I’m pro-choice. Always have been. Periodically I rethink the issue, just so that I can look at myself in the mirror, and engage respectfully those with whom I disagree. Doing that is hugely important, particularly with an issue like this one. I want to make sure the reasons why I support a woman’s right to choose still make moral sense to me.
I’ve noticed something odd. Every single time I’ve brought Gosnell’s trial up, either in person or through social media, other pro-choicers have condemned it lethargically (if at all). There’s a reluctance there–an unwillingness to call it what it is: INFANTICIDE.
I don’t know why. Can’t we all agree on THIS? If a baby is born alive, and you “terminate” it, then we’re talking about a murder. I’m not sure why there’s confusion or trepidation about it.
Being outside of the womb and breathing means you’re alive. It’s not abortion at that point. It’s murder. Where there could possibly be a lack of clarity about this is perplexing to me.
You can be pro-choice and call this what it is, and support greater government oversight for clinics across the country. In fact, aren’t most pro-choicers Democrats who naturally favor greater government oversight of everything (think Bloomberg’s soda ban, the bans on plastic bags and certain light bulbs, etc.)? Why not on this suddenly? How convenient.
That, I believe, is the morally responsible position to take as a pro-choicer.
This is the perfect example, in my opinion, of emoting more than thinking. The cost is unthinkable. If you’re unwilling to think about what this is and what Gosnell did–commit mass murder–just because you’re afraid Roe will get overturned (and it won’t–stare decisis), then something is wrong.
The pro-choice community should be out on the national stage condemning Gosnell like mad and lobbying for greater oversight in clinics across America to ensure that evil acts like this are no longer committed with impunity. Period.
I’m sure some pro-choicers have condemned this. I have. But the condemnation hasn’t been strong enough. Reminds me of how a few Muslims will come out after a terror attack (see Boston, 9/11) and release some weak statement of condemnation–blah, blah, blah.
Please. Not enough. Sorry. The reaction should be swift, strong, and persist far beyond when the news initially gets covered (that’s assuming it gets covered at all–this case was censored by the increasingly laughable mainstream media).
Truth should come first, then opinion.
I understand wanting to protect a woman’s right to choose, but a little human being born into the world screaming, breathing, and kicking–and unable to defend him/herself–has rights, too. They’re unalienable and we refer to them as human rights. You don’t get to commit mass murder in the name of valuing women.
If it were up to me, Kermit Gosnell would get convicted and sentenced to death.