by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

  • The Gosnell jury continues to hear the re-reading of testimony. Based on JD Mullane’s picture of the charges, the jury deliberations could take some time:

    The jurors are also apparently still wrestling with minor charges as well, asking to see files related to two babies that were allegedly aborted past Pennsylvania’s legal limit for abortions of 24 weeks. The panel of 12 also sent out a question asking if the medical files were the sole basis for the 227 misdemeanor charges against Gosnell for allegedly violating Pennsylvania’s 24-hour waiting period on abortions.

  • At National Review Online, Michael New argues that greater availability of contraception (such as the morning-after pill) for younger women may actually result in increased sexual activity, rather than in decreasing the abortion rate.


  • The New York Times covered Live Action’s InHuman video of abortionist LeRoy Carhart (pictured left). While writer Erik Eckholm says Carhart uses “some imprudent phrases while discussing the process of a late-term abortion,” the article is largely a defense of Carhart and fails to mention his blatant lies regarding the deaths of Jennifer Morbelli and Christin Gilbert:

    The new video captures the doctor, LeRoy H. Carhart, using some imprudent phrases while discussing the process of a late-term abortion with women posing as patients. At one point he describes a fetus that has died after an injection in the womb as softening like “meat in a Crock-Pot.” But the video provides no evidence of illegal action or subpar medical techniques.

    Other medical experts as well as defenders of abortion rights said the comparison with Dr. Gosnell, who seemed to show blatant disregard for his patients and the law, was misleading and unfair.

  • Ramesh Ponnuru and Robert George call for Congress to hold hearings on how states regulate (or in some cases don’t regulate) abortion clinics:

    The grand-jury report suggests as well that the fact that the victims were poor and black partly explained the passivity of state officials. This claim, if true, strengthens the case that the state was failing to fulfill its legal duty. There is, of course, all too much precedent for such state failure to enforce civil rights granted by the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment contemplates such failure and offers a solution: Its fifth and concluding section confers upon Congress the power to enforce its substantive guarantees. In this case, power clearly implies duty. It is a power Congress has often used to force states to do the right thing, or to step in itself to bring justice where states refused.

[Photo via Daily Mail]

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...