The short version of the story is that at least in 7 cases the babies came out alive and he took a pair of scissors and jammed them into the back of the neck of the babies and cut their spinal cord.
The longer version is here:
I say no, he should not. Abortion is legal, these people came to him to kill their babies and he did so. Does it really matter that they were in the womb 30 seconds earlier? Does it really make it different if he sliced them up in the womb or out? I say no.
This is the law of the land, you should have to face it’s ugly truth in or out of the womb.The womb should not be required to hide it’s uglyness…
Discuss.
You left out an important part of the article where it says that he was performing abortions in the 6th, 7th and 8th months of pregnancy which, according to the article (after 24 months) is illegal.
That’s pretty brutal when you imagine it.
[quote]pat wrote:
Should the good Dr. Kermit go prison for murder?
I say no, he should not. Abortion is legal, these people came to him to kill their babies and he did so. Does it really matter that they were in the womb 30 seconds earlier? Does it really make it different if he sliced them up in the womb or out? I say no…The womb should not be required to hide it’s uglyness…
Discuss.[/quote]
[quote]John S. wrote:
How far along was she when she had this abortion?[/quote]
It was multiple abortions, from a unlicensed doctor, some of the “abortions” occurred after the baby was born alive.
Pro-choice or not, the laws are this are pretty clear.
The OP is trying to snide in saying he should be let go because abortion is legal, pretending there’s no difference between what’s going on at one month and what’s going on at 8.
[quote]John S. wrote:
How far along was she when she had this abortion?[/quote]
It was multiple abortions, from a unlicensed doctor, some of the “abortions” occurred after the baby was born alive.
Pro-choice or not, the laws are this are pretty clear.
The OP is trying to snide in saying he should be let go because abortion is legal, pretending there’s no difference between what’s going on at one month and what’s going on at 8.[/quote]
[quote]pat wrote:
Should the good Dr. Kermit go prison for murder?
The short version of the story is that at least in 7 cases the babies came out alive and he took a pair of scissors and jammed them into the back of the neck of the babies and cut their spinal cord.
The longer version is here:
I say no, he should not. Abortion is legal, these people came to him to kill their babies and he did so. Does it really matter that they were in the womb 30 seconds earlier? Does it really make it different if he sliced them up in the womb or out? I say no.
This is the law of the land, you should have to face it’s ugly truth in or out of the womb.The womb should not be required to hide it’s uglyness…
Discuss.[/quote]
One more horrendous law that the liberals have given us: ABORTION. This guy should go to prison and never see the light of day again. Murder is horrible - killing children is the worst sort of murder. He like the people who made abortion legal are despicable.
[quote]John S. wrote:
How far along was she when she had this abortion?[/quote]
It was multiple abortions, from a unlicensed doctor, some of the “abortions” occurred after the baby was born alive.
Pro-choice or not, the laws are this are pretty clear.
The OP is trying to snide in saying he should be let go because abortion is legal, pretending there’s no difference between what’s going on at one month and what’s going on at 8.[/quote]
I am not disagreeing with you I am just wondering how far along the mother was. If she was under 24 weeks and the babies where born alive then I think we need to rethink the amount of time one is given to have an abortion.(I am pro-life btw).
[quote]John S. wrote:
How far along was she when she had this abortion?[/quote]
It was multiple abortions, from a unlicensed doctor, some of the “abortions” occurred after the baby was born alive.
Pro-choice or not, the laws are this are pretty clear.
The OP is trying to snide in saying he should be let go because abortion is legal, pretending there’s no difference between what’s going on at one month and what’s going on at 8.[/quote]
I am not disagreeing with you I am just wondering how far along the mother was. If she was under 24 weeks and the babies where born alive then I think we need to rethink the amount of time one is given to have an abortion.(I am pro-life btw).[/quote]
Agreed. Looked it up, wiki says
If a baby can be born that early and survive, then they need to change their months.
“rare survivors have been documented as early as 21 weeks.[1] This date is controversial as gestation in this case was measured from the date of conception rather than the date of the mother’s last menstrual period. Gestation appears 2 weeks less than if calculated by the more common method.”
A 28-week-old male, found frozen in container 1B with a
surgical incision at the base of the neck, discovered in the
February 2010 raid, and determined by the medical examiner to
have been viable.
A 26-week-old female also found in the February 2010 raid,
determined by the medical examiner to have been viable. Her
frozen remains were in a distilled water container labeled by
the medical examiner as 1C.
The man kept babies and parts of babies he had killed in jars, jugs, refrigerators, and freezers. In addition to killing a woman through his neglectful practice. Yup, to jail for murder on multiple counts.
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
Yes, he should go to jail.
Who would argue he shouldn’t?[/quote]
Well, he’s an abortion doctor and abortion is legal. He seemed particularly bad at it, but all he did was perform abortions which are legal. Legally, what’s the problem? Does the metter of a few seconds separate a legal abortion from murder? What is the difference with what he did and what he was “supposed” to do?
He seemed a bit less sanitary, but being dirty makes you a muderer? That’s a big ass jump.
[quote]jakerz96 wrote:
Excerpt from the grand jury report…
A 28-week-old male, found frozen in container 1B with a
surgical incision at the base of the neck, discovered in the
February 2010 raid, and determined by the medical examiner to
have been viable.
A 26-week-old female also found in the February 2010 raid,
determined by the medical examiner to have been viable. Her
frozen remains were in a distilled water container labeled by
the medical examiner as 1C.
The man kept babies and parts of babies he had killed in jars, jugs, refrigerators, and freezers. In addition to killing a woman through his neglectful practice. Yup, to jail for murder on multiple counts.[/quote]
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
Yes, he should go to jail.
Who would argue he shouldn’t?[/quote]
Well, he’s an abortion doctor and abortion is legal. He seemed particularly bad at it, but all he did was perform abortions which are legal. Legally, what’s the problem? Does the metter of a few seconds separate a legal abortion from murder? What is the difference with what he did and what he was “supposed” to do?
He seemed a bit less sanitary, but being dirty makes you a muderer? That’s a big ass jump.
Did any of the mothers die? I didn’t see that.[/quote]
One mother did yes. Also, I think the law about abortion has something to do with timing, so after 24 weeks it equals murder. Also, I think there is something about the baby not being out of or fully out of the womb when it is killed, so again this guy induced labor babies were born alive and viable and then he killed them.
I see what you are getting at pointing out that a few seconds or being outside the womb before death makes it illegal. He is being charged with infanticide though not with committing abortion. I personaly think abortion is infanticide, but the law doesn’t agree at present.
[quote]jakerz96 wrote:
Excerpt from the grand jury report…
A 28-week-old male, found frozen in container 1B with a
surgical incision at the base of the neck, discovered in the
February 2010 raid, and determined by the medical examiner to
have been viable.
A 26-week-old female also found in the February 2010 raid,
determined by the medical examiner to have been viable. Her
frozen remains were in a distilled water container labeled by
the medical examiner as 1C.
The man kept babies and parts of babies he had killed in jars, jugs, refrigerators, and freezers. In addition to killing a woman through his neglectful practice. Yup, to jail for murder on multiple counts.[/quote]
Wow! That’s pretty blatant shit…
[/quote]
Yeah, the grand jury report goes into more detail. The guy was a sick puppy. Real sick.
Were you trying to play devil’s advocate on this one? Or were you unaware of all this?
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
Yes, he should go to jail.
Who would argue he shouldn’t?[/quote]
Well, he’s an abortion doctor and abortion is legal. He seemed particularly bad at it, but all he did was perform abortions which are legal. Legally, what’s the problem? Does the metter of a few seconds separate a legal abortion from murder? What is the difference with what he did and what he was “supposed” to do?
He seemed a bit less sanitary, but being dirty makes you a muderer? That’s a big ass jump.
Did any of the mothers die? I didn’t see that.[/quote]
The abortion of the any human syngamate is homicide.
This is certain. Whether it is murder is a right reserved to the states individually. The Federal government is not authorized to legislate murder.
