The Uncanny Union of Kermit and Miss Maggie

Abortion3by Glenn Fairman10/11/18
“The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” — Margaret Sanger  •  As I write, inside Room 304 of a Philadelphia courthouse there sits a 72 year old bespectacled grandfatherly type who by all accounts sits smiling with an air of cool reserve as an avalanche of testimony from former patients and employees brings his unspeakable deeds to the sterile light of day. Dr. Kermit Gosnell of The Women’s Medical Society in the ruins of Philly’s West End is being tried for running a horrific illegal late term abortion mill and eight counts of murder – although this number is low by an order of magnitude since by definition this quasi-acceptable form of clinical murder is what pays the bills. But apparently in this case, those doing the dying were not the prescribed legal targets. Dr. Gosnell, who does not yet manifest fangs or green saliva, is on the hot seat after nearly 30 years of infant butchery – not because he terminated life, but because he became greedy, sloppy, and no longer abided by the rules of antiseptic human sacrifice. Therefore, this elderly man, who would have been a credit to Dr. Mengele and his loathsome operating table, will be swallowed alive by two diverse modes of outrage: the first by those horrified advocates of the Pro-life position and the second by those Pro-Choicers who are indignant that the Good Doctor has given the technical aesthetic of therapeutic murder such a black eye.

Chances are that if you haven’t been manning the social media outlets of Al Gore’s Internet you would have missed this one, since the story’s P.C. bona fides register as a null set in the Progressive heart. There is nothing that turns a liberal off faster than news of a Black man snipping the spinal cords of helpless fully developed black children who are so viable that they could walk the Dear Doctor out to the bus stop. Indeed, selective abortion: liberalism’s existential sacrament to autonomous human choice and feminine emancipation from the paternalistic horrors of maternity, will suffer a well deserved reproach if it is tarred with the same bloody brush as Gosnell. With that being said, rows of seats reserved for the valiant media in that courtroom are as desolate as Medea’s heart. But if the truth were to be told, perhaps the public should learn to connect the dots between the wholesale slaughter of black babies and the abortion industry’s uncomfortable racial connection with eugenics — beginning with the Malthusian vision of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger.[pullquote]Indeed, selective abortion: liberalism’s existential sacrament to autonomous human choice and feminine emancipation from the paternalistic horrors of maternity, will suffer a well deserved reproach if it is tarred with the same bloody brush as Gosnell.[/pullquote]

One would have to have been encased in Carbonite for the last several generations to have remained ignorant of Sanger’s influence on the culture. Socialist, atheist, anarchist, libertine, and racial eugenicist rolled up into a fluffy package of Quasi-Nazi Science masquerading as the humane prophetess of dripping therapeutic concern, Sanger melded the disordered theories of 19th century Darwinism into a crusade to cull America’s genetic herd. Believing that Negroes, Jews, Slavs and the teeming masses flooding to America’s shores would dilute the genetic vitality of America through mongrel indolence and exhaustive breeding, Sanger’s American Birth Control League, which would eventually become Planned Parenthood, held that we could “create a race of thoroughbreds” through a litany of methods including: sterilization, birth control, segregation to work farms, immigration obstruction and selective deportation. Like the popular racial eugenicists of her day, she held that charity for the poor was counter to human collective interests and government should be in the business of actively encouraging and penalizing disparate groups in regards to their respective reproductive rates.

It is important to note that in her younger years, Sanger was not an advocate for abortion, although it is unknown if she maintained that position. Yet, her undeniable racialist posturing and emphasis on the elimination of “tainted breeding stocks” only lent legitimacy to the idea that the procreative abilities of inferior peoples should be reined in either through force or “persuasive” means. It was in formulating her “Negro Project” in 1939 that she sought the latter as the necessary strategy to achieve the ends of her dark pseudo-science.

That Sanger accepted invitations and spoke to women’s auxiliaries of the Klan should not strain credulity, given her principles. But in order for her extreme views to gain traction in the Black Community, who had early on caught a good whiff of her true agenda, it would be necessary to cloak her message under the guise of family economics and health reform. That her efforts proved wildly profitable were due to her ability to convince esteemed people in Black Society to come on board and to begin the process of welcoming birth control facilities into negro communities. As to her strategy, Sanger offers up a revealing insight regarding the means that would be necessary to attain their ends. In a letter to Charles Gamble she writes:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. And the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

Today, Sanger’s success in installing Planned Parenthood chapters even in some High Schools and fulfilling her quest for the silent extermination of 1500 black children daily should not be surprising, given the groundwork that was set down not so long ago. As the birth rate for black families has now slipped under the aggregate replacement rate, those who concur with Sanger’s eugenics should feel vindicated; although the elimination of the poverty she so enthusiastically promised is yet forthcoming. Needless to say, through the indoctrination of men like Kermit Gosnell, who are there to take up her bloody standard, Sanger’s eradication of the black poor has taken on a new twist by a means she did not fully anticipate, even as the end result has enthusiastically fulfilled her greater purpose.[pullquote]As the birth rate for black families has now slipped under the aggregate replacement rate, those who concur with Sanger’s eugenics should feel vindicated; although the elimination of the poverty she so enthusiastically promised is yet forthcoming.[/pullquote]

Gosnell’s operation has been likened to a modern day Charnel House: a place where he routinely slapped and abused impoverished black women and many times made them infertile with sepsis and venereal disease from his filthy instruments. He performed his ghastly operations under the cloak of night using personnel that were barely paid minimum wage and who were called upon to anesthetize patients who would be induced into labor all day long while lying in filthy chairs covered with blood soaked blankets. When the operation was eventually raided after a period of fifteen years of complaints and deaths without an inspection, the investigators found conditions resembling “a bad gas station bathroom” with cat urine and feces littering the dilapidated premises. To their speechless horror, aborted body parts were stored in the same refrigerator where employees kept their lunches and filthy bags of medical waste were left rotting in the cellar.

His mostly Black employees are now turning upon him, but for years they carried out his wishes to the letter and patently lied when questioned by paramedics about a young woman who had been drugged to death with Demerol. She was among the many others who lost their lives or health due to unconscionable brutalities that resulted in perforated uteruses and by leaving little arms and legs rotting inside his patients. Women who came in for an easy way out of their predicaments were thrown from the frying pan into their own private purgatory located at 38th and Lancaster. As an aside, an interesting thing to note about Gosnell is that while he reportedly was indifferent to the suffering endured by women of color, every time the occasional Caucasian would come in for a procedure, he would handle her himself. When questioned about this special treatment by his staff, he would say to them: “it’s just the way of the world.”

If one has a mind to indulge oneself in ferreting out the truth here, you can find the 280 page grand jury report and in the process disgust yourself to no end. But the truly appalling aspect of this case is that this House of Horrors might still be occurring had it not have been for the illegal drug dispensing operation going on during the day while the Good Doctor was presumably asleep in his crypt. In spite of the manifold lawsuits and complaints that had amassed against The Women’s Medical Society over the years, those in the Health Dept. and the State Atty. General’s offices had long decided from on high to cast a blind eye on Gosnell’s mausoleum — since the touchy subject of abortion was deemed to be a hornet’s nest of political grief. And after all, as an attorney for the defendant once casually offered, “People die.”

Whether she would want to admit it or not, Kermit Gosnell is the end game in a natural progression that the eugenic philosophies of Margaret Sanger set into motion when lecturing about “human weeds” — a callous rhetoric that judged life only by means of its social utility. When plucking weeds, one does not treat them lovingly but casts them in the garbage as a living entity unworthy of our carefully planned and tendered gardens. Sanger and Gosnell have no conception of the evil they have wrought in the world through their respective actions. And like the truly wicked are wont to do, they firmly maintain that they are providing a service: a human good towards the advance of enlightened humanity. In at least my mind, they are joined forever in unholy union – the prophetess and the priest offering sacrifice of the innocent. That the dream has turned out to be such a bleak and sordid nightmare is for us to wrestle with now that we can see through a glass quite clearly.


Glenn Fairman returns from the wilderness and writes from Highland, Ca.
About Author  Author Archive  Email • (1037 views)

Share
Glenn Fairman

About Glenn Fairman

retired
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to The Uncanny Union of Kermit and Miss Maggie

  1. Kung Fu Zu says:

    Interestingly, it was Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin that coined the word and started the movement.

    C.K. Chesterton wrote a book about the subject as it applied to the United Kingdom. It’s title “Eugenics and Other Evils: An Argument Against The Scientifically Organized State”.

    It seems that those early British types wanted the poor to have fewer children as technology had made much handwork redundant.

    I always find it comforting to know that the elites truly have our best interests in mind.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I haven’t read Glenn’s article yet. You can tell by the lack of pull-quotes. 😉

      And I’ll have to check out that Chesterton book. I know that Jonah covers eugenics a bit in “Liberal Fascism.” It was all the Progressive rage back then to try to improve the human race via top-down authoritarianism.

      Now look where the Left has gone. They’re now tearing down the fit in the name of “the poor.” But what has remained the same is their taste for authoritarian control of the population and their love for social experiments.

      Dennis Prager has said that there are two kinds of people. When he looks at, say, the atrocities of the Left, Nazi Germany, etc., he says there are the decent and then there are the indecent. Perhaps we needn’t take things to such an extreme to realize that there is a narrow road, and those who choose to see it, and those whose morals and ethics are purely political or narcissistic in nature. The former has produced some of the most noble people (Mother Teresa, etc.). The latter has produced our debt, the abortion holocaust, lying-as-a-way-of-life, political correctness, and so many other bad things.

      Nobody’s perfect. But there are movements and modes of thought that are inherently poisonous by nature. They are not momentary errors but systemic errors.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    Nice touch comparing the Philly Moloch to Mengele. I have suggested that our avant garde doctors should replace the Hippocratic Oath with a Mengelaic Oath.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    That’s a terrific (root word “terror,” I presume) article, Glenn. Top notch. Now, I hope all are not just “liking” it but sharing it to Facebook or wherever you can. Glenn’s eloquent and plain look at something so horrific (and yet so accepted as normal by the stupefied masses) needs to have as wide of a distribution as possible.

  4. Glenn — this piece makes me realize and remember that the original reasoning behind Roe v. Wade included the horrors of the back alley amateur abortionist. Gosnell and his ilk (and I assume plenty of ilk exists) have brought us full circle right back to the filthy conditions, the butchering procedures, and the total lack of civilized behavior of pre Roe v. Wade law. And this is about women’s health? Good article as always.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Some liberals have tried to defend their opposition to laws the require better behavior by abortionists by claiming that this would get rid of them and send women back to the back alleys — as if the Philly Moloch was any better.

  5. Glenn Fairman says:

    When people understand the methodologies of selective infanticide, they reject the practice overwhelmingly. Perhaps the new “Gosnell” movie will help put an end to the murder and merchandizing of the innocent under color of the bloodless abstraction of human will.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Perhaps the new “Gosnell” movie will help put an end to the murder and merchandizing of the innocent under color of the bloodless abstraction of human will.

      Every bit helps, but given the present mood of the country, one can’t help but doubt that much will change.

      Good to see you are still around and, hopefully, doing well.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Yes, there are so many people who see themselves as possibly needing an abortion as post-coital contraception — men as well as women.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Hi, Glenn. Good to see you again.

      Here’s the IMDB entry for Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer. [Hint: This movie isn’t about Brett Kavanaugh.]

      This is going to be a difficult movie to watch. But it’s one I certainly want to see. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, Glenn. It’s the first I’ve heard of it.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        It’s been extensively covered from the beginning on Town Hall and Hot Air.

      • Steve Lancaster says:

        Gosnell, the winner of the Joseph Mengele humanity award.
        I don’t need to see the movie, but I do wish that every abortion advocate see the movie.

        Glenn, its good to see your still around in my old home town. I used to live on Highland Blvd across from Patton Hospital. The orange groves are long gone. In the summer my friends and I would wander for miles in the groves and eat oranges off the trees when we got hungry. Went to Highland elementary and Jr. High before we moved back to AR.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          It is indeed good to see Glenn again.

          Alexandra Desanctis has an article about the movie at NRO: Gosnell Movie Exposes Reality of Abortion. I wonder if Dean Cain remains pro-choice after appearing in it.

          Like most anything at NRO, the author refrains from judgment. Descriptive conservatism is supposed to organically move everyone to the right position without the discomfort of pointing out to people that they inhabit the wrong one.

          Still, she is likely correct that this movie will make it harder for many people to support abortion when it moves past the insulation of a slogan and to the reality of the butchery.

          My own mind is that children should be able to be slaughtered at any point up until the age of 18 if they prove to be financially or emotionally inconvenient. That’s their end game.

          It’s arguable that there isn’t a man alive who intellectually agrees with abortion. But mouthing approval for it not only sets you right with the “in” group but gives you better access to liberal women.

          For feminism, abortion is an absolute requirement because it frees women from the reality of their biology. And insult to injury, they are freed from the oppression of men whom nature makes the impregnator. Pregnancy is rightly seen by feminist purists as an unhealthy condition (medically, politically, and economically) that must be remedied.

          I think the central reason abortion advocates tend to be such man-haters is that they are reacting to their own guilt at being baby-killers. It’s human nature to delude oneself about one’s own motives. But deep down (somewhere) they know they are killing babies. So when they look out and see the faces of men (or just anyone who disagrees with abortion), they are angry that these people whoremind them of their own butchery.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            Ironically, a lot of men like abortion because it allows them to have sex while freeing them from the risks and inconveniences of fatherhood. And men tend to be less concerned about loss of life than women anyway. What makes it amusing is that femocrats literally are unable to grasp such facts. Human nature denies their ideology, so they choose not to know about it.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            One wonders how much of feminist man hating arises from their unwillingness to understand and accept human nature.

            In my youth, it was pretty clear that liberal females were sexually looser than conservative women. The liberal females were, however, still females and one must assume that most of them desired meaningful relationships with their sex partners. As we all know, a deep spiritual relationship is not foremost in the mind of a horny young male. People throughout the ages have known this and for this reason society has tried to protect females from their emotional excesses, male importuning and promiscuous sex. Many females must have had a pretty good that sex was special and not to be thrown around indiscriminately.

            With the advent of modern feminism, and the pill, this societal protection of females has fallen away and young women have been free to let their emotions rule them. I would guess that many of these women have gone from one sexual relationship to another in search of love and with each disappointment have become increasingly bitter over time. I fear that unattractive females in search of love have suffered most as a result, thus increasing their alienation.

            As with all who deny nature, such women have found out that their hopes and dreams had little basis in reality. Of course, frauds like Margret Mead have fabricated data in the hope of denying human nature, but nature still holds true. Sadly, it is clear too many females have listened to the frauds.

            And while it may be true that multiple sexual partners may not be particularly healthy for anyone, there can be no doubt that females suffer from such behavior much more than males. This may seem unfair, but nature being what it is, it doesn’t concern itself with such things.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              With the advent of modern feminism, and the pill, this societal protection of females has fallen away and young women have been free to let their emotions rule them.

              Oh, Mr. Kung, you said a mouthful and spoke an essential truth.

              I was watching episode 3 of series 7 of “Call the Midwife.” This show is pretty squishy soft to begin with. But whether because the show has entered the early sixties or because the writers have become more liberal, aspects of the show now are woman-centric to a fault.

              Take the case of the young, attractive Au Pair who has been recently employed by the Dr. Turner family. She’s from an Eastern Bloc communist country (somehow escaped or emigrated). Her last job was in France and now she’s come to England for whatever reason. She comes to England already pregnant although she doesn’t learn about it until she gets here.

              She immediately wants to abort the baby and asks her friend, Nurse Dyer, where she can get an abortion. She’s shocked to find that England does not (yet) dispense with the unborn like throwing out yesterday’s newspapers. Valerie Dyer tells her something like, “You’re no longer in a Communist country. You’re in England.”

              The Au Pair asks Valerie if she knows of any back-room ladies who can do the job. Valerie tells the Au Pair to promise her to do nothing of the sort. Meanwhile this spoiled, insensitive Au Pair has other plans. Under the pretense of saying she wants to learn to become a nurse she borrows some medical books from the Turner Family (the father is a doctor, his wife is a nurse).

              The Au Pair first steals some pills from their dispensary that induces cramps. That doesn’t work. With a little more reading she finds there’s a certain drug she can inject that will tend to cause an abortion. She steels this from the clinic at Nonnatus House and, on the premises of the Catholic Nonnatus House (the base of the midwifery operations), injects herself.

              Success! The baby is aborted. The others are shocked what this girl has done. And here we come to the central point. Her deceit, murder, and sacrilege is dispensed with along the lines of a daughter who kills both of her parents but pleads for sympathy because now she’s an orphan.

              Completely out of character as the head of Nonnatus House, Sister Julienne (Jenny Agutter) announces to everyone that, no, her theft, abortion, and sacrilege of a Catholic establishment will not be reported to the authorities. “She has suffered enough.”

              You could probably see from Texas the static electricity caused by my eyes rolling so fast and so far into the back of my head. This is the kind of “compassionate” nonsense that has allowed abortion — and these really rotten women such as the Au Pair — to be seen through a soft-focus lens. One assumes this upcoming movie will sharpen the focus a little for these kinds of nitwits.

              • Timothy Lane says:

                Hmm, the first murder in Ira Levin’s superb A Kiss Before Dying starts as a fake abortion attempt. (It’s actually poison, which would prevent the baby from coming to term.) When the woman doesn’t take the pills, the murderer has to resort to a different technique.

              • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

                I have tried to watch, “Call the Midwife” a couple of times. I just couldn’t make it through a full broadcast.

                I think Jenny Agutter is somewhat wasted in the series.

      • I just returned home after seeing this movie. I’m still shaky. It really packs a punch, yet it is very restrained and makes the audience face little of the actual gore and horror. The acting is superb. Impressive.

        As is this piece. Thanks Glenn for posting this.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          So, just out of curiosity, how would you compare the Creature from the Black Lagoon (that’s what Kermit Gosnell reminds me of, though the comparison is unfair to the Creature) with that other modern apostle of death, Dr. Jack Kevorkian the eager euthanasiast?

        • Timothy Lane says:

          I saw a review at Hot Air that went into the matter of accuracy. The point made there was that no one exaggerated Gosnell’s crimes. In fact, they minimized the numbers, partly because they couldn’t be sure of the facts after the Creature destroyed his files. He probably murdered (after unintended live deliveries) hundreds of viable babies, though they could only get him on 8. The link is:

          https://hotair.com/archives/2018/10/13/just-accurate-gosnell-trial-americas-biggest-serial-killer/

  6. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    I have tried to watch, “Call the Midwife” a couple of times. I just couldn’t make it through a full broadcast.

    Mr, Kung, How can you not like Fred Buckle though? Or Trixie, for that matter. That’s one hot little blond.

    The opening narration by Jew-hater, Vanessa Redgrave, strains my tolerance. But I like “Call the Midwife” as a period piece.

    Granted, the men are almost without exception the problem and women are the long-sufferers. This makes it a good record of the validation of woman’s victimhood through a mass-media narrative. And yet giving birth is no piece of cake and this is shown without much soft focus. But there are plenty of technical and historical aspects of the show that make it interesting to me. There’s one post-war episode where a bomb is found a block or so away from Nonnatus House. The must evacuate Nonnatus House temporarily. Not only that, upon further inspection, the building they were in was found to be so rickety that they must move out permanently.

    Agutter is indeed wasted to a large extent. But once in a while (not often these past couple of seasons) she’s given good work to do. And whether the British character is different from the American one, I don’t know. But you’re left with little doubt that most of these lower-class families couldn’t possibly make it without government assistance. This is not the stiff-upper-lip British class we’re seeing but those who through their vices and ignorance tend to make a wreck of their lives.

    Okay, I’ll admit the non-judgmental treacle that regularly falls out of the mouths of the nuns, nurses, and doctor when confronted with clear cases of people doing bad things gets old. In this latest episode there is a woman suffering from Huntington’s disease. (No fault of her own, of course.) She can’t physically take care of her existing two children let alone her new-born baby. The midwives find her home a complete filthy wreck. The newborn baby’s skin is all red. The diapers haven’t been changed in days.

    One of the kids (who also suffers from the disease which is rare in the young) has to be moved to a foster home. But everyone assures the rather wimpy husband that “It’s not your fault. You’ve done everything you can.” But there is no evidence that this snowflake even tried so much as to wash the dishes in the sink, let alone change a pair of diapers. It’s “acceptance” to a degree that is destructive of people’s lives because it offers no necessary correction. It’s the same as today’s stupid saying of “It’s all good.” No, some of it indeed is not.

    This element has always been with the show but it’s gotten much much worse lately. Regarding abortion, until this episode, it has been generally frowned upon.

  7. pst4gop says:

    A group of us went to see this movie this weekend, and I have to agree with Deanna, it is difficult to see but I think it is necessary for anyone still too cowardly to stand against this evil and those that push for it.
    The movie is well acted and the gore is very much understated. The reality of what is still happening in this country, made me feel a sense of guilt that I have not done enough to stop this.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      There’s a horror that there are people out there who obsess over using the right pronoun for made-up categories of various “genders” but they won’t acknowledge the legitimacy of the real category of the unborn (or even the recently-born but unwanted).

      Sure, Gosnell is a monster but he is empowered by all the other monsters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *