I recently saw the new movie about abortionist Kermit Gosnell. It is a powerful film and I recommend everyone see it. When you do watch this movie, keep in mind it is about real events. It is about a real woman who was killed due to medical malpractice. It is about real babies who were born alive and then callously murdered. It is about a real monster who viewed himself as a hero as he butchered the most innocent.
There is a reason the full name of the movie is Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer.
Here’s something else to keep in mind while watching the movie. When trying the case, the prosecutor says a version of a line spoken over and over by pro-choice activists: the Gosnell trial was about one man’s crimes, not abortion itself. This is wrong, and not something the left-wing activists repeating it even believed.
As proof they did not believe Gosnell’s actions were unrelated to the issue of legal abortion, look at how they covered the trial. Specifically, that at first they did not cover it at all.
Several rows of seats in the courtroom were reserved for media to observe and report on the Gosnell trial. They were empty as the national media ignored the horrific story. For some reason the age old adage of “if it bleeds it leads” did not apply to the grisly murder of multiple newborn babies.
Is there anyone who believes a man on trial for murdering numerous infants by cutting their necks with scissors would not have generated round the clock reporting if the accused was not an abortionist? If a plumber had done what Gosnell did, he would have rightly been regarded as one of the worst, if not the worst, serial killers in American history. Gosnell was not initially treated as the depraved serial killer he is because the act of cutting a baby’s spinal cord minutes after birth (murder – illegal) is far too close to the act of cutting a baby’s spinal cord while still in the womb (abortion – legal).
When asked why the Gosnell trial was not receiving the attention it deserved, Washington Post reporter Sarah Kliff, now with the far-left site vox.com, said it was just a “local crime” story.
By that same standard, the deaths of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Philando Castile would be local crime stories. But they fit a narrative of police officers killing unarmed black men, so each of these cases garnered extensive national media attention.
Gosnell was not similarly covered because it would have promoted a different narrative, one many in the left-wing media did not want. A full and open discussion of the horrors in Dr. Gosnell’s clinic would present uncomfortable questions for pro-choice activists.
A full and open discussion would force pro-choice activists to answer why Gosnell was charged with a crime for abortions on 24 and a half week old fetuses, but the same action would have been legal just a few days earlier.
A full and open discussion would force pro-choice activists to answer why Gosnell cutting the neck of babies born alive in his clinic is different than other abortionists who just leave them to die on cold operating tables.
A full and open discussion would force pro-choice activists to answer why we all instinctively are horrified at Gosnell’s actions in the open, but quietly ignore abortionists across the country who put a more refined face on the same evil.
A full and open discussion would force pro-choice activists to answer a lot of very difficult questions.
Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer is an important movie and one you should see immediately. Unfortunately, you are unlikely to run into many pro-choice moviegoers at your screening; there are too many questions they don’t want to answer.