Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

http://www.ajc.com/news/ap/crime/doc-di ... nic/nWwtN/

Seems to me that once you sanction killing them in the womb it's just too easy for something like this to happen.

Before long they will be making abortion retroactive.

Wow... just, wow...

Not surprised.

They should cut his spine.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

He should be disassembled one limb at a time with zero pain killers and left for infection

There are some things that are just beyond wrong and this one of them. Creepy.....

I think that cutting his spine and leaving him there to suffocate would be justice.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

In the womb , out of sight out of mind, or out of the womb, it's still cold blooded murder. Pretty soon they'll be taking them home to try them out for a while and if they don't like them, they can just throw them on the floor and stomp them to death. It's a National disgrace.

In the womb , out of sight out of mind, or out of the womb, it's still cold blooded murder. Pretty soon they'll be taking them home to try them out for a while and if they don't like them, they can just throw them on the floor and stomp them to death. It's a National disgrace.

My intellect is ill-suited for tedious legalistic thinking, but this all does raise the question, if the highest court in the land has sanctioned the taking of life in utero, is there any difference other than time in taking it ex utero?

And if so, what was the rational used to delineate between the two?

Methinks everyone facing a murder conviction should just plead "really really really late term abortion" as their defense.

That would only work with the mothers consent.

Kreutz wrote:My intellect is ill-suited for tedious legalistic thinking, but this all does raise the question, if the highest court in the land has sanctioned the taking of life in utero, is there any difference other than time in taking it ex utero?

And if so, what was the rational used to delineate between the two?

Methinks everyone facing a murder conviction should just plead "really really really late term abortion" as their defense.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If memory serves, (and I am paraphasing BIGTIME here) the rationale was that the state's interest in protecting the life of the fetus as a person did not arise (or at least did not become so compelling as to override the [ill-defined, largely invented and at least vastly stretched and expanded] rights of privacy and self-determination of the mother) until the fetus was "viable", which was beginning of third trimester. Don't ask how any of this was justified either legally or medically, the court just pulled the whole thing out of its collective @ss; Roe v. Wade is a legal fairy tale.

Hence, the "slippery slope". This guy joked the fetus could have walked to the coffee shop with him, but said that in his medical opinion the fetus was not old enough to make him a murderer. Any time you put the performer in charge of the standard of performance, you run the risk that ALL performances will meet the standard. It ain't JUST the doctors; look at the teachers, and don't forget the damned gub'mint bureaucrats.

And by the way, I prefer "post-partum abortion" for the Roe v. Wade murder defense. Rolls off the tongue better than what you said.

This guy is worse than the recent baby shooter.

Baby murderers get the worst of my contempt.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

There is nothing that could be done to Gosnell that would be equally as horrific. I vote for public execution by a firing squad.

When they start treating abortion as pre-meditated murder, I'll be satisfied. Until then its all just lip-service.

I agree that this pig should die by his own methods, and soon.

As terrible as abortion is though, I'm tired of seeing it as part of party platforms and taking up so much space in national politics. If we don't get issues like this and gay marriage back down to the state-by-state level, they'll only serve to further divide us. We can't denounce the federal government for infringing on the things we support (2A) then ask them to intervene on issues we oppose or we're no better than liberals.

MarcSpaz wrote:That would only work with the mothers consent.

Not true. In either case (either in utero or ex utero) the consent of the person most directly impacted (aka the murderee) is never considered.

Edit: yes, "post partum abortion" is better Dormin. Bet thats what its called when its legalized (but only for infants).

j1mmyd wrote:I agree that this pig should die by his own methods, and soon.

As terrible as abortion is though, I'm tired of seeing it as part of party platforms and taking up so much space in national politics. If we don't get issues like this and gay marriage back down to the state-by-state level, they'll only serve to further divide us. We can't denounce the federal government for infringing on the things we support (2A) then ask them to intervene on issues we oppose or we're no better than liberals.

Overturning Roe V Wade kicks it back to the states....

This is so sad, and horrible, my heart goes out to all the babies. 7 is just what they know about. How many has he done in his career that we don't know about.

=(

TacticalMom wrote:This is so sad, and horrible, my heart goes out to all the babies. 7 is just what they know about. How many has he done in his career that we don't know about.

=(

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Is it just me, or is it curious that this mass murder has gotten so much less media attention than Connecticutt?