Get PJ Media on your Apple

Unexamined Premises

Dr. Mengele, I Presume

April 15th, 2013 - 12:11 am

The “doctor” will see you now

As you can read here, I’ve been following the horrific tale of “Dr.” Kermit Gosnell, the alleged Butcher of Philadelphia, ever since the story broke last year. In fact, in the guise of my crazy-lefty character, David Kahane, I wrote a big piece, “The Charnel House of Blackmun,” about it shortly after the grand jury issued its stomach-turning report on this latter-day Mengele‘s crimes. An excerpt:

For us, a day without an abortion somewhere in this great land is like a day without a sermon on climate change: The world is a drab and bitter place, in which the cheery hosannas of the unborn dead cannot be heard, praising the glory of a Gaian world they will never pollute with their presence. Forget that Baudelaire dude and the gimp, Verbal Kint: The Master’s greatest trick was not convincing the world he didn’t exist, but persuading women that it was morally affirmative to murder their own children. Medea, take a bow!

Now, you may quibble that Medea killed children who were, you know, actually ambulatory, but to us and Peter Singer, that is a small matter, a mere detail, a bagatelle of a bump in the road on our way to a more perfect nihilism. Which is why I’m here to celebrate a great American named Kermit B. Gosnell, M.D., a man who was standing up to the forces of bigotry and intolerance and unreasoning pedophobia by providing abortion services at his Women’s Medical Society in Philadelphia — until, unaccountably, the state of Pennsylvania arrested him… 

Well, one man’s “baby charnel house” is another man’s monument to the House that Blackmun Built, and surely reasonable men and women of good conscience can agree to disagree, even if Roe is long-since settled law and if you troglodytes so much as try to touch one hair of its sacred little head, we’re coming after you with scissors, suction, a pair of pliers, and a blowtorch… Once you accept the proposition of abortion pretty much on demand, including post-“birth,” this seems to us a distinction without a difference, but there’s no accounting for the lengths to which you Christianist Javerts will go in order to hunt down innocent women’s-health specialists.

While it’s true that the alleged details of Dr. Gosnell’s practice can make you squeamish right-wingers uncomfortable, our brave women are made of sterner stuff. They know the parasitic clumps of cells in their wombs — punishment-by-“baby” for the simple, innocent, joyous act of sexual intercourse — are being eliminated for a higher, nobler cause than mere Christianity. We progressives don’t believe in the afterlife, unless we’re trying to fake some sort of “faith” on television, but we do believe in, shall we say, an eternally resonating resonance that proclaims to the universe: We were here. We lived. We killed. Mission accomplished.

The Mainstream Media, though — until being shamed into it by Kirsten Powers last week in USA Today — has given the case scant attention and next to no coverage. An ever-shifting series of completely unconvincing excuses has been given, including “we don’t cover local crime stories”; that’s rich coming from the same gang that made the death of Trayvon Martin into national news for months on end.

And so will this doctor

We all know the reason why the Martin story was news: at first glance, it appeared to be that relative rarity, a white-on-black killing, thus presenting the media with what Tom Wolfe so aptly characterized in The Bonfire of the Vanities as a Great White Defendant – until it was discovered that the alleged killer, George Zimmerman, was half Hispanic. No matter; the New York Times, which is in the grips of an obsession with racial and sexual taxonomy that would do the National Socialist German Workers Party proud, promptly dubbed him a “white Hispanic” and went on their merry way with The Narrative, in which an oppressive White Power Structure visits all manner of evil on the Noble Underclasses.

The story of Kermit Gosnell and his “Women’s Medical Society” is the precise opposite of The Narrative. It features a black villain, who may turn out to be the worst mass murderer in American history. It blows away the smokescreen that abortion has anything to do with “women’s health,” and reveals it for the barbaric, immoral, and murderous practice it, in fact, is. It forces American society to stare at a truth we’ve all known, deep down at our moral core — that a baby in the womb is a human being, not a clump of cells or a malignant parasite. And it’s about time.

Perhaps Elizabeth Scalia, blogging as The Anchoress, is right when she writes of the dawning realization, thanks to God’s grace, that the Gosnell trial reveals something fundamentally rotten in the souls of the American elites:

I see not a glass half-empty, but one half-full and filling. Perhaps I am only an optimist, and a naive one, but I feel like this is a break in the tide; a moment that can perhaps turn America from its myriad and mostly empty distractions, and get her asking important questions about who we are, what we have been enabling, who we want to be and what serving “the least among us” really means.

Coming, as it does, during a honeymoon phase of a popular new pope who embodies the idea of Godly tenderness and forcefully demonstrates his awareness that poverty, marginalization and “least-ness” comes in many forms, this almost seems like a moment handed to us by God.

I guess God’s been shelling peanuts for the past 40 years, but better late than never. A relict of the early 1970s, just as the Sexual Revolution had gone mainstream but while family structures were still largely intact and the legitimate birth rates had not yet taken a plunge, the spectacularly muddled Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision is an object lesson in the Consequences of No Consequences, an inferno of cultural side effects that finally belched up the underlying moral question — when, if ever, is it permissible to take an innocent life? — and propelled it toward its logical and ineluctable final resting place: the abattoir.

Badfellas: Mengele, center, with Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hoess, right

But, you cry, abortion is supposed to be “safe, legal and rare.” And late-term abortions — let’s call them by their real name, “partial-birth abortions,” i.e. infanticide — are supposed to be illegal except in dire necessity to save the mother’s life. Yeah, right: once you’ve established the principle some fetal life is worthless, then it’s easy to say (to quote Hillary Clinton on Benghazi) “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

Let’s take a closer look at that “women’s health” shibboleth, one of the things the murderous Left hides behind in its effort to sanitize the ugly truth of what it’s doing behind closed doors. From the grand jury report:

The “Women’s Medical Society.” That was the impressive-sounding name of the clinic operated in West Philadelphia, at 38th and Lancaster, by Kermit B. Gosnell, M.D. Gosnell seemed impressive as well. A child of the neighborhood, Gosnell spent almost four decades running this clinic, giving back – so it appeared – to the community in which he continued to live and work.

But the truth was something very different, and evident to anyone who stepped inside. The clinic reeked of animal urine, courtesy of the cats that were allowed to roam (and defecate) freely. Furniture and blankets were stained with blood. Instruments were not properly sterilized. Disposable medical supplies were not disposed of; they were reused, over and over again. Medical equipment – such as the defibrillator, the EKG, the pulse oximeter, the blood pressure cuff – was generally broken; even when it worked, it wasn’t used. The emergency exit was padlocked shut. And scattered throughout, in cabinets, in the basement, in a freezer, in jars and bags and plastic jugs, were fetal remains. It was a baby charnel house.

But what else could it be? David Harsanyi makes a good point.

If you’re the kind of guy whose idea of a “botched” medical procedure involves someone surviving, well, perhaps being charged with murder is a distinction without much of a difference. What distinguishes a late-term abortionist from an abortionist who uses scissors to sever the spinal cords of babies born alive is little more than a matter of tools and technique. The results, and the facts, are the same.

And all this was done, mind you, with the complete if tacit approval of the Pennsylvania authorities, who feared what they might find there and so failed to exercise even rudimentary regulatory control over the Charnel House of Harry Blackmun, the weak-minded Supreme Court justice who traveled from right to left, thus growing in office, and who gave us Roe.  Naturally, Blackmun attended Harvard Law, which gave him this sendoff in 1999.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun ’32 died March 4 at age 90. Appointed to the Court in 1970 by President Nixon, he retired in 1994 after a 24-year career on the Court marked by a movement from moderate conservatism to outspoken liberalism. A 1932 graduate of HLS, Justice Blackmun returned to the School on many occasions, for the Centennial Celebration, to receive the HLSA Award, to deliver the Class Day speech, and to speak to students at HLS’s Saturday School. 

Numerous Harvard Law School graduates had the honor of clerking for the Justice. Among them is Penda Hair ’78 – founding principal and codirector of The Advancement Project, a public policy advocacy organization in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles – who served as a Blackmun clerk for the 1979-80 term. The Bulletin asked Hair to comment on the Justice’s legacy. 

Justice Harry A. Blackmun will go down in history as the author of Roe v. Wade, but his contribution is much greater than that one seminal decision. Justice Blackmun’s life on and off the Court reflects a deep passion for protecting the disadvantaged and oppressed. Two hallmarks of his work are compassion for the real people involved in constitutional disputes and his eloquence of expression.

If that’s what Harvard calls “protecting the disadvantaged and oppressed” — and, by the way, does everybody from Harvard toss around Marxist jargon like a 1950s Pravda editorial writer? — then no wonder we’re in such trouble. Thanks, Harry, for making Gosnell possible, and rest assured that the evil you did in your lifetime lives on — and keeps killing.

The Women’s Medical Society

My friend and PJ colleague Roger Simon puts his finger on just what it is that makes the Gosnell story so touchy to the left:

The trial of Dr. Gosnell is a potential time bomb exploding in the conventional liberal narrative on abortion itself. This is about the A-word.

No feeling human being can read this story or watch it on TV without being confronted with the obvious conclusion — like it or not — that abortion is murder.

It may be murder with extenuating circumstances (rape, survival of the mother, etc.) but it is murder nonetheless. Dr. Gosnell — monster though he is — has accidentally shoved that uncomfortable truth in our faces.

Pushing this case front and center in the media would change the national narrative on this subject.

And so, perhaps, it has. The left is right to fear that a Gosnell conviction — almost certain, given the evidence — really is the slippery slope toward rolling back Roe, and that once the American people fully understand the horror Blackmun unleashed, they will recoil like Alec Guinness at the end of The Bridge On the River Kwai, and exclaim, “What have I done?” They know, far better than we, that once they lose The Narrative, they’ve lost everything.

How, in the name of a putative and anodyne “right to choose,” did we move from a country that prized the sanctity of life to a degenerate, bloodthirsty society that literally strangles its own children? A more profound act of self-loathing disguised as “reproductive justice”  can hardly be imagined; it’s Satanic, really.

There’s something in journalism that’s come to be known as “Godwin’s Law,” which posits: ”As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches.” Obviously, I’ve violated it, and deliberately so, because the point of comparison is identical: an affectless unwillingness to treat every human being as fully human, and instead to sacrifice them for a higher cause. When morality is untethered from religion, and tied instead to culture/Kultur, savagery results.

And yet for many on the left, abortion remains the greatest of the secular sacraments, murder as a positive good. I’ve met many young women in our business who tell me that they don’t mind my conservative politics, that much, but the one thing that they absolutely cannot compromise on, or even discuss, is Roe v. Wade. How the maternal instinct was extirpated in a generation or two of women is something for behavioral scientists and theologians to debate; the modern left’s transformation into a suicide cult will give historians and artists grist for decades to come.

We don’t know where it began, although Roe is certainly a good place to start. But we do know where it ends, by whichever name we choose to call the place:

Endstation Auschwitz

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
The really frightening aspect of this case is not the butchery on trial but the willingness of the news organizations and the rest of what W F Buckley used to call the "hive" averting their gaze from actual, undiluted infanticide in service to their ideology. One shudders to imagine what they might be willing to tolerate or even promote under the right circumstances.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It was communists in China who decided that a girl's life was worthless, but it's the "right" that's engaged in a "war on women", right?

It was Teddy Kennedy who drove a young girl off a bridge then ran away and hid his drunkenness and miscreant behavior, but it's the "right" who is engaged in a war on women, right?

It was Bill Clinton, who, in a SEXUAL HARASSMENT LAWSUIT, was asked whether he had ever promised any woman in his employ a promotion, job, or improved economic position (Revlon), in exchange for keeping quiet about their adultery. (Monica Lewinsky). But, it's the "right" engaged in a war on women, right?

But engaged in a war on babies? The right has done everything it can to protect them.

The leftists in government and their media (but I repeat myself) have hidden, dissembled, parsed, covered up, lied, slandered, and misdirected this country into a state of soul removal.

Face it, we are all leftists now.

And, we are watching the blowback up close and personal...when we can get the "news" that isn't filtered by the state's media.

We don't care about the Constitution. We don't care about legislative rules, checks and balances, we don't care about truth, honor or human decency.

Our government and our information stream are poisoned and toxic.

For over forty years we have been a nation hard at work to destroy itself. We have succeeded in "Going Rouge".
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
When the failed “War on Poverty” produced institutionalized poverty and dependency characterized in part by illegitimate births and the resultant unwanted children (unwanted except possibly as a source of income) the liberal had two choices to make in order to mitigate the problem. They could revisit the program in order to abolish or radically change it, which would be an unacceptable admission of failure, or quietly dispose of the most highly visible products of its failure…the unwanted babies. Liberals don’t admit failure. Never ever.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (57)
All Comments   (57)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Original Jeannette,

My mom's birthday is this week. She fussed at me for sending her a present. Silly mom.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
When the subject is death camps, Godwin's Law is irrelevant: the topic started with Mengele's laboratory.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"And yet for many on the left, abortion remains the greatest of the secular sacraments, murder as a positive good."

Or, sometimes, a sacrifice: Remember the (French Canadian?) feminist who said that unwanted babies should be sacrificed to the Goddess Artemis?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
This song goes out to Dr. Gosnell...

Dead Can Dance - Black Sun
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
When decided the chorus sang that making abortion legal would remove it from the butcher shop to the clinic: clean and neat.

Now it seems to me that rather than elevating the practice, it has reduced it to what it is, a squalid atrocity, an abattoir.

Classical culture did it, the Chinese too. Both cultures were callus, certainly, and we must ask is our moralistic comfort worth the cost to our quality of life.

Someone said: "Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me." Well no matter, we know in our wisdom the world will give us a free pass for anything we care to do.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
someone might want to look up "stirpicultire." It's the breeding of special, superior, children. They were spawned at the Oneida Community. Before that, the children borne were "accidents." The community was founded by a direct descendant of Puritan ministers. The founder's cousin was President of the USA, his father was a senator, his other cousins were professors.

Noyes, himself, published a successful newspaper. It was read by Marx and Engels. If you ever wondered why socialists are so very, very, very certain that "this time" children in a community day-care will work best- it's because they read that this one time, it worked. You have to admit, it's a really peculiarly specific idea- they don't know how the state will wither, or how equality will be achieved- but they are sure that children will not be in a nuclear family's care.

Anyway- the perfectionist cult spawned off a newspaper, and descendants who are still running around the northeastern liberal arts colleges. The ideology of unlimited sexual activity is worth everything in the world, and that infants are grade-able- perfect or accidental- is a wide-spread notion. We know that "accidental" pregnancies are the ones aborted, today.

They are serious about the "everything in the world' is worth sexual activity. The members lived in poverty, and then small apartments in a big dorm-house. When people left the cult, they left with the clothes on their back. They didn't practice communion, or regular church- so no encountering any transcendance. And, as far as I can tell, they didn't have regular friends, or hobbies. The chief complaint, as they aged, is that younger members wouldn't come have sex with them. My grandmother crocheted afghans and prayed daily. That sounds like a normal hobby for someone old, not having sex with teenagers.

I wonder about the first "accidental" children of that community. I've read that older men bedded the younger girls- that is, old men and 13 year old girls. I wonder where those girls came from- were they raised as prey? The men practiced habits that sort- of worked like birth control. That was their excuse for getting to sleep with nubile young women.

I can't imagine someone adopting into that cult- they had a factory with hired hands. Shakers adopted children- but didn't prey on them.

Women had to sign pledges to turn over their children to the collective, to even try to get pregnant, once the collective decided to allow births. They weren't even trying for normal children. They were trying to breed "super-children." That's "stirpiculture." The founder had been reading Darwin and Galton, and wanted to practice. We still have the signed pledges.

This sounds odd, until one reads that in Vietnam, today, women have to get permission to try to get pregnant. China, too.

The breakdown on abortions is 80% single women, 20% married. I don't actually understand the married statistic. It seems like it would be zero. The breakdown by race is fairly unnerving, too, city by city. There are more abortions than live births of black infants in New York, for instance.

Nazis read up on Darwin, Galton, and other socialists. Noyes' magazine was named "The Socialist." I have no idea if Nazi's read old newspapers from America. But- the idea pool is the same water.

When we talk about how someone could imagine aborting their child, I'm not sure that the advocates of abortion are talking about 'wanted' children. They've got a whole language of 'accidental' and "unwanted" and "not human" that right-siders and more mainstream religious don't have access to. I'd say orthodox, but I don't necessarily mean capital O- I just mean conventional, main-stream religious. The people advocating this- they all had newspapers, they all read each other's work, they all published books- award-winning, right regularly, I might add.

Most of the posters here are wondering how someone could make such a criminal, perverse hash of normal sentiments and thought. It's not a disorderly mess- it's a worked out, coherent philosophy. It's just one that horrifies more conventional people.

Seriously, if you ever wondered why the Israelites, the Romans, attempted to wipe out particular populations- the Canaanites and the Phoenicians- it's exactly the same reasons- child sacrifice.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Of course the liberals "know" abortion is murder. They simply have a higher purpose in mind. They cannot utter the word "baby," In order to assuage their guilt, they refer to the unborn as a "clump of cells" or a "fetus." They also can't admit that the unborn are "alive." They may not be able to survive outside the womb, but they are "alive" from the time of conception.

Once delivered, children in the progressives' minds are then worthy of such protections that trample the rights of the law abiding such as the gun law backlash from Sandy Hook.

Liberals live in an upside down world where up is down, black is white and to understand the progressive's mindset, you must understand that "issues" like abortion, racism and global climate change have become the new religion for the godless.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Things look bleak, but 95 years ago, Our Lady of Fatima promised that "Russia will spread her errors... but in the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph". I wish I knew the timeframe..
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There is a very important point to keep up front even as the abortion-rights folks try to distance themselves from this "outlier." At least six women and girls, including the mother of Baby Boy A, walked into a supremely reputable clinic in Maryland, a member of the prestigious National Abortion Federation, no less, only to end up in Philly, doped within inches of their lives by rank amateurs, and left moaning on blood-stained blankets in a flea-infested house of horrors. Let that sink in. Kermit Gosnell worked for a National Abortion Federation member clinic. The word for that is not "outlier." It's "employee." Do *not* let them paint this man not being one of them.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I've never understood a woman who can kill her baby. I've never understood the doctors and nurses who help the woman kill her baby. I've never understood the vehement supporters of those women who kill their babies. I never will.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
A bit of research will show that the normal psychology of pregnancy is an easy thing for abortion salespeople to exploit.

First there is an almost stunned disbelief that this is even real. The sales pitch that the abortion will make it all go away is particularly helpful at this time. Convince the woman that it will be as if she was never pregnant int he first place, reinforce the denial. Ca-ching!

Second, there is a time of fear and uneasiness. Can I cope? I don't think I can! This is too overwhelming! So they don't tell the woman that these feelings and thoughts are normal and will pass. Tell her that they are powerful evidience that she is totally unprepared for motherhood and will be unable to cope, unable to properly care for her baby. Scare her into believing her irrational fears. This is actually a sales technique abortion staff are trained in.

Only after the woman has passed through these two phases is she ready for bonding with her unborn baby. This used to happen around "quickening," when the mother felt the baby move and he or she became much more real to the mother. Nowadays it can happen much sooner, of course, thanks to ultrasounds and doppler fetal heart tone monitors. Why do you think abortionists are so dead set against allowing the mother to see or hear her baby? Because they know that once she passes that line, once it really sinks into her consciousness that this is her baby, alive inside her, their sales pitches will fall mostly on deaf ears.

Pretty evil, to use normal psychology that way, isn't it?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Great post. This needs to be repeated over and over.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And over and over again. Such malevolence. The "banality of evil" indeed.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 Next View All