Abortion Doctor found guilty of murder following late-term abortions

[Flaery]

This is unsettling to say the least. Personally, the thought of abortion leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but I've learned deal with it. However, in this case, the babies was born unto this world alive, and their deaths can't be justified. They may not have been fully developed, but they survived through a premature delivery and were born alive. There's no two-shits about that.

 

[ScorpionPrince]

Killing babies after they are born is murder, unless you want to call it "postnatal abortion". Then again, you could call every murder a "postnatal abortion". Anyway, I'm of the opinion that abortions should be legalized, If only for the fact that more qualified people could perform the procedure. Back-alley abortions wouldn't be neccesary, and malpractice (such as this extreme case) can hopefully be avoided.

 

[jetriot]

Oh the hypocrisy...

So, let me get this straight: killing the babies inside the womb is perfectly fine, but killing them minutes after the first attempt failed is inhuman? Paradox much?

Also, these children are not just unwanted, they're also underdeveloped (24 weeks are the legal maximum in the states) and have already survived one abortion attempt, so they're more than likely to have suffered serious injuries in the progress.

In the end we get an underdeveloped, injured and utterly unwanted lump of meat nobody wants and whose probably short, painful life would cost a fortune because somebody wants it to suffer as long as humanly possible.

Sorry, but that guy did the only right thing by putting an end to their misery. It might not seem favorable to self declared moral people, but there are worse fortunes than death.

Edit:

Read the article on another side before, it didn't say the babies are normally born before they get stabbed.

Still, I'm okay with this practice. Making it okay to kill them inside the womb and condemning it minutes after the left it is simply hypocrisy. That's like saying "running over a hobo with my car is okay when I close my eyes before I do it".

Late term or not, a baby gets killed in the process regardless. One either agrees with it or doesn't. Saying "I'm okay with abortion when..." is bullshit.

I for my part can't see anything wrong with what he's done. Those kids were unwanted and he put an end to their life, everything else is just details. The amount of passed weeks, morals and so on don't matter the slightest in the end. The kids would either have lived or died, there's nothing in between.

Also, ever seen a puplic orphanage from the inside?

The entire Middle East is unwanted. Lets just wipe it out. Those people have horrible lives. As a person that knows whats best for them and what is in the future for them I shall wipe them from existence with a few well placed nukes. Speaking of unwanted, black babies in urban centers also have shitty lives and are unwanted. Maybe Hitler had the right idea after all.

What the flying fuck are you even talkin about?

There's a very very large difference between...whatever the fuck you're on about...and a child bein born that will die, will die very soon into its life before it even really understands much of anythin, and will die in horrible excruciatin pain.

People shouldn't be forced to live like that if they don't want to live like that. Children shouldn't be forced to live like that at all.

You should be the one to decide who a child should live? The shitty potential mother should be? The government? Their life is going to suck no matter what so it is up to us to end it now and put it out of its misery? They aren't horses, these a re human beings that you want to kill because you think they might feel bad in the future? What you need to add to your argument is how these babies are going to be much more likely to commit crimes.

My analogy is perfect. Wipe out Africa, their lives suck and all they do is kill each other. Lets wipe out all black babies while we are at it because stats show they commit more crime and have a lower standard of living. I being antagonistic I know. But you are presuming to tell me that you know how a child life is going to turn out in foster care, or with a poor mother. Therefore you believe killing a child outside the womb is justified. It really is sick. Remind me not to be around you if I break my leg. Wouldn't want to be euthanized.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Disgusting. I'm all for abortion, but killing the poor thing AFTER it's been born is just monstruous. I mean you already gave birth, what's stopping you from delivering it to an orphanage?

Wait wait . You do realise that the women that wanted an abortion went there ? So they wanted the baby aborted . He just used questionable methods of getting it done . He's no monster , it's not like he did anything without the mothers consent .

OT: i don't think he should be accused of murder . Maybe malpractice . But not murder . And even less have the death penalty . But americans love killing, and babies . So all the " OMG THEIR JUST BABIES" people are going to want the death penalty , and call this guy a monster .

They were living human beings at that point and he killed them. I'm all for abortion but killing the baby after it's been delivered is murder. If a guy walked into the maternity ward in a hospital and shot all the newborns, that would be murder. The only difference is that he's doing it with scissors and with the mother's consent. THAT DOESN'T MATTER. If a mother kills her child after she's given birth, she has killed a living human being that had a right to at least go to an orphanage.
I agree that he doesn't deserve the death penalty but I'm against that in general. He should however get life in prison.

 

[krazykidd]

Disgusting. I'm all for abortion, but killing the poor thing AFTER it's been born is just monstruous. I mean you already gave birth, what's stopping you from delivering it to an orphanage?

Wait wait . You do realise that the women that wanted an abortion went there ? So they wanted the baby aborted . He just used questionable methods of getting it done . He's no monster , it's not like he did anything without the mothers consent .

OT: i don't think he should be accused of murder . Maybe malpractice . But not murder . And even less have the death penalty . But americans love killing, and babies . So all the " OMG THEIR JUST BABIES" people are going to want the death penalty , and call this guy a monster .

They were living human beings at that point and he killed them. I'm all for abortion but killing the baby after it's been delivered is murder. If a guy walked into the maternity ward in a hospital and shot all the newborns, that would be murder. The only difference is that he's doing it with scissors and with the mother's consent. THAT DOESN'T MATTER. If a mother kills her child after she's given birth, she has killed a living human being that had a right to at least go to an orphanage.
I agree that he doesn't deserve the death penalty but I'm against that in general. He should however get life in prison.

And what about the mothers that came to him? He didn't walk into a maternity ward and killed infants , that's exactly my point . The mother came to him so he could " abort " them . If you ask me they are more guilty of murder than he is .

 

[Altorin]

if the babies had been dead in the womb, even if he technically did it... I probably wouldn't care that much.. Yeah, it would suck, and would certainly fall into malpractice and I'd never want him treating another living thing.. But once you give something a breath of life, you have no choice but to call it alive.. at that point you should try and keep the thing alive, not immediately kill it. I didn't know I had such a definite line, I'd never really considered this scenario before, but that's murder at that point.

And what about the mothers that came to him? He didn't walk into a maternity ward and killed infants , that's exactly my point . The mother came to him so he could " abort " them . If you ask me they are more guilty of murder than he is .

Mothers in that situation can be crazy. and probably are crazy. All of their support structures, if its come to that, have fallen apart, and those women are in a hard enough spot. Yeah, it's horrible, but it's horrible for them too. They probably don't know any better if they're in this situation. The Doctor definitely should know better. He's breaking several well thought out and laid out rules that he should be completely aware of, and aware of the reason they're put in place.

I'm not saying the mothers are blameless angels, but let's be honest here.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Disgusting. I'm all for abortion, but killing the poor thing AFTER it's been born is just monstruous. I mean you already gave birth, what's stopping you from delivering it to an orphanage?

Evidently, a pair of scissors.

You are my hero. Also, the correct spelling is "grisly" in this context, for future knowledge.




I'm feeling particularly misanthropic, so I kind of want this asshole to escape justice, and start a hair salon where he shaves you bald and glues pre-styled wigs to you

 

[The Funslinger]

But americans love killing, and babies

It's a shame they get so uppity when the two go hand in hand.

In all seriousness though, I'm pro-abortion and pro-euthanasia. But abortion refers to the removal of an unborn child, and this was executing actual newborns. Hell, even in countries that allow euthanasia, there are guidelines to prevent suffering.

Yeah, the guy's a murderer.

 

[Silent Protagonist]

The number of posts here calling for just malpractice charges frightens me. I mean, I can understand the pro-abortion stance to a certain degree but what this guy did was horrifying. I am still not a fan of the death penalty though.

I am very pro-life as is about to become apparent and am about to go on a little rant because why not. It's the internet, try and stop me.

Abortion should be legal because women will do it themselves anyway and could hurt or even kill themselves in the process. Same logic, meth should be legal because people will make it anyway and the process is dangerous and they might be killed in a meth lab explosion if they do it wrong. This is not a good argument in my opinion.

"It's my body and only I can decide what to do with it." You're right. Unfortunately it is not your body that is being torn to shreds as it is sucked up through a tube. You also have every right to fire a gun, but not if it is pointed at someone.

A fetus is not the same as an egg or sperm. Eggs and sperm only have half the genetic makeup of a human because that's kinda how reproduction works and are only a small part of a larger organism that continues to live on without them. A fetus is genetically unique and separate from both of its parents. It is a human life, science confirms it, and destroying the fetus does not allow that human life to continue.

I do not subscribe to the belief that humans are slaves to their sexual urges. It does not take superhuman willpower to say no to sex. I do not mean to advocate abstinence only education, but the notion that we simply can't stop humping anything that will let us is absurd. People need to be responsible and consider the consequences when entering into a sexual relationship. I know sexual desire can impair judgement, but so does alcohol, and last I checked "I was drunk" does not absolve people of the decisions they make or the crimes they commit while under the influence.

Women do have the right to choose. They choose whether or not to have sex, whether or not to have sex during the window of their cycle that they are fertile, whether or not to use any of the dozens of various forms of birth control readily available, whether or not to use a morning after pill or equivalent if one of those methods fails. By the time anyone gets to an abortion, a lot of choices have been made by several people.

"I fetus cannot survive outside of the womb." Well technically they can under the right conditions, artificial wombs are not too far off on the technological side. I know you are going to say that it is has to be a ridiculously narrow set of conditions, but the same is true for you and me. We can only survive when the oxygen levels, temperature, and available nutrients are just right. Conditions that likely only naturally exist on this tiny insignificant speck of dust in the universe. We cannot survive in the vacuum of space, therefore it is OK to kill us for any reason

I know that this is not a clear cut issue, and there are scenarios, such as when the life of the mother is in danger, where the issue gets even cloudier. I know that pregnancy is a very big deal, with a lot of serious medical and social concerns. I know that my examples are flawed, but I still think they are good food for thought. I do not hate those who are pro-abortion or women as it is often assumed of those who are pro-life on the internet. This is one of the only issues on which I have a relatively extreme views and I realize that.

 

[Quellist]

The attorney branded prosecutors "elitist" and "racist" for pursuing his client, who is black.
That's the most disturbing part actually.

Yeah, he disregarded hygiene, professional standards, abortion laws and killed kids with brutal methods but they're just after him because he's black!

While in no way do i excuse this defense its just possible that the guy is so obviously guilty that this was the nearest thing to a viable defense the lawyer could come up with.

Lets face it the guy has to mount some kind of defense, even if its a crazy one...

 

[[REDACTED]]

Why in the all-holy fuck does the title refer to infanticide as "late-term abortions"?

 

[Quaxar]

The attorney branded prosecutors "elitist" and "racist" for pursuing his client, who is black.
That's the most disturbing part actually.

Yeah, he disregarded hygiene, professional standards, abortion laws and killed kids with brutal methods but they're just after him because he's black!

While in no way do i excuse this defense its just possible that the guy is so obviously guilty that this was the nearest thing to a viable defense the lawyer could come up with.

Lets face it the guy has to mount some kind of defense, even if its a crazy one...

It's not actually a defense though. "Your honor, in this coming trial I set out to prove that you and all the witnesses are far too racist to convict my client. I will also show that you elitist snobs wouldn't know a professional abortion doctor if he cut your spine with a scissor... no wait, bad analogy."
Pissing off the prosecution seems like the worst possible defense in fact. Maybe his "lawyer" was just one of the guys who lost their jobs at the clinic?

 

[Colour Scientist]

Keep in mind the pro-life community pushes for no support for single mothers. No support for public pre-natal care. No support for children, one of the most impoverished demographics in the US.

I, my sister, and my mother are members of the pro-life community. You're a fucking retard, if that's what you actually believe. Get a clue, idiot.

That doesn't really do anything to disprove his statement.
You, your sister and your mother are pro-life, so what?
What does that have to do with pre and post-natal care and financial support?

I'm not touching the rest of your post because I'll only end up yelling.

 

[Quellist]

The attorney branded prosecutors "elitist" and "racist" for pursuing his client, who is black.
That's the most disturbing part actually.

Yeah, he disregarded hygiene, professional standards, abortion laws and killed kids with brutal methods but they're just after him because he's black!

While in no way do i excuse this defense its just possible that the guy is so obviously guilty that this was the nearest thing to a viable defense the lawyer could come up with.

Lets face it the guy has to mount some kind of defense, even if its a crazy one...

It's not actually a defense though. "Your honor, in this coming trial I set out to prove that you and all the witnesses are far too racist to convict my client. I will also show that you elitist snobs wouldn't know a professional abortion doctor if he cut your spine with a scissor... no wait, bad analogy."
Pissing off the prosecution seems like the worst possible defense in fact. Maybe his "lawyer" was just one of the guys who lost their jobs at the clinic?

I dont have any legal training but i have a feeling that attacking the credibility of witnesses and even the prosecution itself is a viable tactic.

Ah whatever, i dont really care about this, i was just voicing a possibility. This doctor was a horrible person and i think i would rather have quit my job rather than defend him. One reason i will never make a lawyer i guess...

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

I, my sister, and my mother are members of the pro-life community. You're a fucking retard, if that's what you actually believe. Get a clue, idiot.

So your reponse is to call me a fucking retard, an idiot, yet to not to actually disagree or to suggest otherwise. Yes?

Do you believe the Pro-Life agenda supports public prenatal care?

Do you believe the Pro-Life agenda supports welfare for children enough that they can rise outy of poverty?

The US is the wealthiest nation in the world (by far), and yet we are near the bottom when it comes to children per capita living in poverty, about 21% of all kids live with impoverished families [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/child-poverty-2011_n_2323383.html]. This doesn't account for the 400,000 kids in foster care. Feel free to quote your own sources.

You're going to have to present some data to suggest I'm wrong, or you're just going to look naive. By calling me idiotic, you look naive and petulant. And that's not going to win you any friends. Calling me a fucking retard also suggests you have no sympathy for the disabled (people who are actually mentally retarded), which only makes things worse.

Try again. This time with more civility.

More to come...

238U

 

[JoJo]

OT: Abortion is murder. Zygote, fetus, or child, inside or outside the womb, it's still human. This is a biological fact. If you believe that it is unethical to kill a human, yet you support abortion, you are a hypocrite.

And I honestly fail to see how this is so horrifying, because the procedure (snipping the spinal cord with scissors) was the same that doctors use for normal late-term abortions inside the womb. If you want to draw some arbitrary line where inside the womb is ok but outside the womb isn't, you're a sick individual. If you think this incident is in any way outstanding or significant, search abortion on google images, safesearch off. If you have a strong stomach, that is.

Are foetuses human? Undoubtedly. Are they a person? Given their lack of consciousness or self-awareness, probably not. I personally don't believe it is unethical to kill a human, I believe it is unethical to kill a sapient person[footnote]With a few exceptions such as self-defence but that's an argument for another day[/footnote] and so killing foetuses in the womb is absolutely morally fine. I do agree with you on the second paragraph though, whether a foetus is inside or outside the womb is clearly arbitrary and thus at the most this doctor should be charged with conducting illegal late-term abortions rather than spurious murder charges.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

Ahh and so the fucking abortion debate comes up again...

Whilst I'm pro-choice and maintain that women should have the right to do what they want with their bodies, I can't condone late-term abortions except under extreme circumstances.
My reasoning is this:

I base my morality on the assumption that in circumstances where suffering is a certainty, picking an option that leads to the minimum amount of suffering is the moral thing to do.
A very early stage foetus has no capacity to feel pain, due to having an undeveloped nervous system. Not only that, it has an undeveloped brain, meaning that it has no consciousness or awareness of self. From its perspective, it is not aware of its surroundings or its own existence. At this stage it represents only potential but nothing more.
However, at this stage, the suffering that the mother can feel exists as more than potential. Psychological suffering IF the foetus is conceived via rape, or very real danger of harm if the foetus is developing in the fallopian tubes, or the simple fact that pregnancy at that stage represents a huge financial problem, an end to a career, or a responsibility that is simply too much to cope with without support that may not be available.
Therefore, at an early stage, abortion can be the morally right thing to do.

However, as the nervous system and brain develops, the suffering of the foetus itself becomes more than just potential and becomes a reality. It can feel pain and discomfort and all that bad stuff. It still has no real perception of self for a long time, but it does become cognitively aware enough to recognise familiar voices and respond to outside stimuli.

The other aspect to this is whether the foetus is able of living outside the mother, ie, as a seperate entity, or not. If the foetus is undeveloped enough that it absolutely requires the mother as 'life support', then I see a decision to turn off that life support as the woman's decision regarding what to do with her own body. If the foetus is developed enough that it could survive outside the womb, then that becomes less clear. Once you get much past that point, I think you'd be better off performing a C-section or delivering, providing that doing so does not pose too large a threat to the mother's health.

This is a gradual process, so for me, the question of whether getting an abortion is justifiable or not depends on how serious the threat to the mother is versus how far along the pregnancy is. This is why I say that late term abortions are only justifiable in extreme circumstances, ie when continuing the pregnancy is likely to kill the mother.

I disagree with pro-life people because they generally fail to acknowledge that abortion can be the lesser of two evils. Saying that something is unambiguously wrong in all contexts and circumstances seems to me quite juvenile. We all agree that killing is wrong, yet most of us would condone killing a brutal dictator or even an armed intruder who posed a direct threat to us and our families. The few things that are unambiguously seen as wrong are things like rape, because there is no conceivable circumstance in which rape would be considered anything other than inflicting unnecessary and easily avoidable suffering on another person for no reason other than selfishness.

That's my 2 cents. Please, nobody quote me to argue with me because I don't want to hear it. Not now. Thanks.

Edit:
Oh, right, forgot to link this into the actual topic. Yeah, this 'doctor' sounds like scum and there's no way to justify what he did. If you've already delivered the baby and the mother keeping it is impossible, put it up for adoption. That is all.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Just goes to show you...
Uh, I don't actually know...

Uh... don't cut corners? If you're going to preform an abortion make sure the fetus isn't alive when you take it out?

This is depressing, The only thing he did wrong is the order of events, kill the thing, scoop it out. How hard is it to remember that?

Also properly dispose of medical waste and hire qualified people... those are good things to.

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

OT: Abortion is murder. Zygote, fetus, or child, inside or outside the womb, it's still human. This is a biological fact. If you believe that it is unethical to kill a human, yet you support abortion, you are a hypocrite.

A biological fact is an observation. Sure a fetus may be human (in that it's extracted from a human being) but so is anything else pulled from a human body. Cells, hair, tonail clippings, feces, cancer, blood and so on. That's not enough to designate that it's worth personhood or legal protections.

The common Pro-Life argument equates a fertilized zygote as equal to a neonatal infant, even though statistically (according to Guttmacher) about 70% of such zygotes are spontaneously aborted (not so much potential), and no Pro-Life sector has any agenda towards rescuing the countless uninduced miscarriages. (accipitre, correct me if I'm wrong, without calling me names, preferrably.) This is actually a good thing, since a lot of defective zygotes that would never become infants or would be badly deformed are rejected this way.

There is a shitload of controversy regarding when a fetus becomes a person (worthy of a whole nother essay). There is NO controversy as to whether or not the mother is a person. And any efforts to impose the rights of the fetus over the mother causes interaction with the 9th Amendment [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution]. Considering that Catholic doctrine imposed upon hospitals has already caused unnecessary deaths (albeit no cases in the US that have been widely publicized,). Violation of the mother's rights in preference of her unborn progeny is proving to be a valid concern.

So far, the Pro-Life approach has been entirely disinformation and legal obstruction (and the rare murder or terrorism [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#United_States]). For example, all the human-like mangled fetuses that we've been shown by the anti-abortion fronts are almost exclusively natural miscarriages. Actual abortions don't come out so pristine.[footnote]It's also interesting that if we showcased exploded bodies and heads and veterans with missing pieces to promote an anti-war agenda, that'd all be censored right quick as too offensive or disturbing and unpatriotic, but dead babies (typically late-term ones, which is to say, likely wanted by the mother) are acceptable.[/footnote] Again, accipitre, feel free to correct my errors after you're done with your tantrum. Please be specific.

Myself, I'm still one for state-supported ectogenesis, where every zygote gets its own incubation tank, Mozart piped in if you pay for the fancy service. Both the mother's and the zygote's rights are preserved. Of course this may create a (temporary) population boom, but it will dispose of this sorry excuse of a controversy (granted in exchange for others that, I suspect, are more easily resolvable). It would also put the pro-life back into the Pro-Life sector, since it will be revealed whether this is a satisfactory solution, or if the underlying issue surfaces, which is that they want everyone to stop having sex except under the exclusive license of a (their) church.[footnote]I suspect they'll invoke Genesis 3:16[/footnote]

238U

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Disgusting. I'm all for abortion, but killing the poor thing AFTER it's been born is just monstruous. I mean you already gave birth, what's stopping you from delivering it to an orphanage?

My sentiment precisely. A woman whose health is at risk, or a couple who cannot support a child are valid reasons for abortion (among others) up to like the second trimester, but after a child is born that is murder. As stated, a child born healthy can be given up for adoption and would've been the appropriate action in cases like this.

That guy deserves a harsh sentence and the parents who went along with it probably ought to be punished, if not at least counselled or spoken with.