Prior to Roe v. Wade, back-alley abortions were illegal. Thanks to the trial of the individual who is the personification of Roe, we now know they are legal. Kermit Gosnell was originally charged with eight counts of murder: one of a woman who died as a result of his "work"; seven of babies he murdered as a result of deliberately inducing labor in order to more easily kill them. We know for a fact from the grand jury report on Gosnell the following: zealous pro-abortion Pennsylvania government employees masquerading as decent human beings and with jobs to inspect Pennsylvania's abortion mills didn't inspect ANY abortion mills for nearly 20 years during the gubenatorial administrations of pro-abortion Republican Tom Ridge and pro-abortion Democrat Ed Rendell, which means we don't know how many more abortionists like Gosnell there are in Pennsylvania; Gosnell not only left body parts of aborted babies in jars, he often left body parts of aborted babies in the mothers; medical personnel in other health care facilities who had to provide additional medical care to these women either reported Gosnell and what he did to authorities but never followed up or never reported on what Gosnell did; Gosnell's attempt to be a part of the supposedly "premier" abortion group was refused but the group never reported Gosnell to the authorities; supposedly "honorable" abortionists who wouldn't work on certain types of abortions sent mothers to Gosnell.
As I stated above, Gosnell was originally charged with eight counts of murder. Thanks to his lawyer working the system, that number was reduced to five since the prosecution couldn't prove three of the babies were alive after they were outside of the womb. Now, some pro-abortion clown might say that this disproves my point about Roe making back-alley abortions legal. Except it doesn't. While these three babies may not have been murdered as specified in the statute, it doesn't mean Gosnell didn't perform thousands of what the statutes would say are legal abortions in his back-alley abortion mill.
We also have to acknowledge these facts. Gosnell wasn't associated with Planned Parenthood. And while circumstantial evidence of PP's practices might indicate some of their Pennsylvania "clinics" referred mothers to Gosnell, there aren't any facts that I know of that proves it happened (if they have come out, I will strike out this line in an update).
But there are other facts as well. In testimony given under oath to members of the Florida state legislature, a PP lobbyist said it is up to the abortionist and the mother to decide if a baby born alive following a botched abortion should remain alive. Having the state declare the child alive and with guaranteed rights might restrict women's "access" (this is one of the pro-abortion zealots' favorite words) to their reproductive "health" (another of their favorite words) rights; ie., infanticide is A-OK with PP. (Whether they approve of the Gosnell method by severing the living baby's spinal cord with scissors, who knows; PP might have a more "humane" method to murder these babies.) These are the same kinds of arguments Barack Obama made a little more than 10 years ago when he was still a lowly state senator in the Illinois legislature, and several times prevented a vote in the Illinois state Senate a bill to guarantee the rights of a baby born alive after a botched abortion. He said such measures would make for onerous over-regulation and would...here it comes...wait for it...restrict women's "access" to their reproductive "health" rights. Obama prevented these votes despite the fact that testimony had been given in the Illinois legislature and to Congress that abortionists were regularly letting the living human beings born of a botched abortion die of exposure; ie., infanticide. This was the policy Gosnell was allowed to "work" under for nearly 20 years, thanks to the criminal malfeasance (and accessory to these murders) of the aforementioned Pennsylvania government employees masquerading as decent human beings.
Yesterday, Obama gave a speech to a Planned Parenthood gathering, to "celebrate" the "work" they do in the name of reproductive "freedom" or some such nonsense (the quoted words are mine and not attributed to Obama). Like a petulant child, Obama whined about how some legislatures are working on further restricting abortions in their states, restricting "access" for women. However, he didn't mention Gosnell. Which makes sense. In a state where "access" wasn't restricted at all because the regulatory regime was rendered non-existent by the Pennsylvania state government, Gosnell was allowed to ply his butchery without anybody taking him to account. If Obama had even thought about bringing up Gosnell, it would completely undercut the zealous, pro-abortion "access" argument he and PP make, along with the other pro-abortion fanatics, on a regular basis. As I said in the first sentence of this post, back-alley abortions were illegal before the Roe v. Wade decision 40 years ago. But thanks to the likes of Barack Obama, Planned Parenthood, the Pennsylvania state government, all of the other pro-abortion nuts, and Kermit Gosnell, back-alley abortions are quite legal and can be protected by law.
This is what is happening in New York state under Democrat fake Catholic Andrew Cuomo, which I've mentioned here. The "reproductive health act" Cuomo wants passed would permit unlimited late-term abortion on demand, would endanger the lives of women by allowing non-physicians to perform abortions, and would preclude any future reasonable regulations of abortion (see this Hot Air post for more info). As of right now, the bill hasn't yet come up for a vote. If passed and signed into law, New York state's Gosnell-like abortionists would be able to have their back-alley abortions legalized by statute. All in the name of "access" and women's rights to reproductive "health".
You know, one of the arguments I keep hearing from the pro-abortion crowd is how they don't want the government to regulate or have control over women's bodies, and conservatives who are against abortion aren't really conservatives. But think about it. When a man and a woman have sex together, nobody really has control over their bodies, especially if the couple isn't using birth control at the time (heck, even if the man has a condom, it could break). So the "control" argument is a false one. What it also means is that when it comes to control and self-regulation of their own bodies, the women who have had abortions aren't very good at it. And because of this, more than a million human beings are killed every year, with Planned Parenthood performing at least a third of those for the last few years.
I'm also amazed that so many homosexuals are pro-abortion fanatics. Think about it; a homosexual will never ever conceive a child with the person they say they are in love and have sex with, someone of the same sex. It isn't biologically possible. Add this thought as well. Homosexuals claim they are born being homosexuals. If true, and I'm not saying it is, do they care how many homosexuals have been aborted every year out of the million plus babies killed? Oh I'm sure homosexuals will claim that laws that seemingly violate reproductive "rights" are just as bad as sodomy laws. It's a ridiculous argument since there will be less homosexuals, a group incapable of reproducing without intervention, something just about all heterosexual couples do without the assistance of a third party. It's almost like pro-abortion homosexuals are emulating the Shakers.
At one time, a pro-abortion Democrat who shan't be named (*cough* Bill Clinton *cough*) said he believed abortions needed to be safe, legal, and rare. We knew then he was lying, and we know every pro-abortion Democrat (and any other pro-abortion zealot) who says this now is lying. With more than 50 million dead babies since Roe and with some murder charges against Gosnell being dropped (it's possible he'll be acquitted of all the murder charges regarding the dead babies), the words "rare" and "safe" have long held no meaning in that statement; all that matters is that abortions are legal.
I still remember when another Democrat fake Catholic, Massachusetts' now-dead-and-buried Ted Kennedy, falsely, egregiously, viciously, and infamously attacked the now-deceased Robert Bork during the latter's confirmation hearing after President Ronald Reagan nominated the brilliant jurist to the Supreme Court. It is no mystery that Bork thought Roe v. Wade was a badly written and bad decision, and it's possible he might have voted to overturn it if and when it was brought up to the court in a case. (After Bork's nomination was withdrawn, Anthony Kennedy, no relation to Ted and appointed by Reagan and then confirmed, was the deciding vote in Casey v. Planned Parenthood -- go figure -- which upheld the "essential holding" of Roe.) Let's revisit Kennedy deliberately slandering Bork and note the first words out of this dead miscreant's mouth:
Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions,...
Well, guess what? Ted Kennedy's, Andrew Cuomo's, Kermit Gosnell's, Planned Parenthood's, and Barack Obama's America has devolved into making back-alley abortions completely legal, whereas prior to Roe v. Wade, they were always illegal.
At the end of his speech to PP, Obama said the following [emphasis mine]:
"As long as we've got to fight to make sure women have access to quality, affordable health care, and as long as we've got to fight to protect a woman's right to make her own choices about her own health, I want you to know that you've also got a president who's going to be right there with you, fighting every step of the way," said Obama. "Thank you, Planned Parenthood. God bless you."
That's who occupies the White House today, someone who wants God to bless the now-legal back-alley abortions. I know what I'm going to say is sinful, and it really shouldn't be said, but I'm so angry inside I have to vent. Can someone explain to me how anyone can think Barack Obama is a decent human being?