Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Life after Gosnell

This time last year, notorious Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell was on trial. "For procrastination," as one insightful commentator put it. Gosnell waited until his victims had passed through the birth canal before cutting their spinal cords.

Let's not forget that he also killed adult women (a fact that unfortunately got less attention than it should because it only resulted in a manslaughter conviction, versus murder for the infant victims). And his "clinic" was disgusting and grossly understaffed; a teenager worked there, and I can only cringe when I think of how that experience must have affected her psyche.

Time passes; life goes on. Gosnell was of course convicted. The former house of horrors has, in a movie-like happy ending, been purchased for use as a charitable food pantry.

But it would be wrong to view Gosnell in isolation. It's all part of a broader story, in which legislation to regulate abortion facilities is scorned as an anti-choice conspiracy, while the ambulances keep coming. Planned Parenthood aggressively targets politicians who dare to vote for common-sense safety measures: including, most appallingly, the cousin of one of Gosnell's victims.

So I think it's entirely appropriate for the pro-life movement to keep Gosnell in the spotlight. A new documentary film promises to do just that, and best of all, this documentary will air on television.

If you're thinking, "Didn't I already see a movie about Kermit Gosnell?", you are correct. 3801 Lancaster is a short film that vividly depicts the findings of the grand jury report and features heart-wrenching interviews with women harmed by Gosnell. But it was created before the trial, so it obviously can't tell the whole story.

The new film, which is simply titled "Gosnell," is in the crowdfunding phase. The producers have already raised close to $200,000 on IndieGogo.

One of the taglines for the film is "The Doctor is Sin." I don't know if that's an indication that this will be a religious film, or if it's just a clever play on words. The media coverage of the fundraising campaign has been secular in nature so far, so I'm guessing the latter.

The other tagline is "America's Biggest Serial Killer." The producers make their case:
Gosnell killed more people than Gary Ridgeway, John Wayne Gacey, The Zodiac Killer and Ted Bundy combined. In a 30 year killing spree, it is thought he killed 1000s of babies. And that wasn't a national story?
All of those serial killers are staples of cable TV specials. It stands to reason that Gosnell should be too. I look forward to seeing the end result of this project.


Chalkdust said...

Okay, I get that Gosnell is obviously an important argument in the abortion debate. And I understand the logic of, "I am right, therefore Gosnell is probably an argument that I am right"--I have to admit that I've used that as a starting point in my own thinking.

What I don't get is how pro-lifers justify the conclusion that Gosnell is an argument in their favor. What Gosnell did was already illegal; that's why he's in jail now. If SB 732 had passed before Semika Shaw's death. . .it wouldn't have saved her, it would just have been one more law Gosnell was ignoring while he killed her. So how is Gosnell an argument that more anti-abortion laws should exist?

Kelsey said...

Good question, and the answer is: the issue is how long he was able to get away with it. Legitimate medical facilities are subject to random inspections on a regular basis. Gosnell's facility went uninspected for years because, according to the grand jury, pro-choice state politicians effectively nullified all regulation. In fact, the only reason Gosnell's murderous tendencies came to light was because the FEDS raided his office on totally unrelated charges (Gosnell's on-the-side painkiller addiction enterprise).

Acyutananda said...

Besides Kelsey's point about the lessons of a technical nature that we have learned, I think that many in the public must have gained something that was less technical and more of a perceptual shift -- reflected in the "For procrastination" quip.

For those who can connect a few simple dots, Gosnell brought into stark relief what the entire abortion industry is about. People were faced with the fact that Gosnell was killing babies, and that the response in themselves was one of revulsion. And many of those people must have asked themselves for the first time, "How exactly is this different from normal abortion practices?" -- and must have failed to come up with a meaningful answer.

This is not to say that all abortions are unjustified. But in the process of developing the political will to stop the many unjustified ones, we will have to comprehend and feel the fact that all abortion is killing babies.

And once we have found the will to enact unborn child-protection laws, then, as Kelsey has pointed out, enforcement need not be slack.

Chris P said...

What a disgraceful way of trying to get support for your interference in other people's lives. Guns kill far more living people - why don't you fix that REAL problem.

Acyutananda said...

Where I live, a common reason is "I do want to be pregnant, but with a boy, not with this girl." Is that sufficient?

I didn't understand about "sexual life."