Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In the grand jury report on the case, released in January 2011, many pregnant women were given drugs to induce labor. According to employee Latosha Lewis one or two babies fell out of patients each night. They dropped on lounge chairs, on the floor, and often in the toilet.
If a baby was about to come out, I would take the woman to the bathroom, they would sit on the toilet and basically the baby would fall out and it would be in the toilet and I would be rubbing her back and trying to calm her down for two, three, four hours until Dr. Gosnell comes, Lewis told the grand jury.
The report continues: James Johnson, who supposedly cleaned the clinic and bagged its infectious waste, confirmed Lewiss account. He testified that sometimes patients miscarried or whatever it was into the toilet and clogged it.
He described how he had to lift the toilet so that someone else he said it was too disgusting for him could get the fetuses out of the pipes, reads the grand jury report.
Johnson is the common-law husband of Elizabeth Hampton, the sister of Gosnells wife, Pearl.
Gosnell preferred to have the babies expel because it made his job easier, reads the report, which adds, If fetuses had not precipitated, Gosnell would often have his staff physically push them out of their mothers by pressing in the mothers abdomens.
I consent everything that LifeSiteNews says. They are anti abortion, of course they will skew things to suit their agenda.
Well, then, it should be easy for you to tell us exactly HOW they are "skewing" things, and what the actual truth is, shouldn't it?
I shall breathlessly await your doing so.
They need to respect the law and stop claiming that abortion causes mental illness and breast cancer, for a start.
I'm sure the Mother's Day Massacre women felt very healthy after seeing the abortionists:
"Get your women's health right here folks, in the form of greased razor blades shoved into your pregnant uterus! It's good for you! We were just inspected last week so you know we're trustworthy!"
I'm sure the Mother's Day Massacre women felt very healthy after seeing the abortionists:
"Get your women's health right here folks, in the form of greased razor blades shoved into your pregnant uterus! It's good for you! We were just inspected last week so you know we're trustworthy!"
We are not getting a view inside abortion clinics, we are getting a view inside your sick mind.
Dummy.
Get this through your dumb thick head. No one is pro-abortion.
No one wants more abortions. (Though, if some drunk dope planted his seed in you, the world might be better off... know what I mean?)
But you can keep your baby with your idiot genes. That's freedom, dummy. We let people like you have babies or terminate your pregnancy if you want to spare us all a jr you.
For the most part I agree with you in regards to no one wanting more abortions. The exceptions being the psychopathic killers of the world like Kermit Grosnell, the administrators of Planned Parenthood and the leaders of organizations such as NOW and Naral Pro-Choice America.
Immie
Hey Immie, do you have any proof the administrators of Planned Parenthood and the leaders of organizations such as NOW and Naral Pro-Choice America want more abortions?
All of these organizations believe in reducing the need for abortion. This means support for improving access to birth control and teaching young people comprehensive sex education.
I'm sure the Mother's Day Massacre women felt very healthy after seeing the abortionists:
"Get your women's health right here folks, in the form of greased razor blades shoved into your pregnant uterus! It's good for you! We were just inspected last week so you know we're trustworthy!"
We are not getting a view inside abortion clinics, we are getting a view inside your sick mind.
Dummy.
Get this through your dumb thick head. No one is pro-abortion.
No one wants more abortions. (Though, if some drunk dope planted his seed in you, the world might be better off... know what I mean?)
But you can keep your baby with your idiot genes. That's freedom, dummy. We let people like you have babies or terminate your pregnancy if you want to spare us all a jr you.
For the most part I agree with you in regards to no one wanting more abortions. The exceptions being the psychopathic killers of the world like Kermit Grosnell, the administrators of Planned Parenthood and the leaders of organizations such as NOW and Naral Pro-Choice America.
Immie
Hey Immie, do you have any proof the administrators of Planned Parenthood and the leaders of organizations such as NOW and Naral Pro-Choice America want more abortions?
All of these organizations believe in reducing the need for abortion. This means support for improving access to birth control and teaching young people comprehensive sex education.
The law of the land also used to allow slavery.
I guess if its "the law", then its perfectly moral.
If the topic is the "morality" of abortions then everyone who is anti-abortion should also be pro universal background checks for the simple reason that guns "abort" the lives of small children. 20 small innocent children's lives were "aborted" in a manner and a timeframe that not even Gosnell could emulate.
I'm not entirely opposed to universal back ground checks, but I just think it would make a lot more sense to lock people up behind bars if they are so dangerous they can't be trusted with owning a firearm.
Fix the real problem: violent criminals being let out of jail, and mentally ill not being in a mental hospital. Then we wouldn't need any "background checks".
But that kind of logic seems to elude libs.
If the topic is the "morality" of abortions then everyone who is anti-abortion should also be pro universal background checks for the simple reason that guns "abort" the lives of small children. 20 small innocent children's lives were "aborted" in a manner and a timeframe that not even Gosnell could emulate.
I'm not entirely opposed to universal back ground checks, but I just think it would make a lot more sense to lock people up behind bars if they are so dangerous they can't be trusted with owning a firearm.
Fix the real problem: violent criminals being let out of jail, and mentally ill not being in a mental hospital. Then we wouldn't need any "background checks".
But that kind of logic seems to elude libs.
We are in danger of wandering off topic here but there is a need to check the record and look at sane solutions. It was under the Reagan administration that the mentally ill were "freed" from mental institutions given that he slashed their funding. (He was not alone in this but he was instrumental.) Secondly violent criminals are freed to make room for non violent pot smokers which suits the Prison-Industrial-Complex to a tee. It is much cheaper to house non-violent inmates. It was Nixon who started the phony War On Drugs and we are still paying the price. So to address your points you need to support legalizing marijuana which will free up room in prisons for violent offenders and funding to care for the mentally ill. If you want to take this any further we will need to start another thread.
So abortion is legal, pot smoking is illegal and violent and crazy people are allowed to own guns. The use of universal background checks will resolve the latter problem while legalizing pot will solve the 2nd.
So where do you want to go as far as abortion is concerned? Should it be legal or illegal?
Shut up idiot, You pro-abortion, pro-infanticide, baby killers are the ones who are sick
I'm not entirely opposed to universal back ground checks, but I just think it would make a lot more sense to lock people up behind bars if they are so dangerous they can't be trusted with owning a firearm.
Fix the real problem: violent criminals being let out of jail, and mentally ill not being in a mental hospital. Then we wouldn't need any "background checks".
But that kind of logic seems to elude libs.
We are in danger of wandering off topic here but there is a need to check the record and look at sane solutions. It was under the Reagan administration that the mentally ill were "freed" from mental institutions given that he slashed their funding. (He was not alone in this but he was instrumental.) Secondly violent criminals are freed to make room for non violent pot smokers which suits the Prison-Industrial-Complex to a tee. It is much cheaper to house non-violent inmates. It was Nixon who started the phony War On Drugs and we are still paying the price. So to address your points you need to support legalizing marijuana which will free up room in prisons for violent offenders and funding to care for the mentally ill. If you want to take this any further we will need to start another thread.
So abortion is legal, pot smoking is illegal and violent and crazy people are allowed to own guns. The use of universal background checks will resolve the latter problem while legalizing pot will solve the 2nd.
So where do you want to go as far as abortion is concerned? Should it be legal or illegal?
Or we could just build more prisons to actually house all criminals for the full time they are supposed to be in prison, as well as mental hospitals for the crazies. We can start by using all welfare funds, as well as any funds used for corporate and bank bailouts.
Thought I made my opinion on abortion rather clear. Abortion on demand is abhorrant, ending an innocent human life via violent means is murder.
No, do you violate any principles or rules you preach? Or is it just Christians who have to be perfect or else they are total frauds?
Whatever the truth is I am surely not taking your biased lean on it. I suspect the truth is, most people did not consider abortions back then because it was not an option in their minds. And I strongly, strongly suspect within a few months after having given birth, they were eternally grateful they did not end the life of the child now before their eyes.
Your stupid argument is just that. Dont like heroine, dont inject it. Dont like being with a hooker, dont seek one out. I am protecting an innocent life, you dont seem to care.
You sure like to spew from the mouth whatever your brain imagines. How many Catholic services are there that willingly care for pregnant mothers and their children? How many tens of thousands of couples would gladly adopt the child the moment its born? I guess its too much to ask someone like you. Youd rather let a few butchers run wild and kill babies on guerneys just so you can pretend all is well in your world.
We dont agree what you term as thinking, that much is certain.
How many more leftist clichés can you come up with in one post? Possessions? Oh my. You really are beyond redemption on this.
Protecting an innocent life? A non viable egg is not a person. Is an IUD a 'baby' killer too?
You object to being accused of viewing women as possessions that are not smart enough to decide for themselves. THEN YOU DECIDE FOR HER, and tell us she will like it...
Hey Pope turzovka, did you ever read the BIBLE?
Numbers 5:27-28
27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
Why are you here? To cherry pick the questions or remarks that you can handle only?
Which sends me back to "Why are you here?" You danced around a lot of challenges of mine or simply avoided them altogether.
A fertilized egg is a human being according my Church and that is all you need to know if you truly want to be obedient to the one true God.
Artificial contraception is a sin, but the Catholic Church does provide for sinners. It is called confession. Pope John Paul II allowed for some concessions on contraception by formally telling all priests not to be too hard on those in confession who repeatedly confess the sin of artificial contraception. It is not to be deemed mortal or grounds for excommunication or anything of the like. It is to be relegated to the condition of "invincible ignorance." You may want to familiarize yourself with that term for other applications.
I do not decide for women what is right or moral, God does. And Jesus established HIS Church to do the same. Read Matthew 16 and you will understand. The same with Matthew 18. The Church has ruled since time immemorial that abortion is a grave sin. Your interpretation of the Numbers passage is totally false, albeit the one hopeful straw you and yours somehow cling to.
Don't ask me if I read the Bible. You have found one of maybe a handful of passages in all of Scripture you are willing to try to adhere to. All the rest you have no use for. We are not fooled by your duplicitous ways, and surely God is not.
Trial offers a peek into the world of limitless abortion
We are in danger of wandering off topic here but there is a need to check the record and look at sane solutions. It was under the Reagan administration that the mentally ill were "freed" from mental institutions given that he slashed their funding. (He was not alone in this but he was instrumental.) Secondly violent criminals are freed to make room for non violent pot smokers which suits the Prison-Industrial-Complex to a tee. It is much cheaper to house non-violent inmates. It was Nixon who started the phony War On Drugs and we are still paying the price. So to address your points you need to support legalizing marijuana which will free up room in prisons for violent offenders and funding to care for the mentally ill. If you want to take this any further we will need to start another thread.
So abortion is legal, pot smoking is illegal and violent and crazy people are allowed to own guns. The use of universal background checks will resolve the latter problem while legalizing pot will solve the 2nd.
So where do you want to go as far as abortion is concerned? Should it be legal or illegal?
Or we could just build more prisons to actually house all criminals for the full time they are supposed to be in prison, as well as mental hospitals for the crazies. We can start by using all welfare funds, as well as any funds used for corporate and bank bailouts.
So you are saying that no one should be given any social security and medicare because all of the money must be given to the Prison-Industrial-Complex to house violent criminals instead?
Thought I made my opinion on abortion rather clear. Abortion on demand is abhorrant, ending an innocent human life via violent means is murder.
Thank you for restating your position. So if we enact your position into law who is that gets charged with murder? The doctor would be the obvious choice but isn't the woman equally guilty since she provided the "innocent human life" that was murdered? Are you willing to charge 1 miilion+ women per year with murder? Because just like guns finding their ways into hands of criminals pregnant women will find ways to have abortions. They were happening long before RvW and will continue if it is overturned.
So from a pragmatic standpoint are you willing to clutter the courts and the prisons by incarcerating 1,000,000+ women each and every year? You will have to start executing them in an expedited wholesale manner too since the current total inmate population is only 2.5 million. You will more than double that in just 3 years. It is understand why you need to deprive the elderly of their social security and welfare in order to enact your new order.
For the most part I agree with you in regards to no one wanting more abortions. The exceptions being the psychopathic killers of the world like Kermit Grosnell, the administrators of Planned Parenthood and the leaders of organizations such as NOW and Naral Pro-Choice America.
Immie
Hey Immie, do you have any proof the administrators of Planned Parenthood and the leaders of organizations such as NOW and Naral Pro-Choice America want more abortions?
All of these organizations believe in reducing the need for abortion. This means support for improving access to birth control and teaching young people comprehensive sex education.
Really? Maybe you should try reading their propaganda with an open mind. Nothing in it displays any kind of hope for fewer abortions.
And by the way, I am all for comprehensive sex education. The only way to reduce the number of abortions is through informing young adults and changing the hearts of those young adults. You see, we need to portray abortion as the travesty it really is rather than as God's gift to women as PP wants it seen. Of course, "comprehensive sex education" in the minds of PP has nothing to do with teaching the truth about abortion.
Sex education should include the biological aspects of sex that it always has included at least since I was in fifth grade, but it should also teach what abortion is AND alternatives to abortion. It should also teach that abstinence is the only way to avoid unwanted pregnancy AND that it is not abnormal... weird or unnatural to remain abstinent until such time as one is ready to raise a child.
Immie
Or we could just build more prisons to actually house all criminals for the full time they are supposed to be in prison, as well as mental hospitals for the crazies. We can start by using all welfare funds, as well as any funds used for corporate and bank bailouts.
So you are saying that no one should be given any social security and medicare because all of the money must be given to the Prison-Industrial-Complex to house violent criminals instead?
Thank you for restating your position. So if we enact your position into law who is that gets charged with murder? The doctor would be the obvious choice but isn't the woman equally guilty since she provided the "innocent human life" that was murdered? Are you willing to charge 1 miilion+ women per year with murder? Because just like guns finding their ways into hands of criminals pregnant women will find ways to have abortions. They were happening long before RvW and will continue if it is overturned.Thought I made my opinion on abortion rather clear. Abortion on demand is abhorrant, ending an innocent human life via violent means is murder.
So from a pragmatic standpoint are you willing to clutter the courts and the prisons by incarcerating 1,000,000+ women each and every year? You will have to start executing them in an expedited wholesale manner too since the current total inmate population is only 2.5 million. You will more than double that in just 3 years. It is understand why you need to deprive the elderly of their social security and welfare in order to enact your new order.
Those opposed to privacy rights lack the courage to respond to this, as the logical extrapolation of the OP’s idiotic premise, that abortion is ‘murder,’ is that the state, so empowered, may put doctors and women into prison.
The OP is obviously ignorant of the difference between civil law and criminal law, and the legal requirements for murder, such as the ability to form intent.
That the radical right seeks to empower the state at the expense of citizens’ civil liberties should come as no surprise, of course.
