Let her be clear: A Is For… co-founder Martha Plimpton doesn’t want to hear about the Kermit Gosnell case, and if you bring it up in the context of today’s arguments for and against new abortion restrictions in Texas, you will be blocked immediately. See?
Not surprisingly, Plimpton’s partner in A Is For…, comedian Lizz Winstead, doesn’t want to talk about Gosnell either. She’s bored by attempts to politicize the Gosnell murder case, which has nothing to do with safe, legal abortion by health providers who care. Sally Kohn, too, is frustrated by people using the horrific trial to turn people against late-term abortion.
That doesn’t have to stop the rest of Twitter from talking about Gosnell, though. Often lost alongside Texas’ proposed ban on most abortions past 20 weeks are new safety regulations directly inspired by the Gosnell case. The legislation would require physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, require abortions to be performed in ambulatory surgical centers and require doctors themselves to administer abortion-inducing drugs.
As loudly as pro-abortion activists denounced Gosnell as a murderer and psychopath once he was convicted, in the early days of his practice he was a hero to many feminists by offering abortions without apology. In 1972, Gosnell told the Philadelphia Inquirer, “I am very concerned about the sanctity of life. But it is for this precise reason that I provide abortions for women who want and need them.” Through his trial he contended that he himself was a legit, caring health care provider.
Still, abortion advocates argue that forcing Texas clinics to correct the fatal shortcomings that characterized Gosnell’s clinic would only create more Gosnells, by forcing Gosnell-like clinics to upgrade their level of medical care or close down.
Like it or not, the Kermit Gosnell case looms large over the proceedings in Austin, Texas, and blocking followers on Twitter won’t change that.
To change your comments display name, click here.