For those of you without the intestinal fortitude to read the entire grand jury report on what they found a Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s clinic, The Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto dug out a bit of history from the report that makes you wonder why this guy wasn’t drummed out of the medical profession four decades ago.
One of the strongest practical arguments in favor of the Roe regime is that abortion has been around since time immemorial and outlawing it only drove it underground, leading women to endanger themselves by seeking out the services of back-alley quacks. The Philadelphia grand jurors recounted a powerful example from their own city’s history.
It was called the Mother’s Day Massacre. A young Philadelphia doctor "offered to perform abortions on 15 poor women who were bused to his clinic from Chicago on Mother’s Day 1972, in their second trimester of pregnancy." The women didn’t know that the doctor "planned to use an experimental device called a ‘super coil’ developed by a California man named Harvey Karman."
A colleague of Karman’s Philadelphia collaborator described the contraption as "basically plastic razors that were formed into a ball. . . . They were coated into a gel, so that they would remain closed. These would be inserted into the woman’s uterus. And after several hours of body temperature, . . . the gel would melt and these . . . things would spring open, supposedly cutting up the fetus."
Nine of the 15 Chicago women suffered serious complications. One of them needed a hysterectomy. The following year, the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade. It would be 37 more years before the Philadelphia doctor who carried out the Mother’s Day Massacre would go out of business. His name is Kermit Gosnell.
That’s some pretty damning background information that would give some context to what type of
human being monster Kermit Gosnell is. But that’s another story the mainstream media don’t seem interested in dredging up. I encourage you to read the entire (long) article because it’s a powerful argument for overturning the Roe abortion-on-demand legal regime and allowing some sensible rules and regulations crafted by democratic compromise.