Autopsy Confirms That “Aborted” FL Baby Was Born Alive

Hialeah, FL - Dec 03, 2006 An autopsy report released last week obtained by Operation Rescue now indicates that a baby that was reportedly born alive then intentionally killed at a Hialeah abortion mill in July was indeed born alive.

However, it is unclear how this determination will affect any criminal prosecutions. The Hialeah Police are asking for murder charges to be filed against those responsible for the baby’s death.

On July 20, an 18-year old woman reported to the A Gyn Diagnostics abortion mill to complete an abortion in her 22nd week of pregnancy. The doctor was not on hand and she was placed in a recovery room to await his arrival. After several hours, the woman gave birth to a live baby girl who, according to the mother and another witness, “was moving and gasping for air.” The baby was put into a plastic bag by clinic owner Belkis Gonzalez, then tossed up on the roof of the abortion mill.

An anonymous caller tipped the police, and the baby’s body was discovered a week later and sent to the Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner for autopsy.

The report indicates that the baby, a 22-week baby girl with black hair and brown eyes, was apparently healthy at the time of her birth. Her cause of death is listed as “extreme prematurity,” and the manner of her death was “natural.”

The natural death determination was made because the coroner did not believe the baby, now named Shanice Denise Osbourne, had any chance of survival.

“It doesn’t matter if Shanice had a 100 percent or a zero percent chance of survival. Once she was born, she was deserving of the same protections under the law as the rest of us,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “At the minimum, she should have been given comfort care. Shoving her into a plastic bag and tossing her onto a roof to die is just unconscionable.”

“If Gonzalez and her cohorts are to be charged, they better do it quickly,” said Newman. “We have seen abortionists flee in the face of prosecution over less than this. Gonzalez and her associates should be considered flight risks.”

"My point is that Abraham's willingness to kill his own son is unacceptable. Indeed, it is foundationally unacceptable. Civilization cannot prosper when people are willing to kill their own children, as the abortion issue illustrates."

I answered you with this:

"With all due respect, I disagree. The willingness was not to kill a child. The willingness was to obey the Lord God! Abraham trusted God and there was a sacrifice of a child. I aaume you know your Biblical history. It is important to always know the CONTEXT of a Bible passage or verse before espousing a view point. God never intended for Abraham to sacrifice his son. Also important to know is the fact that this particular portion of the Bible, found in the book of Genesis, is a foreshadow or a "type" of the future when God sacrificed His own Son in order to atone for the sins of the world. So, again, I respectfully disagree with you in that Abraham, in his obedience to God, is to be likened to 'Molech'"

Genesis 22:1~18 reveals that God only wanted to and did test Abraham's obedience to Him. The fact that the Lord provided a ram reveals His intention all along. This is further confirmed in Hebrews 6:1~20. Scripture, in several places, and in several different ways, points out that God, being God, knows the end from the beginning. In other words, in this case, the Lord knew that Abraham would be obeidient to Him. He also knew that no sacrifice; that is, no human sacrifice would be required. The only human sacrifice God ever approved of was that of His only begotten son on the cross of Calvary. (He was the only human, who have been in the form of a man and at the same time was perfect God, who could have and did provide the means for our salvation by taking on Himself the sins of the whole world.) All God wanted to teach Abraham was that He would provide the sacrifice, and Abraham believed that, did as he was told, and his faith in God's provision was rewarded. And the reward was not that he wasn't required to kill his own son...the reward is described in Genesis 22:16~18 and repeated in Hebrews 6:13~15.

This is my understanding of the these passages. This is consistent with with the Lord's directives concerning children throughout the Scriptures. (Matthew 18:6 "...but whoever causes one of these little ones who believes in Me to stumble, it is better for him that a heavy millstone be hung around his neck, and that he be drowned in the depth of the sea." and Psalm 139:13~16: "For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother's womb. I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Thy works, And my soul knows it very well. A frame was not hidden from Thee, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth. Thine eye have seen my unformed substance; And in Thy book they were all written, The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them."

God has to be consistent, to be God. This is just the way I read the Scritpures. Thank you letting me share this.

Nancee

My point is that Abraham's willingness to kill his own son is unacceptable.

I just did a google search on ur+child+sacrifice and learned that, unfortunately, child sacrifice was acceptable among the people living in Abraham's home city of Ur

Here's what one source says

However, the request that he should offer his son as a burnt offering was culturally related to the world in which Abraham lived. He had no sense that child sacrifice was not part of God's way of relating to his people. It was not beyond his imagination that this should happen. Amongst local cultures child sacrifice took place particularly at times of crisis so that the gods might be appeased.

I'm glad we find child sacrifice unacceptable nowdays.

From lifesite, By Gudrun Schultz (thanks)

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/dec/06121302.html

Administrator of Defunct Abortion Center Charged with Performing Illegal Abortions
Nurse practitioner charged with two counts of “knowingly or recklessly performing abortions as non-physician
By Gudrun Schultz

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama, December 13, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The administrator of the Summit Medical Center abortion clinic, forced to close by the state Health Department last spring, has been arrested and charged with two counts of performing illegal abortions, the Birmingham Business Journal reported Dec.8.

Janet Onthank King, 58, was trained as a nurse practitioner. Ms. King has been charged with two counts of “knowingly or recklessly performing abortions as a non-physician” and one count of falsifying records at the Center, including “making false entries into equipment sterilization reports,” a news release from Alabama Attorney General Troy King’s office states.

If convicted, Ms. King faces sentencing of up to six months in jail and fines of $1,000 on each misdemeanor indictment.

A joint investigation by the attorney general, state Health Department and the Alabama Board of Medical Examiners followed the forced closure of the center, after a woman was given an early-term abortion drug by clinic staff during the third trimester of pregnancy and gave birth to a dead, full term baby six days later.

Summit surrendered its license last spring, after the state Health Department suspended operations at the clinic, and agreed to remain closed.

See previous LifeSiteNews coverage:

Alabama Abortion Clinic Closed After Botched RU-486 Abortion
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/may/06052310.html

Alabama Abortion Clinic Surrenders License After Woman Delivers Dead Full-Term Baby
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06061504.html

(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

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.