March 22, 2017

January 25, 2011

The Silence is Deafening

via ReformedPastor,

It’s now been seven days since the member organizations including the Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), United Church of Christ, United Methodist General Board of Church and Society and Women’s Division, and various mainline church caucuses, have had a single word to say about Gosnell.

Keep in mind that this was a major news story that involved the killing of at least seven babies (and very possibly hundreds more) as well as at least one woman. Gosnell hasn’t been charged with medical malpractice, or with having a dirty office, but with eight counts of murder. In fact, Gosnell may be the biggest mass murderer in American history, though his destruction of his own records would make that hard enough to prove in court that he’s only charged with eight. (A former assistant of his says that she aided in at least one hundred killings of live-born children.) And yet–perhaps because Gosnell didn’t try to kill a politician, didn’t use a gun, and was practicing a profession that the mainline denominations approve of wholeheartedly–there’s not been a peep.
With regard to the RCRC, that’s not surprising. People across the political spectrum (outside of the abortion-worshipping far left) have been seeking to outdo themselves in indicating their disgust at the chamber of horrors Gosnell ran while killing perhaps hundreds of live babies using a procedure very similar to one that RCRC says should be legal. RCRC apparently figures that if it doesn’t say anything, it won’t look like it’s supporting Gosnell’s practices. But while I’m sure RCRC doesn’t approve of his malpractice or breaking the law, the fact is that RCRC supports two of the pillars of Gosnell’s work: abortion at absolutely any stage of pregnancy, and killing viable babies after bringing them partially (if not entirely) out of the mother. Condemning him would thus be seen as the height of hypocrisy, and defending him would be the equivalent of defending Joseph Mengele, so best that they just ignore the whole sorry mess.

read it all

Share this story:

Recent Related Posts



OK, but wait ... what about the state’s role in all of this? The Pennsylvania Dept. of Health dropped the ball repeatedly and Pennsylvania’s former governor Bob Casey was one of the star’s of the pro-life movement.

The RCRC will probably pratter on about how much worse things would get if abortion wasn’t legal and how places like this would become the norm rather than the exception.

But what I find remarkable and disgusting is that this clinic went on for so many years in a state that has had distinguished pro-life leadership and laws that are as restrictive as one can enact with Roe v. Wade. Does anyone truly care, especially about the health of inner-city women and their children?

[1] Posted by Teatime2 on 1-25-2011 at 06:53 PM · [top]

Bob Casey has been dead for 11 years.

[2] Posted by James Manley on 1-25-2011 at 07:00 PM · [top]

It was the administration of Tom Ridge which decided to forego inspecting abortattoirs as inspections and other regulatory acts were seen as a barrier to choice.

[3] Posted by Paula Loughlin on 1-25-2011 at 07:37 PM · [top]

James, he did say “former”. Plus, isn’t Jr. still around and active in politics?

[5] Posted by DavidSh on 1-25-2011 at 07:55 PM · [top]

According to the grand jury report, the change came when Gov. Casey left office and Gov. Ridge came in - there was a conscious decision not to interfere in abortion clinics because it got the pro-abortion groups too upset. Read the grand jury report (if you can) - this was a deliberate state government decision starting with Ridge to give the abortion clinics a pass.

[6] Posted by Branford on 1-25-2011 at 08:06 PM · [top]

Here’s a link to the grand jury report. And in the comment above I say “(if you can)” because it is very gruesome - read at your own risk.

[7] Posted by Branford on 1-25-2011 at 08:09 PM · [top]

Paula @ #3 and Branford are right.  It was the pro-choice Republican governor who messed up here, not the pro-life Democrat.

I say this as a Republican.

[8] Posted by James Manley on 1-25-2011 at 08:44 PM · [top]

#7, That Grand Jury report is gruesome. The plain ineptitude of the Department of Health is just grotesque.  Amazing that two governmental agencies kept playing a game of “its their jurisdiction”  so that nothing was done.  VILE this man!

[9] Posted by Blue Cat Man on 1-25-2011 at 09:06 PM · [top]

[1] Teatime2, “Does anyone truly care, especially about the health of inner-city women and their children?” Without, or at least trying to suppress, snarkiness, inner-city women and their children are not likely voters. Nor are they major contributors to political campaigns. The pro-abortion crowd is politically motivated and active.

[10] Posted by off2 on 1-25-2011 at 11:00 PM · [top]

Wickedly the argument is already being made that the horrors alleged to have been perpetrated in Kermit Gosnell’s Clinic are due to “anti-choice zealots” and too restrictive abortion legislation.

Lord have mercy.

[11] Posted by driver8 on 1-26-2011 at 12:09 AM · [top]

I’m also surprised that a certain misanthropic TEC seminary dean hasn’t made statements in his defense. After all, it is a woman’s choice, isn’t it?

Regardless of whether the baby is in the womb, at any gestational age from conception on, or whether the baby has been delivered, breathed air, and cried - what’s the difference? It’s still killing a baby.

[12] Posted by Ralph on 1-26-2011 at 08:21 AM · [top]

A bit surprised they aren’t yelling, kicking and screaming because Gosnell has been prevented from carrying out more “blessings”.

[13] Posted by midwestnorwegian on 1-26-2011 at 09:08 AM · [top]

Now that I’ve read some of the report (and seen a horrific picture of a dead baby boy), it’s interesting to note the discussion on viability. When I was “personally-oppossed-but” I always thought the viablity argument made sense. But it doesn’t. A newborn is utterly dependent on those around him. Leave him on the table, and he’ll die—simple as that. The only difference is one of development. Yet with this false distinction comes the bifurcation we see in this report: horror at the killing taking place outside the womb, utter silence at the killing taking place inside.

[14] Posted by DavidSh on 1-26-2011 at 01:09 PM · [top]

While this is all horrible, it remains that women must not be promiscuous and cannot/should not have relations with men outside of marriage.  (Are those words even spoken anymore?)  Women must be the gatekeepers and should only allow a husband inside the gate.  This is what I was taught.  If women stop letting itinerent men inside the gate, at least the numbers of sought abortions would diminish.  As well, a host of other problems would disappear.

[15] Posted by episcopal100 on 1-26-2011 at 04:12 PM · [top]

episcopal100 - I was going to say you’re an idiot, but I will rephrase my comment.  I’ll just say you’re off-topic.

[16] Posted by veritas2007 on 1-26-2011 at 07:52 PM · [top]

You cannot separate relations with the result of those relations.

[17] Posted by episcopal100 on 1-27-2011 at 01:15 PM · [top]

I was taught as a boy that part of being a man was to respect women and be aware that, while your body may be yelling for you to something, you are bigger than your drives - and you have God to help.  That was something that saved me a lot of grief in my twenties.  A guy who was converted to Christ at our church, however, said that his father had explicitly taught him that a man is a man only if he gets inside the pants of a lot of women.  And that did bring trouble to my new Christian friend.

Over the last forty years, that second teaching has predominated.  Indeed, it is taken for granted, and the larger culture shows it - just look at TV “comedies.” Many broken hearts - and many murdered children - have resulted and will continue to result.

So abortion has to remain.  Moloch and Aphrodite support each other - and both are idols.

[18] Posted by AnglicanXn on 1-27-2011 at 01:59 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.