An ABC News article appeared recently on the Kermit Gosnell trial that included remarks from one pro-life spokeswoman (our own Ann Scheidler, Vice President of the Pro-Life Action League), as well as one “pro-choice” spokeswoman (National Abortion Federation President Vicki Saporta).
In the article reporter Colleen Curry quotes or paraphrases Saporta in each of the last four paragraphs. Here are the first two:
Vicki Saporta, president for the abortion rights group National Abortion Federation, said that Gosnell took advantage of the women who came to him in need of an abortion. She said his clinic is not representative of safe, regulated abortion clinics.
“Unfortunately, you do have rogue providers that prey on the most vulnerable of women and regardless of a woman’s income level they deserve access to high quality care,” Saporta said.
It’s also worth noting that Curry wrote another article earlier this week on the Gosnell trial for which she also interviewed Saporta. In that article, Saporta called Gosnell an “extreme outlier.” And now, a few days later, we see Saporta calling Gosnell one of those “rogue providers that preys on the most vulnerable of women.”
As pro-life blogger JivinJehoshaphat wrote after Curry’s first article appeared on Monday:
Kermit Gosnell worked one day a week at a National Abortion Federation clinic in Delaware called Atlantic Women’s Services. For Vicki Saporta to claim Gosnell was “an extreme outlier” when he worked at a NAF clinic and even got patients from that clinic shows just how much confidence the abortion industry has in the media to cover their rears.
What’s more, Saporta acknowledged in a January 21, 2011 open letter that the NAF knew about the horrific conditions in Gosnell’s facility — in fact, an NAF evaluator who visited his so-called clinic in 2009 went far as to say it “was deemed beyond redemption” — and yet neglected to report him to authorities.
Once the Gosnell story first broke in early 2011, the NAF could no longer pretend they’d never heard of Gosnell. At that point, they had to throw him under the bus.
The final paragraph of the recent ABC News article reads:
“The fact that he wasn’t providing care later and wasn’t ensuring fetal demise and not operating under any established standards of care and outside of the law is the problem in this case, and not indicative of the high quality care available across the country,” Saporta said [emphasis added].
Leaving aside for the moment the demonstrable absurdity of Saporta’s comments about the “high quality care available” in abortion clinics across the country, note in particular her claim that the problem with Gosnell was that he “wasn’t ensuring fetal demise”.
In other words, then, according to the president of the National Abortion Federation: The problem with Gosnell is not that he was killing newborns. The problem with Gosnell is that he was not killing pre-newborns.