• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Baby Abortion Survivor Was "Swimming" In Toilet "Trying To Get Out"

It can put people away, but in a case where there is such a fevered level of emotion driving it, I doubt embellishing or lying is too far fetched to believe.
I gotcha. However, it is a lawyer's job to disprove the testimony. So far, it hasn't been disproved. Until then, we have nothing left to go on.
 
I gotcha. However, it is a lawyer's job to disprove the testimony. So far, it hasn't been disproved. Until then, we have nothing left to go on.

Well I don't intend to read the story because I don't like that whole "lets gross everyone out to get our way" thingy which anti-abortion nuts often tend to do... as I witnessed in Phoenix when a box truck would drive around in rush hour traffic with bloody body parts of an abortion pictured all over the sides and back with anti-abortion slogans all over it.

Plus I just don't even like watching vids of skateboarders breaking legs or that college basketball player that broke his bone or Joe Theisman or any of that stuff. Just don't like it. Not a Roman blood sport kind of guy.

That being said, I don't know the size of the baby that is being talked about but the opening of the toilet drain will be 3" diameter. A woman's cervix BEFORE a baby passes through is 10cm or around 4". That's before the baby passes. So flushing a baby that is most likely going to be well over 4" down a 3" pipe...

If the baby was smaller than that, it'd have to be much smaller and much more premature and I already doubt the muscle structure of a standard new born to try and swim much less the even more underdeveloped muscle structure of a preamy doing so.
 
Well I don't intend to read the story because I don't like that whole "lets gross everyone out to get our way" thingy which anti-abortion nuts often tend to do... as I witnessed in Phoenix when a box truck would drive around in rush hour traffic with bloody body parts of an abortion pictured all over the sides and back with anti-abortion slogans all over it.

Plus I just don't even like watching vids of skateboarders breaking legs or that college basketball player that broke his bone or Joe Theisman or any of that stuff. Just don't like it. Not a Roman blood sport kind of guy.

That being said, I don't know the size of the baby that is being talked about but the opening of the toilet drain will be 3" diameter. A woman's cervix BEFORE a baby passes through is 10cm or around 4". That's before the baby passes. So flushing a baby that is most likely going to be well over 4" down a 3" pipe...

If the baby was smaller than that, it'd have to be much smaller and much more premature and I already doubt the muscle structure of a standard new born to try and swim much less the even more underdeveloped muscle structure of a preamy doing so.
You know something, I'm going to have to bow out of this debate. I seriously can't stomach it. Sorry man.
 
Can you cite the study that shows where scientists have submerged babys in water to see if they attempt to flail their arms? You know, kind of like in the liquid environment they just left in their mothers stomach? Also, haven't you ever seen a preemie? You could definitely get a very small baby to at least get down the toilet.
If you don't mind, I'd like to stop debating the last issue. Not really something I care to rehash over and over. I'll debate the rest with you all day long. Just not that.
Flailing is not swimming. Also you are not going to get very far with flushing a premie without somehow mushing it first.
 
You know something, I'm going to have to bow out of this debate. I seriously can't stomach it. Sorry man.

Sorry about that. Didn't mean to gross you out. I'm the one trying not to get grossed out. I was just trying to physically show how physical evidence seems to be adding all this up to being a whopper of a lie... but that's with the little info that I'm going on just reading others' postings in here.
 
In the law, testimony is a form of evidence that is obtained from a witness who makes a solemn statement or declaration of fact
Testimony - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That still does not make testimony fact. It is quite well known memory and perception are unreliable which is why evidence is rarely based solely on witness testimony. Witnesses lie and make mistakes all the time which is why there are defense attorneys and the accused is given a chance to cross examine a witness to invalidate their testimony. Please do not distort reality by claiming witness testimony is fact. You may be ignorant enough to think that but most people are not.
 
Flailing is not swimming. Also you are not going to get very far with flushing a premie without somehow mushing it first.

I'm not sure quibbling over the persons use of "swimming" vs "flailing" really changes the nature of what was claimed in the testimony here.
 
jake tapper, formerly abc, recently moved to cnn, reports on the testimony

ie, the testimony is the testimony

the prosecution just rested, we'll hear gosnell's defense

tapper interviewed the inquirer's john slobodzian, who has been there (unlike jake tapper and almost everyone else in the msm) from the start

Trial of abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell reveals 'a house of horrors' – The Lead with Jake Tapper - CNN.com Blogs

"The evidence is certainly compelling," said The Philadelphia Inquirer's Joseph Slobodzian. Slobodzian has been in the courtroom every day of the trial.

"There are any number of witnesses, most of them former employees of Dr. Gosnell's clinic, who say they saw late-term abortions being done, they saw fetuses, babies, that were moving, breathing after the procedure, and those babies were killed," said Slobodzian.

before you talk anymore, you should read (catch up with tapper, at least)

Why Dr. Kermit Gosnell's Trial Should Be a Front-Page Story - Conor Friedersdorf - The Atlantic

Why Is the Press Ignoring the Kermit Gosnell Story? - Bloomberg

Why I Didn't Write About Gosnell's Trial--And Why I Should Have - The Daily Beast

if you need to see to believe

Abortionist Slit Necks of Born Babies in Front of Teenager; Told Assistant: 'That's What You Call a Chicken With Its Head Cut Off' | CNS News

Abortionist Joked: 'This Baby Is Big Enough to Walk Around With Me or Walk Me to the Bus Stop' | CNS News

baby boy A pictured is the same little victim who, according to kareema cross, medical asst at 3801 lancaster for four and half years, instinctively made swimming motions in the toilet that had accepted, over the years, hundreds if not thousands of induced deliveries

meet davida clarke

3801 Lancaster

there's another case out there, by the way

Wilmington Planned Parenthood Closed, Investigated for Botched Abortions | LifeNews.com

one of the delaware women may be dead

but you're still missing the most salient issue

bloomberg gets it

This story -- which if nothing else suggests that live births do, in fact, happen during late-term abortions -- upsets a particular narrative about the reality of certain types of abortion, and that reality isn’t something some pro-choice absolutists want to discuss.

so does the beast

This has disturbing implications for late-term abortions. It suggests that sometimes those fetuses are delivered alive. Worse, it hints at what we might be doing inside the womb to ensure that the other ones aren't.

why can't the president come out against scissors?
 
This thread is just one more bit of proof that the moral fascists who want to ban abortion don't care about babies. All they care about is partisan attacks

I want to ban abortion and I most certainly do care about pre-born babies being murdered. It has nothing to do with partisan attacks, it has to do with being sad and angry and at a loss to explain how anyone can kill a pre-born baby.
 
-- Disposing of it in a toilet is a bit curious and hard to fathom though.

Horrific story, late term or trimester abortions shouldn't happen except under life threatening conditions so if he's routinely carrying out such procedures (illegally) he possibly couldn't dispose of these fetuses / babies any other way. He wouldn't be able to use established methods if they exist there.
 
Wow, that's some really horrid stuff

Yes it is and it is also simply amazing how many of the MSM outlets are ignoring this genocide because it makes progressives look bad.

These progressive media outlets will do their best to post any and every "gun crime" while they champion a gun ban but sweep this genocide under the rug...

Of course progressives have absolutely ZERO problem with this bias and selective editing.... I suppose the truth doesn't matter - only opinions matter to them...
 
Both sides should be absolutely disgusted about what this man did and the complete lack of oversight (apparently, before all this went down, the last state inspection was in 1993!?)
 
Both sides should be absolutely disgusted about what this man did and the complete lack of oversight (apparently, before all this went down, the last state inspection was in 1993!?)

They should be ashamed but they won't be. Instead they'll debate whether a newborn baby can swim in a toilet or not.
 
Well, it's not exactly a study we can do is it? What normal person wants to do a study on if a baby can swim right after birth? THE BABY SHOULDN'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT DOING THAT.

I just don't think its possible. I also think its impossible to flush a newborn down the toilette.

When my sister had a miscarriage it was flushed down the toilette, but it was about a six week pregnancy.

I just can't picture the image she is describing.
 
Testimony under oath is considered fact until proven otherwise. It is testimony that puts many criminals away is it not?

Many things presented in a case can put criminals away: DNA evidence, video evidence, a confession, etc. The defense will try to discredit it and debate it. The jury will ultimately decide whose side and argument seems the closest to the truth.

Misinformation can and has been permitted in the past.

Just because its heard at a trial doesn't mean its gone through any rigorous study and is a common accepted fact, or the truth as you say.

At misstrials witnesses can and have recanted their previous testimony.

And more than likely this statement won't be put to any test for obvious reasons.
 
Simply horrific.

I don't usually support the death penalty, but Gosnel absolutely deserves it and should be executed according to how unborn children are slaughtered.
 
Simply horrific.

I don't usually support the death penalty, but Gosnel absolutely deserves it and should be executed according to how unborn children are slaughtered.

Yes, horrific. As a disclaimer, I oppose the death penalty under all circumstances including this one, but in Gosnell's case, the death penalty is too easy. Lock him away for the rest of his rotten life, hope he lives a very long and healthy life, and surround him with his jars of fetus feet so that he has something to contemplate.
 
Can you cite the study that shows where scientists have submerged babys in water to see if they attempt to flail their arms? You know, kind of like in the liquid environment they just left in their mothers stomach? Also, haven't you ever seen a preemie? You could definitely get a very small baby to at least get down the toilet.
If you don't mind, I'd like to stop debating the last issue. Not really something I care to rehash over and over. I'll debate the rest with you all day long. Just not that.

Don't even resort to asking us to prove a negative. We are simply using common sense and saying the claim is difficult for us to accept as fact.

I have seen newborn babies in incubators and I don't believe they have muscle development to swim, or even lift their head up. With that being said, I am certain they could be easily drowned, even in the shallow water of a toilette, but it would seem to defy common sense to me that it could be flushed down without problem.


My sister flushed a six week miscarriage down. In a miscarriage the embryo or fetus comes out dead and not swimming, so that is entirely different. I wonder if this witness is confused or something.
 
Yes, horrific. As a disclaimer, I oppose the death penalty under all circumstances including this one, but in Gosnell's case, the death penalty is too easy. Lock him away for the rest of his rotten life, hope he lives a very long and healthy life, and surround him with his jars of fetus feet so that he has something to contemplate.

I just want him to get sentenced to death by the methods he used to murder babies and have the court rule it to be "cruel and unusual punishment." Maybe America will have a wakeup call regarding the hell and atrocities that is legalized abortions, especially legalized late term ones.

If we wouldn't, or legally couldn't, do it to the scum of humanity who are guilty of atrocious acts why should we subject unborn humans to that?
 
Actually we do know you do have to learn to swim and newborns do not have the muscle development or coordination to swim. We also know that you can plug a toilet with a turd so you would never get a conscious baby to flush into the pipes. It sounds like something a first grader would come up with as a lie.

What are you? Gosnell's defense attorney?
 
It's little sad to see people actually defending this guy.
 
Back
Top Bottom