Posted on 04/29/2013 12:17:04 PM PDT by Morgana
Just the fact that somebody needed to snip their spines to kill them would be about all the proof anyone in their right mind would need.
If they weren’t alive, then why go to the trouble of snipping their necks?
he just snipped their spinal cords as a tradition.
The jury might have been chosen from people as horrible as he, there are many many people out there as horrible as he. WE don’t have a history of 55 million reported abortions from one stupid, evil man.
It is a successful publication of abortion. Grim but necessary. The decision is secondary.
Tells us all we need to know about a Lib’s morals/ethics. Society in permanent decline.
Why were the babies necks cut if they were already dead? You’d have to be an ignorant juror not to figure that one out.
What a stupid defense!
If they weren’t alive, why did Gosnell have to kill them?
banking on the presumption that all of his clients partial birth aborted babies were all still born ought to fly like a pig. Following this trial, I’d bet this defense attorney will be leaving town and changing his name or finding a new career.
Praying the jury is NOT as stupid as the lawyer is acting like they are
Because when you are an evil bastard you just plain enjoy it! That being said, I have no doubt that these poor souls were born alive. This is the kind of immoral practice an evil bastard in service to Satan would find enjoyment, and speaking of in service to Satan why else would Obummer speak to planned un parenthood.
Why were the babies necks cut if they were already dead? You’d have to be an ignorant juror not to figure that one out.
So they could have the dwarf midget guy from the Wizard of OZ to tell us that they were truly really utterly DEAD??????
Of course they were born alive. In many instances, Gosnell probably found it more difficult to pith the baby in utero than to simply deliver the baby and kill it.
Disgusting either way.
Let’s see, maybe the death merchants will now argue that delivering the baby normally and killing it after birth is safer for the mother than traditional method intra-uterine murder technique. In fact, after birth infanticide could be performed by more providers.
We've seen that a jury of our "peers" doesn't necessarily mean so. When you have a 50% populace that votes for a MARXIST twice you know we have a problem with mental health in this country.
If they weren’t alive, then why cut them?
There’s not a dungeon deep or dark enough to throw this psychopath in to. Wish the state could “snip” HIS neck.
It's a horrific splitting of hairs...
They are depending upon a denotative interpretation - one which we disagree with whole hardily.
He snipped their spinal cords because Gosnell enjoyed it. I will enjoy reading about the violent death he may very well face.
I would not be surprised at all if Gosnell walks with nothing more than probation and a fine, along with an involuntary manslaughter conviction.
All it would take is one low information juror who couldn’t understand the idea that if the babies were dead there would be no reason to snip their spinal cords. After all there were millions of low information voters who reelected Obama so odds are there might be a few on this jury.
With a splitting maul.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.