No Survivors: The Party of Gosnell

By Jennifer Hartline Published on February 27, 2019

When it suits them, Democrats love survivors, and delight in showcasing survivors. Survivors of abuse, sexual assault and harassment, oppression, racism, etc. When the survivor is the “right” person and the abuser/oppressor is the “right” villain, then Democrats are champions of the survivor. (Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford was celebrated for her courage and believed without question, but Dr. Vanessa Tyson, not so much.)

There’s one particular survivor, however, that is always despised and feared by today’s Democratic party: the baby who survives an abortion attempt.

When the Magical Birth Canal Isn’t

The argument has been that abortion is about a woman’s right to decide what happens to her body. Her body is her own, so her choice is inviolate, so it goes.

But if the baby survives the abortion and is delivered alive? This presents an awkward situation. It means the abortionist failed to do the job he was paid to do. What a pickle. Now there’s a living victim instead of a dead one. What to do?

Word games must be employed. Suddenly, in this scenario, the baby magically and necessarily remains a fetus and the woman’s rights still supersede all considerations for the baby. (Alexandra DeSanctis does a stellar job exposing this vile trick.)

But a woman’s right to do what? The baby is not in her womb anymore, so her body isn’t involved. Her healthcare is not relevant anymore either, since the baby has been delivered. All that’s left is her desire to not have a living baby, and so we have officially opened the door to legalized infanticide on a whole new level.


I say a whole new level because every abortion kills an infant. Every abortion kills a living child. Gestational age and stage of development are irrelevant to that fact. We’ve had legalized infanticide for over 40 years, but now one political party is moving to extend that infanticide beyond the borders of the womb, beyond the mother’s body altogether, or risk losing their sacred cow altogether.

After all, if it is declared criminal for the baby to die outside the womb, people might reconsider why it is not criminal for the baby to die five minutes (and a few inches) earlier inside the womb.

If the abortionist is required to give medical care to an infant born alive, how can he also be permitted to deliberately kill that same infant before birth? If the infant lying there is declared a human person entitled to medical care as a patient, how can we justify targeting that same infant for execution in the womb?

There Can Be No Survivors

Living victims reveal the depravity of abortion, so there must be no living victims. This is why all but three Democratic senators voted against the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (BAASPA), introduced by Senator Ben Sasse. The bill would require infants born alive after an abortion attempt to be given medical care and treated as a patient.

Every single Democrat currently campaigning for President voted to deny appropriate medical care to a living infant — not a fetus, an infant — who had the nerve not to die during the abortion as expected.

What smoke and mirrors do they utilize to obscure the savagery behind their votes? The familiar rallying cries of “abortion rights” and women’s healthcare, and their newest word-weapon, the fetus.

Opponents of the BAASPA are lying about what medical interventions the bill would require. In fact, here is what the bill says:

Any health care practitioner present at the time the child is born alive shall—

(A) exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age; and

(B) following the exercise of skill, care, and diligence required under subparagraph (A), ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.

Such basic human decency should not have to be spelled out and legislated in a civilized society. But ours is becoming less civilized by the day.

A New Face for the Next Phase of ‘Choice’

Move over, Donkey boy. The Democratic party has a new mascot.

Kermit Gosnell.

There never was a morally gray area concerning abortion. It has always been the same reality — violence against the most helpless human beings on the planet.

What a sinister prophet he has turned out to be. After he was convicted for snipping the necks of living babies in his filthy abortion mill, he said this: “I continue to feel optimistic of the eventual outcome … the vindication of what I’ve done, why I’ve done it and how [it] will become accepted within my lifetime.”

Accepted indeed. Democrats may still try to publicly denounce Gosnell’s grisly methods, but they cannot condemn the results, since that is in fact what they are fighting for.


There never was a morally gray area concerning abortion. It has always been the same reality — violence against the most helpless human beings on the planet; children who can put up no defense, whose only crime is to exist against someone else’s wishes.

This violence is the indisputable flag and creed of the Democratic party in America, and it has nothing to do with women’s healthcare. The only remaining question is, how long will it continue to be acceptable to Americans?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Comments ()
John Burton
More from The Stream
Connect with Us