Kermit Gosnel: guilty

Arlen wrote: But these children were born (by a Frankenstein methodology) and breathing on their own. Their murder was not abortion but rather infanticide. The doctor was not convicted of abortion, but murder.

But the women were there for the specific purpose of having their baby killed. He completed the womens' requests and I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that killing the baby inside the womb is all that different than killing it outside except that the baby gets to feel air on it's skin before being killed.

Trust me, I have no problem with this guy getting death, but it won't ever happen. This will set a precident the pro-abortion crowd won't want to see.

http://news.yahoo.com/convicted-pa-abor ... 05368.html

Dr. Kermit Gosnell gave up his right to appeal and in return will spend life in prison. Gosnell, 72, was found guilty Monday of first-degree murder in a case that became a flashpoint in the nation's abortion debate. ... Prosecutors instead agreed to two life sentences without parole, and Gosnell was to face further sentencing Wednesday: in the death of the third baby, an involuntary manslaughter conviction in the death of a patient and hundreds of lesser counts.

Rick wrote:

Arlen wrote: But these children were born (by a Frankenstein methodology) and breathing on their own. Their murder was not abortion but rather infanticide. The doctor was not convicted of abortion, but murder.

But the women were there for the specific purpose of having their baby killed. He completed the womens' requests and I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that killing the baby inside the womb is all that different than killing it outside except that the baby gets to feel air on it's skin before being killed.

Trust me, I have no problem with this guy getting death, but it won't ever happen. This will set a precident the pro-abortion crowd won't want to see.

There has to be a hard line between a live baby human and an unborn baby. Or else we will be killing babies up to 2 years old because they have not become aware until then, (as a senator Obama supported this very thing!)

Arlen wrote:

Rick wrote:

Arlen wrote: But these children were born (by a Frankenstein methodology) and breathing on their own. Their murder was not abortion but rather infanticide. The doctor was not convicted of abortion, but murder.

But the women were there for the specific purpose of having their baby killed. He completed the womens' requests and I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that killing the baby inside the womb is all that different than killing it outside except that the baby gets to feel air on it's skin before being killed.

Trust me, I have no problem with this guy getting death, but it won't ever happen. This will set a precident the pro-abortion crowd won't want to see.

There has to be a hard line between a live baby human and an unborn baby. Or else we will be killing babies up to 2 years old because they have not become aware until then, (as a senator Obama supported this very thing!)

Well personally, I think the hard line is a beating heart whether it be in or out of the womb, but others would say the baby needs to be able to breath on it's own to be considered human.

I'm glad this scumbag gets to think about all the money he's made off of dead babies without being able to spend another dime. Maybe he'll find out what it feels like to get sliced up in prison... that would be justice.

He needs to be put to death.

Arlen wrote: He needs to be put to death.

In a just world, yes.

I have a hard time thinking that I want to put a 70+ yr old person to death.

I really think that living a life of shame, depriving him of his ability to work in his profession, and confiscating all his physical assets is enough.

I simply don't have a spirit of vengeance. I suspect he'll get plenty of that one day when he stands before the throne.

Being the nice person that I am - I feel no urge to hasten that day.