What does the trial of a Philadelphia doctor who is accused of performing illegal late-term abortions by inducing labor and then killing viable fetuses have to do with the debate over legal abortion?That rhetorical question is easy to answer– it gives insights how some of our high ranking elected officials actually hold political positions which condone Gosnell’s acts of infanticide and how government officials and medical turn a blind eye to existing law protecting the newly born to ensure the viability of their perceived sacred right of abortion on demand.
Although this author is appalled by abortion, it is currently the law of the land with some caveats (like the 24 week rule, and Born Alive). But consider the appalling medical conditions described in the Gosnell trial, and the aforementioned Orlando abortion instance and the lack of regard for the Born Alive Protection Act. Does this type of treatment represent the sentiments which President Obama alluded to when quoting President Bill J. Clinton that “Abortion should be rare, safe and legal”.
If abortionists routinely skirt the law on infants born alive and give sub-par medical treatment to women wanting abortions on the cusp of legally recognized viability, then how does it bode for other medical treatment, especially under Obamacare?
Those who oppose abortion know that pro-choice people become uncomfortable when the ghastly facts about abortion as practice are exposed. That is why the Lamestream Media ignores cases like Gosnell and Hollywood stereotypes pro-lifers as hayseed, obsessed bitter clingers. But as we are all being fed into the machine of Obamacare, people should be fully cognizant how medical ethics are being skirted for profit and professional integrity as well as the ethics of removing the voice for the defenseless such as the unborn may soon imperil you.