Why did it take 10 days to convict Kermit Gosnell? There is one overwhelming and undeniable reason. This case puts the abortion industry on public display. This man murdered babies. Isn’t that the point of abortion? He killed babies that were alive and moving. That’s what abortionists do.

Jerry Falwell, the late anti-abortion crusader, and Peter Singer, the Princeton ethicist who promotes the idea that parents should have the right to kill their child within the first few weeks of life if they decide they’d be happier without it, agreed on one point. There is no difference between killing a baby inside the womb or outside. Falwell thought both wrong, Singer thinks both OK.

In any sane environment this trial would’ve been over in a couple of days. Murder is wrong. Even illegal! Testimony and evidence quickly determined his guilt. But abortion was on trial. Not everybody realized it, but the pro-abortion forces saw it and trembled. They can allow nothing to restrict the practice Gosnell represents. Proponents of abortion endlessly proclaim the need for legal and safe abortions. Safe? Abortion is the “medical” procedure in which 50 percent of the patients are expected (required) to die.

Much was made of the horrible conditions of Gosnell’s “clinic.” It was dirty, smelled of urine and feces, had stained walls and floors and several cats who roamed the place without benefit of a sandbox. The media made much of this. After all, it took attention off the real purpose of the place. Being concerned about the urine smell in Gosnell’s chop-shop is like being concerned about the sanitation grade of a restaurant that is putting poison in it’s food. Interesting, but hardly relevant!

The trial was about abortion, period. This time abortion lost. There is hope!


Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.