Thirty-seven years ago, the Supreme Court ruled on the ‘landmark’ case of Roe v. Wade, thus effectively granting constitutional protection to infanticide. Defense of the ruling has become the raison d’être of the left in subsequent years, a banner they wave far too proudly given the 30+ million lives extinguished as a result. Today, any attempt to curtail the disastrous ruling is seen as an assault on women. We must protect a woman’s right to choose, they shriek, or else we will force women into unsafe back-alley abortions. Hyperbole and factual errors aside, this argument is now false on its face.
Women face the same risks to life and limb in the abortionists’ clinics as they do in the back alley. One abortionist in Philadelphia (Dr. Kermit Gosnell) allowed an unlicensed and apparently untrained assistant to perform examinations and administer medication. This assistant had already administered Demerol, Promethazine and Diazepam when the doctor arrived and proceeded to administer yet more medication (and no, it wasn’t the same doctor treating Michael Jackson’s insomnia). As a result of this malpractice, the woman suffered an arrhythmia after her abortion and subsequently died. This was not the result of some untrained hack in the alley with a coat hanger, as black market abortions have been so vividly described. This was a fully licensed, registered doctor practicing within the confines of the law. Where is the outrage? Where is the unyielding commitment to women’s health? I thought the whole movement was dedicated to ensuring women had access to affordable and safe healthcare. I should, by now, be used to the deafening silence of hypocritical left-wingers when their rhetoric fails to match reality (see the feminist’s rush to defend Sarah Palin). Where is the coverage that rivals that of the murder of abortionist George Tiller? Was his life worth more than this young woman’s, simply because he had paid handsomely to ingratiate himself to the Democratic establishment? This woman died in November 2009, but the story doesn’t end there. Apparently the doctor had been publicly reprimanded in 1995 for employing an unlicensed assistant and allowing that assistant to see and treat at least one patient on his own. Had more stringent oversight been employed, or more rigorous penalties applied to this gross negligence, perhaps the young woman from the recent November case might have lived.
Most offensive of all, the Pennsylvania authorities have raided this abortionist’s office several times in the last four days, during which they discovered dozens of frozen fetuses, some dating as far back as thirty years. How can a doctor be allowed to horde carcasses of aborted fetuses for thirty years, during which time he was investigated by state licensing authorities? How can the state be so oblivious to what is going on in this abortionist’s clinic – to the point of allowing a sociopath to horde his victims’ carcasses for thirty years? The state was negligent to the point of complicity in this particular case, having allowed this doctor to practice his particular ‘medicine’ unrestrained. Unfortunately this lack of oversight cost a woman her life. Who knows how many more there are whose lives could have been saved had the government taken a more active regulatory role in the industry of death they helped sanction over thirty years ago. I normally bristle at the mere concept of government regulation or intrusion, but this industry has been given carte blanche to circumvent the laws of society and moral decency for far too long. Their lobby in Washington may be powerful but, as we have seen with the Tea Party movement and the growing sense of grassroots discontent, nothing can withstand the power of an informed, active, engaged and morally enraged electorate.
Abortion on demand is not a right; it is merely a sacrosanct privelege of a population that is unable to accept personal accountability. Our society treats abortion as merely another form of birth control – nevermind the unintended consequences of playing God. The abortion ‘rights’ movement has a history of less than ethical conduct to acheive this end. Margaret Sanger, the mother of the abortion ‘rights’ movement, believed that abortion could be used to limit procreation among the mentally disabled and immigrant groups (especially among Africans) and, therefore, help rid society of less desirable elements. Why is it that leftists are so committed to Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest, yet seem to neglect the whole concept of natural selection? The culmination of her life’s work – Planned Parenthood – has made it their mission to circumvent the will of parents and eschew their religious beliefs when it comes to their children’s sexuality. They constantly lobby to allow minors to abort their children without notifying the parents, and encourage promiscuity among teens. PP adamantly opposes abstinence education, despite the proven efficacy of such programs. They do everything in their power to prey on the vulnerable during moments of profound confusion and weakness to encourage abortion, yet they don’t bother with the psychological impacts of abortion. It is telling that some of the most vociferous opponents of abortion are those who have had one of their own.
Much in the tradition of Ms. Sanger, Dr. Gosnell apparently has no concept of the value and worth of human life, no moral compass, and no sense of ethical conduct. The fact that his practice was allowed to continue, uninterrupted and undeterred, to the point that it cost a woman her life and those dozens of infants their dignity, is a sad commentary on our society today. This should be a wake up call to all those who support the sanctity and dignity of life that those who are ideologically opposed to our cause will stop at nothing to achieve their ends. They are going so far as to open abortion ‘supercenters,’ lest one woman be made to wait more than fifteen minutes to end the life of her unborn child. The abortion industry has grown beyond control, and has done a tremendous job of entrenching itself in society. How much abortionist money has flowed into Washington? More importantly, how much more can we tolerate?