The defense counsel for Kermit Gosnell complained about the “baby factor” after a jury convicted his client of multiple crimes, including the murder of three born alive children. He'll be happy to know that time is on his side and, with any luck, the "baby factor" won't be a problem in the near future. If some in the abortion and medical communities have their way, future Gosnells won't be prosecuted, they'll be celebrated. Given the media's blackout of the trial for its first few weeks and then the trivial coverage it gave once the Mainstream Media had been exposed, it's difficult to know exactly how many Americans actually know what happened at 3801 Lancaster Street in Philadelphia, how they will respond, or if they actually care.
But if this case has done anything, it's ripped the cover off an abortion industry that most Americans want to ignore, hide from and pretend doesn’t really exist. To face the reality of abortion exposed by Gosnell, one must face the explicit hypocrisy and illogic of "I'm morally against abortion but I can't impose my view on someone else." Worse, the case did indeed present Americans who are paying attention with the "baby factor," the persistent evidence that there are a growing number of people in our nation who are just as comfortable with the taking the lives of children after they are born as they are with the taking the lives of children in the womb. They, in fact, recognize both as human beings, just not valuable human beings.
First, we had the video of a Planned Parenthood staffer in Florida testifying that such a decision should be left up to a woman and her doctor, and then the multiple videos of abortion center staff members dismissing the killing of already born children. But why not? If life begins at some arbitrary point on a continuum, what are a few hours? Clearly, a baby just outside the birth canal can't be any more morally defendable than one just inside.
Remember, just three years ago, Virginia had to update its law to ensure that the murder of a baby already born, but still attached to its mother by umbilical cord, is a crime. This after a woman went unprosecuted for letting her baby die while still attached to her.
Most people, my guess is, dismiss those cases as "isolated" and go back into their world of "if I can't see it I won't be bothered." But in all the cases listed above, you can see it. You can look into its eyes. You can see it's a human being. That is, most of us can.
But not all.
Just last year, in the peer-reviewed Journal of Medical Experts, two physicians made the case for "after-birth abortion:"
In spite of the oxymoron in the expression, we propose to call this practice "after-birth abortion", rather than 'infanticide', to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which "abortions" in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk. Accordingly, a second terminological specification is that we call such a practice "after-birth abortion" rather than "euthanasia" because the best interest of the one who dies is not necessarily the primary criterion for the choice, contrary to what happens in the case of euthanasia.
If criteria such as the costs (social, psychological, economic) for the potential parents are good enough reasons for having an abortion even when the fetus is healthy, if the moral status of the newborn is the same as that of the foetus and if neither has any moral value by virtue of being a potential person, then the same reasons which justify abortion should also justify the killing of the potential person when it is at the stage of a newborn.
This is nothing but the logical outcome of abortion on demand. And this is where America is headed if cases like Gosnell don't force Americans to face the reality of an abortion industry most would rather ignore.