Reflecting on NARAL's Post #Gosnell Verdict Comments

Here is what they said:

“Kermit Gosnell has been found guilty and will get what he deserves. Now, let’s make sure these women are vindicated by delivering what all women deserve: access to the full range of health services including safe, high-quality and legal abortion care.”

“Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell.”

Here is something I wrote a few weeks ago on the blog that similarly applies here.  It's always helpful to consider any pro-choice arguments through the lens of the toddler.  Would what they are saying apply if it was used in the case of wanting to "terminate" a toddler?  Then the next best question to ask is, "What is the fundamental different between a toddler and an unborn human being?"

NARAL's logic boils down to this...

There will always be crazy parents (like crazy Gosnell) who who kill their toddlers. Usually this is not in a manner that is particularly pleasing to the eye. Maybe they shoot them, strangle them, drown them, or stab them. Who wants to deal with that mess? Kids should have a right to killed in a way that is humane! 

So since there are always going to be sickos (like Gosnell) out there, we need to make room for people to do the killing in a way that is more pleasing and less emotionally taxing. How about lethal injection? Decapitation is quick. It's over before it starts. Why not? Just give the parents an option to do it in a way that's calm, sterile, and less bloody. This will surely make the problem of messy, unsanitary, and unregulated backyard killings go away. 

Except the problem doesn't go away from the toddler. He still has a big problem. Namely that his parents want to kill him and there is no one to stop them or protect him.

This presses on the lunacy of six inches of difference.  Consider this stunning contrast that came to mind from reading this great post from Ryan T. Anderson.

A few weeks ago our President spoke to Planned Parenthood and applauded them for being a premier champion of "women's right's".  So when the baby is six inches up inside the woman the killing is applauded as the height of human rights!  Who doesn't want to be a champion for rights?

But the Gosnell case forces a dramatic contrast.  Place that baby six inches farther down the birth canal, just barely outside of the woman, "terminate" it, and now you have a backyard butcher going to prison for life.  Can the difference between a standing ovation and life in prison really be six inches?

Make sense?  Yeah, doesn't make sense to me either.