Abortion Doctor found guilty of murder following late-term abortions

[Woodsey]

- A debate is now raging in the US (apparently) as to whether this demonstrates the barbarity of a pro-abortion stance, or whether this provides a cautionary tale of what might happen more often if regulations are tightened and women are forced to visit unlicensed practitioners.

Because this is totally what the pro-abortion side argues for.

"Anti-abortion activists said the case exposed the grim reality of the procedure"

Yep. That's probably why it's illegal to birth them and then cut their spines with a pair of scissors. Fucking idiots.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

Of course. The saying "Rome wasn't built in a day" certainly applies. Progress and change is always slow. I doubt we'll ever see this kind of abortion/euthanasia in our lifetimes, but at some point in the future, when things are even more progressive than they are today, who knows?

 

[LysanderNemoinis]

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 .

Regardless of what the mother wanted, if the baby was actually alive after the procedure, it's a human being, pure and simple. Since the mother didn't want it, how hard would it have been to bring the baby to an orphanage or a church or hell even a hospital? I'm very conservative and I have no problem with abortion, and we can debate as long as we like about "when life begins" but when the baby is out of the womb and living on its own, killing it is murder.

And to those who might point out the "hypocrisy" of people who are pro-life but are okay with the death penalty, a baby who's just been born hasn't done anything. If you killed or raped someone, especially a child or a baby (the most innocent of the innocent), then I'm all for going old school and putting said sick son of a ***** in an iron maiden.

 

[dtgenshiken7]

Wow, this is a bit of a new spin on the whole abortion debate. Admittedly a sick, twisted spin that makes me want to shudder and vomit, but I suppose the question of whether or not it's wrong is entirely up in the air. I mean, it's obviously morally wrong. Waiting for a baby to be born into the world, then cutting it's spinal cord?

But I was incredibly conflicted about this whole thing. True- He should most certainly PAY for this, but only the malpractice, I think. For being unlicensed and for the horrific procedure, but the abortion itself? The method is simply a means to an end, is the child not equally dead at the end of a regular abortion?

Actually, something just occured to me- When they're born, I'm fairly sure a childs nervous system is advanced enough to feel pain. So yeah, I'm thinking that's also something to throw into this hotch-potch debate.

The whole thing just becomes a tangled mess of emotions and Law that you can't stand to read into after too long, it's almost a paradox in and of itself. You can provide reasons for him to be logically in the clear, but morally a monster.

In my opinion, I believe he should be sentenced, fined heavily, but not killed. The abortions were legal, his methods & credentials were not. Granted, it's on a slightly larger scale than that, but the idea is that people shouldn't get too emotional in this, whatever happens. I reckon the court won't sentence him to death, and that'll start a massive stink, but what can you do.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

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 .

Regardless of what the mother wanted, if the baby was actually alive after the procedure, it's a human being, pure and simple. Since the mother didn't want it, how hard would it have been to bring the baby to an orphanage or a church or hell even a hospital? I'm very conservative and I have no problem with abortion, and we can debate as long as we like about "when life begins" but when the baby is out of the womb and living on its own, killing it is murder.

And to those who might point out the "hypocrisy" of people who are pro-life but are okay with the death penalty, a baby who's just been born hasn't done anything. If you killed or raped someone, especially a child or a baby (the most innocent of the innocent), then I'm all for going old school and putting said sick son of a ***** in an iron maiden.

I agree.

Abortion is abortion.
Murder is murder.
One is legal in some places.
The other is illegal everywhere.

No clue if the the guy had ill intent, but unless ALL the women involved were going to die if he didn't cut the umbilical cord (like situation at the climax of the "Fetal Position" episode of House) he was doing something illegal.

EDIT: oh god, he cut their spinal cords? God damn, that turned my legs into jelly.

 

[axlryder]

I'm generally pretty on the fence about a lot of abortion issues. Fortunately for me (and less so for the babies), this isn't an issue I have to be "on the fence" about. Shit is fucked up.

 

[axlryder]

Actually, something just occured to me- When they're born, I'm fairly sure a childs nervous system is advanced enough to feel pain. So yeah, I'm thinking that's also something to throw into this hotch-potch debate. .

A fetus' nervous system is likely advanced enough to perceive pain long before they're born. Probably around the 20 week mark if what I've read is accurate.

 

[dtgenshiken7]

Actually, something just occured to me- When they're born, I'm fairly sure a childs nervous system is advanced enough to feel pain. So yeah, I'm thinking that's also something to throw into this hotch-potch debate. .

A fetus' nervous system is likely advanced enough to perceive pain long before they're born. Probably around the 20 week mark if what I've read is accurate.

That's good to know but automatically makes his actions even less humane than before. If it can be proved that he knew this then there's a whole now barrel of *bleep* to be unloaded on him.

 

[Mossberg Shotty]

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 .

Really? His only crime is the method he used to murder the babies? And as far as I'm concerned, the mother's consent doesn't mean shit after it's already been born, if they still don't want it at that point, killing it shouldn't be the go-to course of action.

If you think the biggest charge here should be "malpractice" you have a broken moral compass. This can't be justified. Explain to me how it's alright for these newborns to die, but it would be monstrous to kill the doctor who did it?

And the way you blame the reaction on American culture and how Americans love killing just tells me lack basic common sense, and you're pointing fingers in the wrong direction. Wake up.

 

[Aramis Night]

I'm as big a fan of abortion as anyone. To the point where i think it should be mandatory unless you can prove that you have at least $250,000 on deposit somewhere strictly allocated to the child's upbringing. But this is not abortion. This is straight up murder. Not malpractice. However i also don't believe that the death penalty is appropriate. He should be made to endure life in prison among understanding inmates. I do however think that his own spinal cord should be appropriately damaged enough to cause paralysis and then left to the tender mercy of the other inmates in general population. Even if they take pity on him and choose to help him live, he will have to live as helpless and reliant as an infant.

 

[Darks63]

The thread title really needs to be changed to infanticide and not late term abortions. One is terminating a child that can't survive outside of the womb and the other is murder of a living child.

The guy is a killer end of sentence and the lawyer is just doing what scum lawyers do and thats reaching for any straw he can to save his client and increase his prestige.

 

[SadisticFire]

Shniiiiiiiiiip

Well did the article say they were actually fully developed? I am not trying to justify his actions, but simply change outlook. Like were they due to be borned or did he somehow force it out with blackmagic? In my opinion that would change the situation. I did a quick search over the article and it doesn't mention if fully developed or not.

I just think it changes what it means if you were to say, kill some that isn't developed fully, then a baby that was already due to be born.

Cause I believe abortion means killing something that can't biologically live outside the womb without extra support, right?

 

[SlaveNumber23]

I'm a supporter of abortion, but there is no way anyone in their right mind could consider this 'abortion'. This disgusting murder of infant children is 'late-term abortion' in the same way that burying or burning someone alive is giving them an 'early funeral'. I hope someone buries or burns this particular monster alive.

Also, why are the thread titles for all of these kinds of stories so damn misleading? It sounds as if the guy had been convicted of murder for aborting babies at late stages of development in the womb, not that he had been murdering newborn infants with a pair of scissors. You aren't getting paid to sensationalize these threads and have more people view them, why do it? I understand that you just copied the title from the BBC article, but come on if you want to have a rational discussion about a news story please change the title from something so disgustingly misleading.

 

[BNguyen]

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.
Apologies, that was a horrible, horrible remark.

This isn't at all a demonstration of how pro-abortion is barbaric.
No, this is a demonstration of a sick individual doing sick things within a sick environment.
Just as a chef can cook up domestic pets that they found and serve them to unwitting customers, just as someone can walk into school with a multitude of firearms. Those aren't normal actions for your typical restaurant or school, and they most certainly aren't normal people doing the action.

But what I find most asinine of all, is the defense lawyer in this case.
In 2009, the man's grossly under-qualified staff administered a lethal dosage of a drug to a patient.
The lawyer states that it was "medical complications", implying that it was a regular procedure undertaken by a staff with credentials and an unforeseeable tragedy that occurred. But in reality, it just malpractice and criminal negligence. For this case, the lawyers are stating that it is simply due to the doctor's ethnicity that he was targeted with charges.

What in the actual fuck.
Have they done a comparison between a qualified abortion clinic and this grizzly shack?
Have they seen the results of the "doctor's" work? Have they heard him describe his procedure?
It sometimes boggles my mind the shit that lawyers will say to get paid.

You know, I'm all for a lawyer wanting to defend and innocent person but what goes into a lawyer's head to want to defend somebody who actually did a crime? Somebody so blantantly guilty that you'd have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to not see it

 

[lacktheknack]

Wait, so this isn't abortion at all. Misleading title is misleading. -_-

Well, it's a retroactive abortion.

I'm going to start referring to all murders as "retroactive abortions", just to see how people respond.

OT: I'm not a fan of abortion in the first place (at all), but this just PISSES ME THE HELL OFF.

There is no part of this story that doesn't fill me with terrifying screaming rage.

Just... just... GAAAAAAAAAAH.

 

[BNguyen]

This story is much worse than what I had imagined from the title. I thought he was just aborting them after the legal deadline (3 months or something? I really don't know), but this is just sick. Livestock for slaughter get more humane deaths than this.

I'm all for abortion, but this sounds more like childbirth followed by blatant murder. Like someone else said, is taking them to an orphanage really that difficult?

which is another reason why I can't understand why women don't use the morning after pill ever, even after rape assaults, and if it happens to be the result of a relationship thing then why can't the guy also wear condoms? See there are a good number of ways to prevent an unwanted child without going to the idea of abortion which is why I can't support it.
Instead of preventing something from being developed at all, people want to wait until it actually resembles a human before they decide that that is the best time to do away with it.
Now I don't have any clue what makes a person want an abortion and want to actually perform the abortion but apparently these people do not think there might be more decent ways of handling the situation.

 

[BNguyen]

Well, I fully support abortion, even after the so-called deadline. But once the baby is actually out and into the world, then it's no longer simple abortion in my eyes but murder. Murder with a just cause? Perhaps. But murder all the same. I don't believe in the death penalty though, it disgusts me more than this story does. So I do not believe he should receive it, not at all.

What kind of cause can you give to explain why you would kill a baby unless the baby was already dying and you put it out of its misery, of course after it had been examined and was found that nothing could be done to save it?

 

[BNguyen]

Wow, this is a bit of a new spin on the whole abortion debate. Admittedly a sick, twisted spin that makes me want to shudder and vomit, but I suppose the question of whether or not it's wrong is entirely up in the air. I mean, it's obviously morally wrong. Waiting for a baby to be born into the world, then cutting it's spinal cord?

But I was incredibly conflicted about this whole thing. True- He should most certainly PAY for this, but only the malpractice, I think. For being unlicensed and for the horrific procedure, but the abortion itself? The method is simply a means to an end, is the child not equally dead at the end of a regular abortion?

Actually, something just occured to me- When they're born, I'm fairly sure a childs nervous system is advanced enough to feel pain. So yeah, I'm thinking that's also something to throw into this hotch-potch debate.

The whole thing just becomes a tangled mess of emotions and Law that you can't stand to read into after too long, it's almost a paradox in and of itself. You can provide reasons for him to be logically in the clear, but morally a monster.

In my opinion, I believe he should be sentenced, fined heavily, but not killed. The abortions were legal, his methods & credentials were not. Granted, it's on a slightly larger scale than that, but the idea is that people shouldn't get too emotional in this, whatever happens. I reckon the court won't sentence him to death, and that'll start a massive stink, but what can you do.

is not a child, adult, etc. also equally dead as that aborted baby just with a few extra years added on? is not murder also a means to an end?


Yeah, yeah, I know I'm probably too invested in the subject but things like these just really piss me off how people can treat life so indifferently that it just comes down to "do I want this child or not?" As a man who loves children, I honestly feel disgusted with people who can't simply take precautions prior to sex in order to avoid the whole thing.
And to those I've messaged before on this, I'm sorry if I was rude and now, I'll let myself out.

 

[TheJazzyH]

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.
Apologies, that was a horrible, horrible remark.

This isn't at all a demonstration of how pro-abortion is barbaric.
No, this is a demonstration of a sick individual doing sick things within a sick environment.
Just as a chef can cook up domestic pets that they found and serve them to unwitting customers, just as someone can walk into school with a multitude of firearms. Those aren't normal actions for your typical restaurant or school, and they most certainly aren't normal people doing the action.

But what I find most asinine of all, is the defense lawyer in this case.
In 2009, the man's grossly under-qualified staff administered a lethal dosage of a drug to a patient.
The lawyer states that it was "medical complications", implying that it was a regular procedure undertaken by a staff with credentials and an unforeseeable tragedy that occurred. But in reality, it just malpractice and criminal negligence. For this case, the lawyers are stating that it is simply due to the doctor's ethnicity that he was targeted with charges.

What in the actual fuck.
Have they done a comparison between a qualified abortion clinic and this grizzly shack?
Have they seen the results of the "doctor's" work? Have they heard him describe his procedure?
It sometimes boggles my mind the shit that lawyers will say to get paid.

You know, I'm all for a lawyer wanting to defend and innocent person but what goes into a lawyer's head to want to defend somebody who actually did a crime? Somebody so blantantly guilty that you'd have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to not see it

Our justice system may be screwed up, but this is one of the few fair things about it. Not every criminal is as obvious as this guy, and framing is possible (although that's unlikely for this case) so you can't take away a defendant's chance to defend himself on a case-by-case basis, based on how "obviously guilty" the defendant looks. That would be allowing preconceived judgements to interfere with what little integrity is left in courts these days.

You can also think about this way:

1) If the defendant is possibly innocent, then it's the defense attorney's job to prove his client's innocence or at least mitigate the punishment.

2) But if the defendant is "blatantly guilty", as you say, then the prosecutor should have no trouble convicting him, with the defense powerless to do anything about it.

Ideally, the truth would always come out in court, and the right verdict would always be decided, if both attorneys would just do their jobs properly, in the presence of an attentive jury. But of course, a lot of problems in our justice system get in the way of this.

 

[kypsilon]

That's...quite the most deplorable thing I've heard in a long while. It's obviously not abortion, the baby is born when he does this. As was mentioned previously, I dunno why the baby just couldn't be given up for adoption, they've already had the baby at this point.