Ever since the Gosnell trial began, fetus fetishists have been wanking themselves into gore-fuelled paroxysms of prurient joy.
Sadly, though, Canadian fetus fetishists are missing out.
Despite SUZYALLCAPS's obsession (I got bored counting at 30 blogposts here: http://www.bigbluewave.ca/search?q=gosnell&updated-max=2013-04-14T22:06:00-04:00&max-results=20&start=20&by-date=false), unaccountably, Canada has produced no Gosnells.
Though it darned well should, according to HER. (I can't embed HER tweets because she has me blocked.)
Claudine Jacques observes:
With the procedure funded and decent access #Gosnell would have no reason to operate in Canada. Makes antis furious. #m408
— Claudine Jacques (@ClaudineJacques) April 21, 2013
By their logic, Canada has no law on abortion, therefore Gosnells should abound on every street corner in the land.
BLAAAAT! Wrong.
Canada's lawlessness is the very reason we don't have Gosnells. And the obverse is equally true.
It is precisely the expense, stigma, regulations and general bullshit gleefully generated by USian 'prolifers' that create the perfect conditions for the very embodiment of olde-timey backstreet butchers like Gosnell.
But they can't admit that or their heads will explode.
2 comments:
Abortions are medical procedures, regulated as all professionally administered are, through the Canadian health care system.
Anti-choice keep tripping over the lies they spread about abortion regulation in Canada. They believe their own propaganda.
That's hilarious. As if it's our responsibility to prove a negative. She's the one with the crazy hypothesis of Gosnells in Canada, so the onus of proof is 100% on her. Anyway, Claudine and you are right on. I also discussed this very issue back in 2011 in my comprehensive piece on abortion funding (near the end of point #8):
"It’s not clear why Canadian mortality and morbidity rates from abortion are lower than in the U.S., but funding may help account for it. Although the vast majority of abortion clinics in the U.S. deliver excellent care despite the lack of government funding, a few outliers still exist — unscrupulous or incompetent providers who may take advantage of women for profit. The tragic situation discovered in Philadelphia in 2011 is a case in point — Dr. Kermit Gosnell performed cheap, illegal late-term abortions on vulnerable low-income women who could not afford to go to a reputable clinic. Gosnell was charged with 8 counts of murder for killing one woman and seven infants born alive. A second woman also died, and dozens suffered perforated bowels, cervixes and uteruses.[66] Unfortunately, when doctors make their money privately from abortion fees they collect directly from women, they become less accountable to the government, medical boards and organizations, and accrediting agencies. It’s reasonable to assume that the extra oversight that comes with government funding would decrease the risk of substandard treatment of women. Indeed, reports of bad providers are extremely rare and practically nonexistent in Canada, but surface from time to time in the U.S. Unfortunately, the occasional discovery of a bad provider is a field day for anti-choicers, who use it to reinforce abortion stigma and push for more stringent anti-choice laws — which incidentally have nothing to do with patient safety and may actually compromise it, such as laws that mandate waiting periods and increase delays, and laws that require clinics to do major and expensive renovations unrelated to patient health."
Post a Comment