Gosnell thinks of himself as “a soldier in the war on poverty”
He believes himself to be innocent… in this larger spiritual sense. He believes he was performing a service for people that asked him….
He believes he was a soldier at war with poverty. He has a sense of righteousness, that whatever rule he broke, it was worth it.
~ Philadelphia reporter Steve Volt, discussing what he learned from conversations with the imprisoned, convicted “House of Horrors” abortionist Kermit Gosnell, as quoted by ABCNews.com, September 23
Sep.24, 2013 1:00 am |
Abortionist quacks & pervs |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“whatever rule he broke”
All those pesky rules … who can keep them all straight anyways?!
Don’t murder human beings. Rules, rules, rules!
Of course. Up until recently, he had a nationwide community of “choice” advocates telling him that he was a hero. That’s the word they always use for abortionists, and late-term abortionists in particular. It’s no surprise he’s held onto the self-image that was deliberately reinforced for decades.
Praying for him.
That he repent. That God impress upon his heart how very evil his deeds were and that he be broken over the children he killed and the women he wounded.
The level of ignorance in the few comments on the story is astonishing. You know, one guy blamed us 100% for his murders, because we decided in 1960 that suddenly life begins at conception, you know before that we always believed live started at birth, especially in Jesus’ time. Darn theists, causing infanticide by telling people not to commit infanticide. If only they would stop trying to prevent infanticide, we would have no infanticide.
As a general rule, abortionists are textbook narcissists. Many see themselves as saviors to — in their mind – the poor stupid women whom they save through the desire to rid them of their unwanted condition. It appears Gosnell is truly surprised he could be charged with any crime.
He was killing the future poor to save them from a lifetime of poverty.
Because he cared.
This reminds me of how Kevorkian justified his “medical practice” of euthanasia. These types will use everything and anything as a scape-goat.
He believes himself to be innocent…in this larger spiritual sense. He believes he was performing a service for the people that asked him…
He has a sense of righteousness, that whatever rule he broke it was worth it..
So did the Commandant of Auschwitz.
He is one of those African Americans who never took the black plight seriously or contributed one iota to the betterment of black Americans. Kenneth Clark would most definitely dispute Gosnell’s approach to eradicating poverty in the black community.
If he was so considered about the poor, I wonder if he ever donated to a food bank or to organizations that work to end poverty, or volunteered to tutor West Philly students, etc.? There are dozens of things one can do to help end poverty. Killing the children of the poor isn’t one of them.
Monsters always justify their atrocities, at least in their own minds.
The Ku Klux Klan lynched “niggers” to send a grisly message. They wanted to “protect white women.” They thought themselves to be doing good work.
Someone already mentioned guards and officers of the Nazi concentration camps. They wanted to purify Europe of Jews. They thought themselves to be doing good work.
And Gosnell thought he was fighting poverty — by extorting poor ethnic women and killing their children. (I’m not sure how his illegal drug sales played into his fantasy.) He thought himself to be doing good work.
The important thing is that WE decide who are the monsters. They do not get to define their own self-righteousness.
No phillymiss. To Gosnell and his irk of liberal DemocRATic minions donating to Planned Parenthood is a much more efficient use of their money to end poverty. The sad part is that we talk about Gosnell as being this evil man but even if Gosnell himself had been standing by Cecile Richards getting applause at last years DemocRATic convention; all those millions of other ghouls would continue to support DemocRATs.
Not sure about anyone else here, but this article gave me the feeling that someone is trying to do a good whitewashing of this man’s crimes and somehow portray him as a victim of sorts. I found the article itself as well as the linked story “Gosnell’s Babies” to be completely disrespectful to this man’s many victims – the title alone – the babies he brutalized and murdered should never ever be called his. I realize headlines need to attract attention, but they do not need to be insulting to the adults and babies who were brutalized by this man.
This idea that killing the babies of poor women is somehow helping to end poverty in any way also needs to be dispelled once and for all. And I too caught the comment Chris mentioned of someone claiming this atrocity was the fault of pro-lifers. I’m sorry but the responsibility for the atrocities committed by this man lay firstly with himself and his staff, secondly with the local community and bureaucracy who were made aware of numerous complaints, and lastly with all of the abortion supporters who for years swore up and down such horrible practices would end if abortion were safe and legal and who continue to fight to ensure these clinics stay unregulated. While I’m sure some of his patients also have some responsibility here as well, it’s difficult to really know since so many have since come forward with claims of their being coerced and even outright forced to abort their babies.
It would be so nice for a change if this upcoming Gosnell story in Philly Mag would offer a contrast by including some of the amazing work and services offered by our crisis pregnancy centers here, including some of their success stories of young women who choose to have their babies and raise themselves up out of poverty as well. I live in Philly though (for just a little while longer thankfully) and I realize such balanced coverage isn’t likely.
If abortion eliminated poverty then why is there still poverty?
Poverty exists because Democrats enable their constituents to take advantage of government programs above and beyond actual need.
Poverty is a relative term anyway. In my state, publicaid recipients walk around with $150 Nike gym shoes on and use the link card to purchase all sorts of things many of which are supposedly “excluded” from the list of allowable items. Go Dems!!!
Poverty is a relative term anyway.
Yup. A middle school civics teacher (outspoken Obama supporter) where I work told her students last week that folks are having fewer children these days because of the expense associated with having children. She told the students it costs over $205,000 ($11,388.88 per year) to raise each child from birth to age 18 and this doesn’t include putting money away in savings for things like college.
Going by this teacher’s lesson, it should have cost me over $34,000 per year when my three kids were all living at home. I don’t know how my kids and I survived before I remarried, because I never made that much per year.
Oh, that’s right, it’s called living within your means.
“In my state, publicaid recipients walk around with $150 Nike gym shoes ”
It’s called “Goodwill”. Most of my clothes are brand name and look new and I really doubt I’ve ever spent more than $20 on a clothing item. You can’t really judge how poor or needy someone is on clothing in my opinion. A lot of thrift stores have the nice stuff priced very reasonably if you look hard enough, some of it’s even brand new! It’s not like there aren’t welfare cheats, but I don’t really like the idea of deciding how in need someone is on what type of clothing they wear.
And plus, especially after the economic crisis, there are people with nice things that are in dire straight. Stuff like video games and such you can sell off if you need to, but you might as well keep your nice clothes since you’re not going to get really any return on them.
I do think that food stamps needs overhaul though, I see no reason why soda should be allowed for one. Though I don’t begrudge people on food stamps a treat.
Gosnell and his ilk of liberals and DemocRATs waging a war on poverty and saving people money by killing their children. If Gosnell could get away with it he would kill the babies by snipping the spines on the mothers to save even more of us from poverty. He is also a hero to the Obama Green agenda too cause each baby he kills prevents all of that future carbon footprint from their planet. Bringing us closer to utopia one death at a time.