because those are already illegal?)  And so, in that vein...

part of the problem: Why is it so hard for liberals to just say this is a horrible and monstrous event that should never have been allowed to occur nevermind what you think of abortion?


Why is it so hard for conservatives just to say this is a horrible and monstrous event that has no bearing whatsoever on the legal abortions that are regularly performed in this country?
 
2013-04-17 02:23:34 PM

Fluorescent Testicle: vernonFL: Supposedly abortion clinics don't have to meet standards that other medical offices do - for example I heard that Dentists are regulated more than abortion clinics as far as cleanliness standards and such. I don't know if that last statement is even true. But that is what my anti-abortion friends have told me.

Your anti-choice friends lied to you. Pennsylvania has very strict laws.


THIS is amazing.
that you assholes have the balls to still complain about overzealous regulation in this specific geographic region AFTER we find out this dude has been crushing hundreds if not thousands of babies spinal cords and then stacking babies like cord-wood to putrefy while generally maintaining the hygiene at the facility more common in a high school locker room than a medical facility and that the operator had all the discernment for proper technical qualifications in his staff of a fly by night carnival operator which directly led to the death of a young poor women?
after all this shiat you helped create you have the balls to keep complaining, for the one time in your life, of over-regulation of something?
 
2013-04-17 02:24:29 PM

skullkrusher: YoungLochinvar: Yeah... read that list more closely. It's the same list I had; based on the website (for the clinic) the first three listings are the exact same place (despite different listed addresses), two others are simply larger organizations with no actual clinics near Philly.

The Philly clinics are all different. The S Jersey Woman's Center has 2 addresses but I don't know if that means 2 locations where services are provided. There's another unique clinic in there too within 10 miles. So at least 5, maybe 6 places to go

YoungLochinvar: Funding, as a potential barrier, is absolutely relevant. My understanding was a number of Gosnell's client were there because they couldn't afford legitimate places, which is a problem that public funding solves...

Look at the fees for the S Jersey Women's Clinic. Far less than what Doctor Demento charged

YoungLochinvar: I mean, if you wanna make abortions more difficult to obtain that's your prerogative - I'm just not sure why you think it'll be any more effective than, say, the war on drugs. Market demands are usually met, legally or otherwise, and this is the type of stuff that happens on the black market for abortion...

abortion should be safe and legal (to a point with restrictions). I am opposed to them from a personal perspective but if you want to get one, by all means. Just don't expect me to pay for it unless it is necessary to save your life or the result of rape.


I just looked at the websites for the orgs, I only found one address but maybe that's an issue with the websites (or me not searching the sites hard enough).

As far as cost, I'm guessing you're conflating Gosnell's late term prices with his early term prices:
http://www.keystonepolitics.com/2013/04/why-poor-women-went-to-kermi t- gosnells-clinic/

(The $330 Gosnell charges appears to be $100-$200 cheaper than the S Jersey clinic).

As far as having tax money pay for it - once again, that's your prerogative. But if people can't afford the legit places, they'll go to places like Gosnell's.
 
2013-04-17 02:25:24 PM

relcec: Fluorescent Testicle: vernonFL: Supposedly abortion clinics don't have to meet standards that other medical offices do - for example I heard that Dentists are regulated more than abortion clinics as far as cleanliness standards and such. I don't know if that last statement is even true. But that is what my anti-abortion friends have told me.

Your anti-choice friends lied to you. Pennsylvania has very strict laws.

THIS is amazing.
that you assholes have the balls to still complain about overzealous regulation in this specific geographic region AFTER we find out this dude has been crushing hundreds if not thousands of babies spinal cords and then stacking babies like cord-wood to putrefy while generally maintaining the hygiene at the facility more common in a high school locker room than a medical facility and that the operator had all the discernment for proper technical qualifications in his staff of a fly by night carnival operator which directly led to the death of a young poor women?
after all this shiat you helped create you have the balls to keep complaining, for the one time in your life, of over-regulation of something?


Wait if all that was legal why is he on trial?
 
2013-04-17 02:28:58 PM

relcec: jake_lex: The article does make an interesting point: how can there be people camped out there with the stated intent of shutting the place down not have noticed anything?

listen jake, it actually is a very stupid point only a moron or someone who is so ideologically bent they can even remain objective for 3 seconds it takes to analyze the retarded point would say it was interesting.
they are protestors.
they are not invited in to interview and verify the staff's medical credentials. they are not invited in look for unsafe practices. they are required by law to stay away from the clinic if they've ever been taken to court.
this guy had violation going back 20 years, but no one gave a shiat, perhaps because the only victims were the poor and probably pricks like you are so remarkably ideologically compromised you'd perform almost any task short of active cover up participation to defend and operation like this from regulation you find so remarkably in literally every other facet in commercial and medical life besides this one. you're what is f*cked up with america jake.


Is there ever a time you don't come off looking like an apoplectic frothing retard?
 
2013-04-17 02:30:44 PM

YoungLochinvar: I just looked at the websites for the orgs, I only found one address but maybe that's an issue with the websites (or me not searching the sites hard enough).

As far as cost, I'm guessing you're conflating Gosnell's late term prices with his early term prices:
http://www.keystonepolitics.com/2013/04/why-poor-women-went-to-kermi t- gosnells-clinic/

(The $330 Gosnell charges appears to be $100-$200 cheaper than the S Jersey clinic).


I might've been mixing up the late term/early term fees

YoungLochinvar: As far as having tax money pay for it - once again, that's your prerogative. But if people can't afford the legit places, they'll go to places like Gosnell's.


well it's not really my prerogative. Luckily our current law agrees with my feelings though. The Jersey place has assistance programs. Elective abortions aren't a concern of mine. I'd prefer to support a kid via tax dollars if need be over paying to have him preemptively terminated. If you want to elect to have an abortion which isn't medically necessary, I am not going to stop you but I don't want to be a part of it.
 
2013-04-17 02:38:17 PM

skullkrusher: dude, there's no one praising this guy. One example of someone who has an incredibly high tolerance for monstrosity but no one cheering this guy


it's hyperbole. I was taking *he just wasn't a very good doctor - no need to vilify the man*  to 3 levels higher to show its absurdity.
"Actually, he performed a D&X.... poorly. Because he was a lousy doctor."
see? he was just a lousy doctor just like the lousy 15% you'll find in any other profession. let's move on.
you seriously have ideological derangement if you can't even admit this was an incredibly nasty case. if you are trying to downplay the seriousness of the accusations.

the ironic thing is this is exactly what pro choicers claim will happen if abortion is made illegal (and which I agree with), but instead of them saying holy shiat we need to make sure this never happens again you see them come in here and claim
1) the pro life folks fell down on the job,
2) it really wasn't that bad and he was just a subpar doctor
3) overzealous regulation caused this tragedy and the answer is less restrictions even though this guy didn't have a visit from the medical authorities in 20 years and never had his staff credentialed apparently.

it's scary how far ideologues of any persuasion are able to warp their minds to fit the uncomfortable facts they are confronted with. they literally cannot see facts as normal people do.
 
2013-04-17 02:39:01 PM

part of the problem: Why is it so hard for liberals to just say this is a horrible and monstrous event that should never have been allowed to occur nevermind what you think of abortion?

The simple answer is that liberals are incapable of thinking ideologically impire thoughts. Or any other kind of thoughts for that matter. Just admit this is sick, politics be dammed.


This is a horrible and monstrous event that should never have been allowed to occur.  This is farking sick.

/Pro-choice liberal.

I would appreciate you retracting the bold part now.
 
2013-04-17 02:47:56 PM

madgonad: This is just another fine example of what happens when society becomes polarized over an issue. Both sides only see what they want to see and disregard the rest. This scumbag succeeded in hiding fairly well from the Right (possibly because it was a black doctor, serving a black population, in a black neighborhood - suburban housewives aren't quite so butthurt when the babies being aborted aren't white) - and the Left didn't go looking for bad clinics for fear of finding something which would erode support for their cause.


Sadly, a part of me thinks that the reason why abortion has a much higher approval rating now is because the average woman getting an abortion isn't a young white middle-class co-ed anymore, it's a poor minority woman who typically already has a kid.
 
2013-04-17 02:51:22 PM

skullkrusher: If you want to elect to have an abortion which isn't medically necessary, I am not going to stop you but I don't want to be a part of it.


That's fine.

Just understand that you WILL be a part of it one way or another. You're on the hook for paying for that kid's education, sure, but "unwanted" kids are more often than not going to need school lunch help, and their families will more likely be taking advantage of programs like TANF, and SNAP (and, while the kid's gestating, WIC). And even with all that, what are the odds the kid is well-nourished? Assuming the kid's getting his vitamins, what are the odds they live in a stable family environment (especially considering we know mom already didn't want the kid)?

Not to mention the third-, fourth- and fifth- (...nth-)order problems - a kid growing up in the conditions above is more likely to not finish HS (and even if so, less than likely to attend or even graduate college), more likely to be involved in crime (and if it's drug- or sex-crime, hooray more expensive incarceration with all the health problems), and in general less likely to net-contribute to society.

Not to say it can't be done, or that "unwanted" kids will necessarily end up homeless junkies sucking dick for lines of Velveeta, but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?
 
2013-04-17 02:53:54 PM

Dr Dreidel: but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?


No.
 
2013-04-17 02:55:35 PM

shortymac: the average woman getting an abortion isn't a young white middle-class co-ed anymore, it's a poor minority woman who typically already has a kid.


Non-Hispanic white women account for 36% of abortions, non-Hispanic black women for 30%, Hispanic women for 25% and women of other races for 9%.[6]

About 61% of abortions are obtained by women who have one or more children. [6]

Link
 
2013-04-17 02:59:06 PM

Dr Dreidel: skullkrusher: If you want to elect to have an abortion which isn't medically necessary, I am not going to stop you but I don't want to be a part of it.

That's fine.

Just understand that you WILL be a part of it one way or another. You're on the hook for paying for that kid's education, sure, but "unwanted" kids are more often than not going to need school lunch help, and their families will more likely be taking advantage of programs like TANF, and SNAP (and, while the kid's gestating, WIC). And even with all that, what are the odds the kid is well-nourished? Assuming the kid's getting his vitamins, what are the odds they live in a stable family environment (especially considering we know mom already didn't want the kid)?

Not to mention the third-, fourth- and fifth- (...nth-)order problems - a kid growing up in the conditions above is more likely to not finish HS (and even if so, less than likely to attend or even graduate college), more likely to be involved in crime (and if it's drug- or sex-crime, hooray more expensive incarceration with all the health problems), and in general less likely to net-contribute to society.

Not to say it can't be done, or that "unwanted" kids will necessarily end up homeless junkies sucking dick for lines of Velveeta, but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?


No.
 
2013-04-17 03:01:33 PM

lennavan: Dr Dreidel: but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?

No.


OK then. At least you've made an informed choice.

Hopefully, it also means you'd allow others that same choice, but (and I'm not assuming you're all about this) you can no longer pretend opposition is based on anything but your own morality. Which, again, is perfectly OK. I myself am "anti-"abortion in the sense that I don't think should get that far (contraception and Plan B should handle 90%ish of what would become abortions) - my own moral reasons.

However, if someone doesn't want to be a parent, I also think there's a certain morality in allowing them that choice (or at least, the morality of not bringing in an "unwanted" kid to more than likely suffer for the sins of the parents). Morality is a balancing act anyway.

// that last 10% is some laughably small number of "accidental pregnancies" where both parties used contraception as directed and Plan B failed to work as directed
// and the 90/10 split is not math-based, so it might be some other breakdown
 
2013-04-17 03:04:33 PM

skullkrusher: Dr Dreidel: skullkrusher: If you want to elect to have an abortion which isn't medically necessary, I am not going to stop you but I don't want to be a part of it.

That's fine.

Just understand that you WILL be a part of it one way or another. You're on the hook for paying for that kid's education, sure, but "unwanted" kids are more often than not going to need school lunch help, and their families will more likely be taking advantage of programs like TANF, and SNAP (and, while the kid's gestating, WIC). And even with all that, what are the odds the kid is well-nourished? Assuming the kid's getting his vitamins, what are the odds they live in a stable family environment (especially considering we know mom already didn't want the kid)?

Not to mention the third-, fourth- and fifth- (...nth-)order problems - a kid growing up in the conditions above is more likely to not finish HS (and even if so, less than likely to attend or even graduate college), more likely to be involved in crime (and if it's drug- or sex-crime, hooray more expensive incarceration with all the health problems), and in general less likely to net-contribute to society.

Not to say it can't be done, or that "unwanted" kids will necessarily end up homeless junkies sucking dick for lines of Velveeta, but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?

No.


I wish more people realized this
 
2013-04-17 03:07:42 PM

lennavan: part of the problem: Why is it so hard for liberals to just say this is a horrible and monstrous event that should never have been allowed to occur nevermind what you think of abortion?

The simple answer is that liberals are incapable of thinking ideologically impire thoughts. Or any other kind of thoughts for that matter. Just admit this is sick, politics be dammed.

This is a horrible and monstrous event that should never have been allowed to occur.  This is farking sick.

/Pro-choice liberal.

I would appreciate you retracting the bold part now.


What you're forgetting is that there are only two sides to this debate. Either all abortions are morally reprehensible or all abortions are morally acceptable. And since philosophers like Peter Singer have argued that infanticide is the same thing as late-term abortion, if you find abortion morally acceptable, you must find what this doctor did morally acceptable. Ipso facto, you cannot find this doctor's actions sick.

/I wish there weren't people who thought this was actually the case
 
2013-04-17 03:08:44 PM

CPennypacker: skullkrusher: Dr Dreidel: skullkrusher: If you want to elect to have an abortion which isn't medically necessary, I am not going to stop you but I don't want to be a part of it.

That's fine.

Just understand that you WILL be a part of it one way or another. You're on the hook for paying for that kid's education, sure, but "unwanted" kids are more often than not going to need school lunch help, and their families will more likely be taking advantage of programs like TANF, and SNAP (and, while the kid's gestating, WIC). And even with all that, what are the odds the kid is well-nourished? Assuming the kid's getting his vitamins, what are the odds they live in a stable family environment (especially considering we know mom already didn't want the kid)?

Not to mention the third-, fourth- and fifth- (...nth-)order problems - a kid growing up in the conditions above is more likely to not finish HS (and even if so, less than likely to attend or even graduate college), more likely to be involved in crime (and if it's drug- or sex-crime, hooray more expensive incarceration with all the health problems), and in general less likely to net-contribute to society.

Not to say it can't be done, or that "unwanted" kids will necessarily end up homeless junkies sucking dick for lines of Velveeta, but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?

No.

I wish more people realized this


realized what?
 
2013-04-17 03:10:37 PM

Dr Dreidel: Hopefully, it also means you'd allow others that same choice


Yup.

Dr Dreidel: you can no longer pretend opposition is based on anything but your own morality.


I think you're using the wrong word there in "opposition."  I'm not opposed to people getting abortions, I'm opposed to the possibility that I would be forced to help them get an abortion.

Dr Dreidel: I also think there's a certain morality in allowing them that choice


The phrase "allowing them that choice" makes my skin crawl.  Maybe I'm part libertarian.  So long as they aren't infringing on the rights of another person, who the fark am I to choose for other people?  So I'm pro-choice until the fetus becomes a person.
 
2013-04-17 03:10:52 PM

skullkrusher: Dr Dreidel: skullkrusher: If you want to elect to have an abortion which isn't medically necessary, I am not going to stop you but I don't want to be a part of it.

That's fine.

Just understand that you WILL be a part of it one way or another. You're on the hook for paying for that kid's education, sure, but "unwanted" kids are more often than not going to need school lunch help, and their families will more likely be taking advantage of programs like TANF, and SNAP (and, while the kid's gestating, WIC). And even with all that, what are the odds the kid is well-nourished? Assuming the kid's getting his vitamins, what are the odds they live in a stable family environment (especially considering we know mom already didn't want the kid)?

Not to mention the third-, fourth- and fifth- (...nth-)order problems - a kid growing up in the conditions above is more likely to not finish HS (and even if so, less than likely to attend or even graduate college), more likely to be involved in crime (and if it's drug- or sex-crime, hooray more expensive incarceration with all the health problems), and in general less likely to net-contribute to society.

Not to say it can't be done, or that "unwanted" kids will necessarily end up homeless junkies sucking dick for lines of Velveeta, but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?

No.


I would probably pay for the small price for the abortion than the larger price for an incarcerated loser kid that wasn't conceived intentionally. But that's me the Conservative, always thinking about dollars and sense.

(Back.)
 
2013-04-17 03:13:47 PM

Wessoman: skullkrusher: Dr Dreidel: skullkrusher: If you want to elect to have an abortion which isn't medically necessary, I am not going to stop you but I don't want to be a part of it.

That's fine.

Just understand that you WILL be a part of it one way or another. You're on the hook for paying for that kid's education, sure, but "unwanted" kids are more often than not going to need school lunch help, and their families will more likely be taking advantage of programs like TANF, and SNAP (and, while the kid's gestating, WIC). And even with all that, what are the odds the kid is well-nourished? Assuming the kid's getting his vitamins, what are the odds they live in a stable family environment (especially considering we know mom already didn't want the kid)?

Not to mention the third-, fourth- and fifth- (...nth-)order problems - a kid growing up in the conditions above is more likely to not finish HS (and even if so, less than likely to attend or even graduate college), more likely to be involved in crime (and if it's drug- or sex-crime, hooray more expensive incarceration with all the health problems), and in general less likely to net-contribute to society.

Not to say it can't be done, or that "unwanted" kids will necessarily end up homeless junkies sucking dick for lines of Velveeta, but wouldn't you rather pay for an infinitesimally small part of a $100 abortion than all of that?

No.

I would probably pay for the small price for the abortion than the larger price for an incarcerated loser kid that wasn't conceived intentionally. But that's me the Conservative, always thinking about dollars and sense.

(Back.)


meh, I'd rather see the kid given a shot regardless of how remote and help him out if he needs it.
 
Displayed 50 of 184 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report