<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>One rich white girl missing in Aruba? WALL TO WALL COVERAGE! Hundreds of poor black babies murdered, their feet saved as trophies? Crickets.</p>— Kathryn (@kmturner11) <a href="https://twitter.com/kmturner11/status/322709556117508099">April 12, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Some people seem to be saying here (whether they know it or not) that they do let the media dictate to them what issues they should be concerned with...
I just read parts of the first page. God damn you liberals. Individually I supported your causes, but when you gather for a group mind orgy and become blind to the most obvious then your cause is worthless and I want NO freaking part of it, and will purposely fight against the group. JHChrist, the bigger your group the more stupid and self-serving you look. Now I'm going back to my peaceful morning.
The fact that people are still going to try to get abortions even if it's made illegal, and that the illegal, "black market" abortion scene would probably look a lot like this.
If you are willing to fight against a cause you believe in because you don't like the liberal way of acting when there is a large group of them, then you might want to think about making some changes yourself.
We all know what's going on. The media is overwhelmingly pro abortion rights. And the Gosnell case casts sunlight on a procedure that is usually hidden inside the womb. And so the media must ignore it, lest they face what it is they condone. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/345484/no-job-too-small-kevin-d-williamson
You read parts of the first page? The first page is a good old fashioned wing nut gangbanger session with dead fetuses and first graders as props. God dam you liberals!
which is the case here---information is power---which is why you aren't talking about child prisons in far-off countries but Wikileaks is if you look carefully enough. I still don't understand what point this serves? These were terrible acts, but they reinforce the need for stronger regulation of LEGAL abortion providers, rather than no regulation of ILLEGAL abortion providers.
Whether legal or illegal, there would be a CHOICE as to pursue an abortion or not. Whether legal or illegal it works against the child's interest. What it seems to also reveal, by implication, is that the tears cried by The Left for those aborted are in fact crocodile tears... if there is not outrage about this rather than the benign "oh, that's terrible" which is being uttered. Any negative publicity given to the pro-Choice issue is firstly ignored and secondly swept away.
The grand jury says the health department "decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all. … With the change of administration from Governor Casey to Governor Ridge, officials concluded that inspections would be 'putting a barrier up to women' seeking abortions." Casey was pro-life; Ridge was pro-choice. The department's senior counsel, in his testimony before the grand jury, "described a meeting of high-level government officials in 1999 at which a decision was made not to accept a recommendation to reinstitute regular inspections of abortion clinics. The reasoning, [the witness] recalled, was: "there was a concern that if they did routine inspections, that they may find a lot of these facilities didn't meet [the standards for getting patients out by stretcher or wheelchair in an emergency], and then there would be less abortion facilities, less access to women to have an abortion."" http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...alley/2011/02/what_happened_to_the_women.html
When you perform late-term "abortions" by inducing labor, you get babies. Live, breathing, squirming babies. By 24 weeks, most babies born prematurely will survive if they receive appropriate medical care. But that was not what the Women's Medical Society was about. Gosnell had a simple solution for the unwanted babies he delivered: he killed them. He didn't call it that. He called it "ensuring fetal demise." The way he ensured fetal demise was by sticking scissors into the back of the baby's neck and cutting the spinal cord. He called that "snipping." Over the years, there were hundreds of "snippings." Sometimes, if Gosnell was unavailable, the "snipping" was done by one of his fake doctors, or even by one of the administrative staff. But all the employees of the Women's Medical Society knew. Everyone there acted as if it wasn't murder at all. Most of these acts cannot be prosecuted, because Gosnell destroyed the files. Among the relatively few cases that could be specifically documented, one was Baby Boy A. His 17-year-old mother was almost 30 weeks pregnant -- seven and a half months -- when labor was induced. An employee estimated his birth weight as approaching six pounds. He was breathing and moving when Gosnell severed his spine and put the body in a plastic shoebox for disposal. The doctor joked that this baby was so big he could "walk me to the bus stop." Another, Baby Boy B, whose body was found at the clinic frozen in a one-gallon spring-water bottle, was at least 28 weeks of gestational age when he was killed. Baby C was moving and breathing for 20 minutes before an assistant came in and cut the spinal cord, just the way she had seen Gosnell do it so many times. And these were not even the worst cases. If... a baby was about to come out, I would take the woman to the bathroom, they would sit on the toilet and basically the baby would fall out and it would be in the toilet and I would be rubbing her back and trying to calm her down for two, three, four hours until Dr. Gosnell comes. She would not move. Spoiler http://m.theatlantic.com/national/a...ls-trial-should-be-a-front-page-story/274944/
^what is the point of Internet outrage again? I don't exactly see it overturning Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, but hey.
wait, say what, you can do things without needing to overturn Roe v. Wade to ensure that LEGAL abortion clinics have higher standards? color me shocked.
So you hate abortion, and never really supported "liberals'" "causes" enough to distinguish them individually from each other, or their political orientation.
<object width="416" height="234" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" id="ep_1415"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="movie" value="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_embed_2x_container.swf?site=cnn&profile=desktop&context=embed&videoId=bestoftv/2013/04/13/ac-gosnell-abortion-clinic-accusations.cnn&contentId=bestoftv/2013/04/13/ac-gosnell-abortion-clinic-accusations.cnn" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /><embed src="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_embed_2x_container.swf?site=cnn&profile=desktop&context=embed&videoId=bestoftv/2013/04/13/ac-gosnell-abortion-clinic-accusations.cnn&contentId=bestoftv/2013/04/13/ac-gosnell-abortion-clinic-accusations.cnn" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" bgcolor="#000000" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="416" wmode="transparent" height="234"></embed></object>
The power of information. It must begin with an attitude change which can begin when the truth ekes out.
And once the information is out, people incoherently spluttering with rage rather than looking at policy objectives and solutions to the problem at hand, will accomplish what exactly? Let's take a step back from the "oh this is turrible" mindframe and think about solutions being worked. oh wait, there already are. ^that's the question you should be answering, rather than "is this bad?".
