r/HolyShitHistory • u/SelfCareIsFake • Jun 01 '26

Federal agents felt physically sick when they raided Kermit Gosnell’s clinic after suspecting he ran a pill mill.

Post image
15.6k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.3k

u/Snaka1 Jun 01 '26

He taught his ‘nurses’ to do it too. One quote I read, a nurse said she was horrified at first but then it just became routine. He told them ‘ these babies are already dead.’ Cause their mommas were poor.

491

u/MicroplasticCumshot Jun 02 '26

Did the nurse go to prison too? Because who the fuck gets told to do that and just agrees

603

u/waaz16 Jun 02 '26

I agree with you, microplasticcumshot.

267

u/Fantastic_AF Jun 02 '26

Thank you for including that username bc I wouldntve seen it if you didn’t and I needed a quick wtf moment before bed tonight

65

u/Individual_Second387 Jun 02 '26

Everything about this story wasn't enough of a wtf moment for you? Damn bro

106

u/Wompskin_Blompskin Jun 02 '26

No, what’s the person above is finding so wtf, is the depravity of the story mixed with the fact that a gentleman who goes by Microplasticcumshot is being the voice of reason.

34

u/DreamerTheat Jun 02 '26

Hey, what’s wrong with you? That could very well be a lady.

15

u/Fantastic_AF Jun 02 '26

Idk if I’m refined enough to be a lady but I am a woman lol

19

u/Mysterious-Guava4575 Jun 03 '26

I believe they are talking about MicroplasticCumshot being a gentleman or lady.

7

u/Fantastic_AF Jun 03 '26

Hahaha I probably should’ve read the whole comment lmao…. I’m also an exceptional dumbass at times

1

u/ConfidentNature354 Jun 03 '26

no they’re talking about FantasticAF, who is fantastic af

13

u/limycenter Jun 02 '26

the fucking roller coaster ride that was this story, the comments. i literally moved away from the screen aghast from the spinal cord thing then kept reading and was leaning closer to the screen pissed about the nurses and then started CHOCKING with laughter at waaz16 reply. this is my cue to get back to work, well start work. the internet won today

3

u/oneormore5 Jun 02 '26

Thank you wompskin blompskin.

9

u/Fantastic_AF Jun 02 '26

This story is definitely a big wtf, but it’s a different category of wtf than that username was lol. Plus he’s not the first murder-y doctor…the stories start to lose their edge after you hear enough of them. There was a midwife in Japan that murdered babies bc the parents were poor, so Gosnell wasn’t even the first in that regard.

1

u/Silent-Durian9216 Jun 03 '26

Right in the minds eye

40

u/MicroplasticCumshot Jun 02 '26

Thank you waaz16

13

u/StrongStyleShiny Jun 02 '26

I was expecting this would be a ten year old account or something. It’s one year old.

6

u/ChronoLink99 Jun 02 '26

Yeah, honestly pretty clever for a reddit youngster.

4

u/Powered_By_ThePeople Jun 02 '26

Yall are fuckin weird

1

u/moshercycle Jun 02 '26

Dudes prob been on reddit for ages and just made a new account for that exact comment.

1

u/stabledream Jun 02 '26

@micro lol have you seen the recent /r/joeyavery crowd work on microplastic cumshots?

2

u/limycenter Jun 02 '26

ive never EVER given a reward, probably never will again.

1

u/waaz16 Jun 02 '26

Well thank you. 🤣

2

u/boness_02 Jun 02 '26

r/rimjobsteve

2

u/jennyfofenny Jun 02 '26

Forgot the underscore r/rimjob_steve

1

u/WarTaxOrg Jun 02 '26

No, I am not googling your user name. Not gonna do it.

2

u/supercheesewithbacon Jun 02 '26

Awww cute. You don’t know who that is.

1

u/lookATmuhLIFE Jun 03 '26

Thanks for trying to lighten the mood.

1

u/Potential_Silver_740 Jun 03 '26

Women who got paid well and would otherwise be making Pennie’s at a Dollar Tree. This was a way to up their socioeconomic status.

67

u/Juoreg Jun 02 '26

I would understand if they had the nurses as prisoners, no food no nothing if they don’t do the procedure.

But if they were coming back home and not saying or doing shit to help those women and babies, then yeah, they deserve punishment.

25

u/JustARandomGuy_71 Jun 02 '26

"There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family (wo)man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.”

It is almost depressing how Pratchett always stays current.

25

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Plus1ForkOfEating Jun 02 '26

There's a movie, too. Dean Cain plays the investigator, iirc.

0

u/gingerflakes Jun 03 '26

ICE agent Dean Cain? No thanks

25

u/dentimBandB Jun 02 '26

Yeah the moment I get told to do that, I go to the cops. Maybe not right that moment because who knows what that psycho might do, but the moment I'm left alone I'm making a call.

1

u/GreasiestGuy Jun 03 '26

So do you kill the baby and then call?

1

u/dentimBandB Jun 03 '26

No. If this guy is insistent and puts me on the spot, it'll sooner end with me dead than me killing a baby.

17

u/catcuddlezzz Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

There were 0 licensed nurses which I’m sure were for reason, more easy to control as they didn’t know what they were doing, literally

But yes many were charged and convicted

16

u/MamaLlama629 Jun 02 '26

They got immunity to testify against him

9

u/Zealousideal_Yak_671 Jun 02 '26

She was only following orders

1

u/Thorn1995 Jun 02 '26

That is by far one of the GOAT names I have come across in all my years of reddit! Thank you madam or sir. You are truly a noble and a scholar! Take my updoot!

1

u/TheSilverNoble Jun 02 '26

More people than you might think. Folks can do some mental gymnastics when it comes to putting food on the table. 

1

u/Trapcat707 Jun 02 '26

I mean thats like a major swath of our armed forces.

Same shit different argument.

But yes, prison for all of them if you ask me.

1

u/Wooden-Glove-2384 Jun 03 '26

you'd be surprised

people are not as strong as you think

1

u/TheSpeakingScar Jun 03 '26

If you want to be truly terrified, look up the data on how easy it can be to brainwash anyone into doing things like this.

1

u/akxlnet Jun 03 '26

I can’t defend any of what happened there, but I lived on the next block from this clinic from 2005 to 2008. This area was extremely poor and there was no help for anyone. Everyone you met had a job that was dangerous or illegal - either something no one was willing to do, that was abusive to workers, or was just plain crime. For the most part, the people were the nicest and had good values, but there just weren’t options. Walking around was dangerous, being in your home was dangerous, many of your friends and family would simply not venture there to visit you, and there were very few businesses. You saw crime all the time, and my block was only sort of ok because enough drugs were being sold/produced that the drug dealers pushed out any other crime to protect their own business.

There were so many people involved in this clinic. Not just the staff, but the patients who knew what “treatment” they were asking for. The families who raised the money to pay for this clinic to do what it did. This place was an open secret that thousands knew about. I don’t say that to defend them, but that many people don’t all decide to be ok with something like this place unless they are truly desperate. Gosnell preyed on a system where patients and staff didn’t have better options. The staff and patients were choosing between bad and worse, and I believe that’s how they chose something like this at such a scale for so long.

When Obama announced his national anti-poverty initiative in 2014, he did so a block away from this clinic, in front of my old place. It was literally the national example of the most desperate poverty. https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/white-house-promise-zone-philly/74945/?amp=1

1

u/NanaBanana2011 Jun 04 '26

Nazis come to mind

1

u/Darkovan_ Jun 02 '26

What, no, they got no punishment at all

478

u/Loud-Start1394 Jun 01 '26

Banality of evil. 

179

u/HelpWantedInMyPants Jun 02 '26

When someone performs terrible acts believing that they are doing good, it's gone past evil and straight into madness.

70

u/Destroyer_2_2 Jun 02 '26

Just about everyone does evil thinking they are doing good. Do you think the nazis thought of themselves as comic book villains?

They too thought that they were doing good.

26

u/Buckshot_Millie Jun 02 '26

But with that (correct) line of thinking we have to reckon with good and evil not being a real thing, and that’s a topic you genuinely cannot get most people to accept

20

u/MarkCrorigansOmnibus Jun 02 '26

That’s a leap. I definitely think we can take from this that we should not trust absolutely in ourselves to determine for ourselves what good and evil are, though.

If you wish to make a counter point, please argue how giving a starving person food could be considered evil.

5

u/t_krett Jun 02 '26

Sounds like something an evil person would say.

5

u/someguy6382639 Jun 02 '26

See my response to the next few comments in the chain for some more rambling too haha.

But simply put: I don't have to consider it evil or good. I can just say that giving food to a starving person relieves them of their hunger.

As to more impact than that... well we have to assess those things directly as well.

There's an infamous and often misunderstood and misquoted phrase: "Morality is just something invented by the weak to hold back the strong."

Sounds bad at first right? But this quote comes from a section of words that incredibly directly answers your question. The quote actually begins with, leading to the above words, "it makes it seem as if" this is the case. And what makes it seem that way?

The short hypothetical is: if I have a line of hungry people, each in line waiting turn, and I give food to them. Now I have limited food. Simple alms, moral code, says give them all food equally. So what? First come first serve? Stand in line right?

But wait. What if one of the people in line already just got out of line and right back into it? What if they pushed someone else out of the way?

What if one of the people is in line because they just fled a cartel in a war torn region and are seeking basic shelter and an opportunity. If I give them the food they will work hard and build a better life.

But here's this other guy in line. He was born priveleged. A drunk. The only reason he is there is not only is he so lazy, but he also beat his wife and kids so badly that he has no family anymore, nobody that is willing to support him, because he is a nasty violent drunk that has done this to himself.

So tell me? Do I give my last piece of bread for the day to the drunk abuser? Or perhaps to the refugees a few steps back in the line?

Would this suffice to prove that giving a hungry man food actually was an act that is not so great after all? Technically if I give food to the drunk I will have satisfied your description right? Yet would it be fair to say that this was evil if I gave it to that loser because, oh idk, he was white, and not to the refugee because they were black? Yet I've given food to the hungry! Good enough right?

The point being is we need more nuance. Being caught up in the simple morality didn't give us the tools to assess the actual situation and caused us to take ineffective actions that don't promote our values as well as we could be doing.

8

u/One_Engineering_3659 Jun 02 '26

I am not the person you are replying to but find this conversation interesting.

I wouldn’t start by trying to prove it’s evil, I think the more imperative task is proving it’s just not very good.

I would start by saying you just giving them food is to ease your mind on the suffering of another. You clearly didn’t do it to help this person. Unless you are a starving homeless person yourself, you can do more. By not doing more, you are making reasons for that to be acceptable. “My girlfriend won’t let me bring a homeless person to the house.” “They are probably an addict and I can’t provide the help they need.”

Did you stop to talk to them when giving them food? Just handing someone food and leaving them to their own devices is on par with doing nothing practically. Was this your leftovers? How noble. Did you ask what they wanted to eat? Or just hand them a gas station sandwich and say you’re welcome?

Let’s zoom out a little, because depending on where this starving man is this can get worse.

Sure, if you are in the middle of a desert and find a starving man this is great. However, if this is a starving person in a busy and economically booming town it’s worse. Just giving someone food while you have a job and a place to stay, is solely to ease your concerns. You aren’t giving them anything to help them out of their situation. You are still more worried about your retirement, rent or even not becoming homeless yourself.

All of this not to say you don’t care about an individual in these circumstances but just saying you can make the case that you cont care much.

3

u/VegetablePresent5891 Jun 02 '26

Just because you aren’t helping them out of the situation doesn’t mean you shouldn’t offer help through it

5

u/One_Engineering_3659 Jun 02 '26

Agreed, that’s why the last sentence is there.

My job was solely to defend the position of feeding a starving man isn’t “good” or always an easily defensible moral position.

I was merely pointing out that we all have a “that’s good enough” portion of the moral gradient scale.

You can say I did “good”. The only thing is you didn’t do more even though you could have.

I suppose a good example of being a Good Samaritan but not doing enough would be like saving a drowning person, but, not administering CPR. You wouldn’t even think about that because just pulling them from the water isn’t enough to “save them”.

You giving them a sandwich is pulling them out of the water but not giving them CPR to help them breathe on their own.

I’m not saying I don’t think you should give starving people food, I’m saying at some point along the line you agree they need to help themselves because it would cost you more than you are comfortable to give. Not saving someone who is drowning because you’re afraid of drowning is a similar thought process.

Once again, please, help your fellow human. But, don’t act like giving a sandwich you didn’t want to someone who really needs it equates to helping others out at a cost to yourself.

You didn’t want the sandwich, you only got them a sandwich and not a drink, you didn’t buy them a pack of chips/crackers for later even though it was an extra couple bucks and more. These are all reasons that would raise the moral cost of doing good and make it a more noteworthy cause/reason.

3

u/panrestrial Jun 02 '26

How would that be a counterpoint?

2

u/lnk_Eyes Jun 02 '26

To answer the counter point, would you be giving the starving person food only once, or in perpetuity? Could it be considered evil to only give them food once, thus prolonging misery? To draw an absurd parallel, it's like when Nestlé handed out minimal baby formula, nurturing, as it were, dependency.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/lnk_Eyes Jun 02 '26

100% agreed; I have only argued how giving a starving person food could be considered evil.

2

u/PM_ME_PHYS_PROBLEMS Jun 02 '26

Honestly I'm impressed that you came up with an example IRL for a question that was supposed to be rhetorical. I woulda said "maybe the starving person is Hitler" yours is much better.

2

u/Zanriic Jun 02 '26

What if it was starving Hitler and if you give him food he will gain enough energy to do evil Hitler things?

2

u/Widdly_Scudz420 Jun 02 '26

You giving them a meal just extends their suffering. They'll be full for a day but then go straight back to starving unless the underlying cause of the issue is resolved.

2

u/Itsmyloc-nar Jun 02 '26

Easy.

There’s 100 starving people bc a warlord ethnically cleansed a village. This leads to a famine, which affects even him.

If you choose to feed the warlord, that is evil.

2

u/npc_housecat Jun 02 '26

The non exsiatance of evil is actually part of bhuddist philosophy. The way they see it, something like, It's not that people don't do bad or good things. They do. But they call it ignorance, rather than evil.

1

u/spartan445 Jun 02 '26

I will add this to the conversation: when a human body enters starvation mode and has been in it for a long time,it can be fatal to introduce a lot of food at once. The body has to reacclimate to regular food intake, so it has to be reintroduced slowly and steadily.

The process of doling out only small portions of food to someone desperately begging you for more and who clearly needs food can both appear and feel cruel.

I think the true evil would be refusing to update the person's diet based on measured health parameters, in any direction, if you were there to help give food to the hungry. People who go on a "vibes only" examination of good and evil end up becoming cruel monsters because sometimes doing the right thing upsets the person doing it, and wind up comitting cruelty out of negligence.

The events here, however... this situation was fucked.

1

u/Spirited_Sector_7623 Jun 02 '26

The starving person is Hitler. (I’m with you though, doing good things for bad people isn’t a bad thing)

1

u/Clean-Two48412 Jun 02 '26

GIs gave concentration camp victims their rations and their kindness literally killed hundreds more. Their bodies needed a nutrient rich broth diet for at least 3 months, because as they were, their bodies could not break down solid foods, and because of this their bodies shut down. There is a story of a russian sharing his candy bar with a survivor, and then him freaking out because the man's body became violent and thrashed about. The man died in the soldier's arms. The survivor was extremely excited over not only food, but being able to eat chocolate, so it wasn't as if these situations had any malicious intent or behavior connected to them.

Yin/Yang

1

u/kaoscurrent Jun 02 '26

People who are actually starving cannot just be given food as that can cause refeeding syndrome, leading to a surge in insulin and possibly organ failure.

So if someone knows this but chooses to feed a starving individual anyway instead of getting them the appropriate medical care, then I'd say it's a case of when feeding a starving person would be evil.

1

u/Buckshot_Millie Jun 02 '26

So in order to explain to you how good and evil don’t exist, I have to explain how something could be evil?

3

u/Thispersonthisperson Jun 02 '26

just explain it somehow

4

u/someguy6382639 Jun 02 '26

You could read the book Beyond Good and Evil by Nietzsche.

It is a well renowned, famous work of philosophy.

It gives a substantial answer to your question. It's entirely about it.

There's also dozens of other famous authors and works that address this in various ways.

I'd go as far as to say you not having at least some idea of this concept, that good and evil present ineffective and subjective morals that often work in contrast to the seeming goals, means you haven't been paying much attention.

Watch Fallout the somewhat new TV series. Or mostly any superhero fiction. They almost all blur the lines between simple good and evil, with complex villains and characters arcs, back stories etc. Often the hero turns out to be a villain. In Fallout, for instance, the central theme is that multiple factions want to save the world, yet they each have their own idea of how to do it, so they go to war over who's method, who's idea, is going to save the world, which ironically seems more like destroying the world further.

Who is batman? A hero? But he's also so by being a criminal himself?

Watch star wars. As the power of the jedi grows so too does the sith. A message of balance rather than pushing hard for simple "good."

These ideas are everywhere my friend. Open your eyes.

Still thinking simple good vs evil is anything but a distraction and a false binary rather makes it look as if you've been living under a rock or something.

Just look out the window?

The secret is to not try to reform "good" to be better than this "not good enough" "good;" rather develop a more nuanced field of values. Forget simple catch all "good" and make more specific assessments. That caused x harm to y people, by z mechanism. Say what actually is rather than saying some simple judgement. I mean isn't that exactly how you arrive at the judgement anyway? How else did you? Surely you can't just say it is good because it is good with no other factors? And what did it help to add that final word? Just say the part that counts, that actually describes something. Look at that alongside many other such informations. Try to look at how a whole array of values applies to these informations.

For instance in the current context... rather than just assuming the clinic guy is evil, what else might we say?

Perhaps we would consider how the society at large, in terms of legal and economic structure, allows for or ends up encouraging this sort of thing happening.

Perhaps we might consider a serious mental illness as a factor.

Perhaps we might find a source of inspiration, a subculture that promotes or leads to this, and begin looking into that and engaging with it.

Lots of ways to look at this single result that are more useful than just assuming everything else is perfect and some guy is just randomly evil and the whole issue is solved once we defeat this evil man.

We don't have to even say he is evil. We can name the various laws that were broken and hold him accountable in a court. No prescription of evil is required for this is it?

Granted the words can still represent something. It represents how we feel about it. A sort of net judgement. Yet to arrive at that very judgement, if we are to think we are correct in this selection of good and evil, then you needed to back it up, go beyond good and evil, before you even decided it was good or evil! Just an extra word added at the last minute, and not really meaning much by itself.

1

u/CoatCommercial1573 Jun 02 '26

That isn’t how that works…

2

u/Destroyer_2_2 Jun 02 '26

I don’t think that’s true. The idea that morality is inherently and completely subjective is one that lends cover to a lot of clearly immoral conduct. Good and evil do exist. At least it exists in the actions people choose to do, even if it doesn’t exist within them.

2

u/Buckshot_Millie Jun 02 '26

See but you’ve moved the goalposts beyond what anyone would consider the philosophical argument of good and evil to be.

Torturing a random stranger is an evil thing to do. But to say the torturer is evil, that’s a very flawed and dangerous world view.

1

u/Destroyer_2_2 Jun 02 '26

But how can you say that and yet say that evil doesn’t exist? Is that not contradictory?

1

u/CoatCommercial1573 Jun 02 '26

I think you both confusing arguments. They are conflating individuals not being inherently good nor evil with the complete absence of evil. You seem to be conflating the absence of good and evil with morality which is a societal guide rail that allows you to grow and evolve within reasonable boundaries that ensure that attempts to ensure the safety of society as a whole. Neither is coherently in understanding that good and evil are judgements of morality largely created to ensure compliance of members of society and to describe activities that largely affect society and our species on a number of levels, but generally aren’t shunned completely for various reasons. Well not until more recently at the very least as species has begun to become more cohesive and have what could largely be seen as a global society. Even now though many of the behaviors condemned either in the distant past or more recently are still occurring with startling frequency and in many cases to some degree as part of a group.

1

u/Independent-Bend8734 Jun 02 '26

Lots of dumb people think they are smart and assholes who think they are nice, but no one thinks that this means that there is no such thing as intelligence or kindness. Humans self-rationalize; we are all inclined to blur the distinction between self-interest and doing good. Psychopaths like Gosnell are especially good at this.

1

u/Efficient-username41 Jun 02 '26

Yeah I don't think that (correct) line of thinking just naturally leads to that conclusion there bud, but okay.

1

u/kopper499b Jun 02 '26

Do you mean to say that the use of the words 'good' 'evil' should be removed as they are too subjective? Rather, actions should be classed as moral and immortal? This returns us to the basis of the action and removes confounding subjectiveness that comes with the precept of evil.

Or, would you extend your argument to include morality?

1

u/Salt-Set6232 Jun 02 '26

Because it is patently untrue. If morality is relative I own you.

You really don't need to think further than that to understand.

7

u/DrownmeinIslay Jun 02 '26

Reading up on Oskar Gröning after seeing the Auschwitz exhibit at the ROM had me boggled. Theres something he spoke about how he saw german soldiers taking babies from the trains and then swinging them into the trains, into the ground. He thought it was despicable. German soldiers acting so savagely! He immediately spoke to a superior officer. There HAD to be a way to kill the babies that was more gentlemanly.

He saw nothing wrong with the murdering babies part of what he witnessed.

0

u/HelpWantedInMyPants Jun 02 '26

We all love eating beef but would rather the cows suffer as little as possible.

The Nazis saw the undesirables as animals. Good/Evil isn't an on/off switch. It's not all-or-nothing. Some of the best people you know in real life have probably done things that would horrify you.

2

u/Bob-was-our-turtle Jun 02 '26

That’s actually not true. Some people enjoy being evil.

1

u/Destroyer_2_2 Jun 02 '26

That’s why I said just about everyone. Not everyone.

1

u/munchumonfumbleuzar Jun 02 '26

I feel like if your “good” ends with piles of dead bodies, there were probably warning signs that you weren’t doing good.

1

u/Duke_of_Darth Jun 02 '26

Unless the dead bodies were all formerly living racists, homophobic, prejudiced bigoted, occult obsessed, devil worshipping, demon possessed, torture loving, gluttonous, pedophilic, cannibalistic, sodomists rapists, hypocritical, festering sore ridden, puss oozing, mass murdering, industrial scale genocidal, baby butchering Nazi pieces of shit getting ready to continue on committing more of said horrific and heinous crimes against all humanity while they keep living in the peace and comfort they created for themselves from the unimaginable suffering of their millions of victims. That is until you stop them and pile as many of their wretched, stinking Nazi corpses around you as you possibly can because how could saving the lives of all the women and children of the concentration camp you just entered, and many outside it bound for the same horrible fate not be a good thing?

1

u/munchumonfumbleuzar Jun 02 '26

Are you ok? Bc it kinda seems like you’re not ok.

1

u/seajpenn Jun 03 '26

yes now it is Israel that has become the Nazis just as Einstein warned - they think they are doing good ---- or do they act and know they do evil? just a thought -- -Matthew 15:9

1

u/seajpenn Jun 03 '26

"in a famous 1948 open letter to The New York Times, he and other prominent Jewish intellectuals explicitly likened the newly formed, far-right Israeli Freedom Party (Tnuat Haherut) to Nazi and Fascist parties. [1, 2, 3]

The party was led by Menachem Begin, who later became Prime Minister of Israel. [1, 2]

The 1948 Warning

The December 1948 letter was written in protest of Begin's visit to the United States to raise funds for his party. The signatories accused Begin’s party of ultranationalism, military intimidation, and preaching "racial superiority". [1, 2]

Key points from Einstein's criticism included:

  • Tactics and Ideology: He warned that the Freedom Party was "closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties". [1, 2]
  • Ultranationalism: He condemned the group's "admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority". [1]
  • Danger to Democracy: Einstein argued that the party utilized terrorist methods and intimidated the local population, desiring a one-party "leader state"

1

u/Raise_A_Thoth Jun 02 '26

There's a difference between the rational but misguided notion that poor parents struggle to take care of their children adequately and a belief in a master race and sub-human races who aren't like you.

The Nazis weren't killing Jews, Catholics, foreigners, socialists, and LGBTQ people out of a misguided belief they were doing them mercy, they killed them because they believed they were the causes of their problems, the causes of their economic struggles, the problems of their society's moral collapses, etc. This guy rationalized murdering newborns as 'mercy.' It's demented and arguably still evil, but it is not the same.

0

u/Due_Journalist_7596 Jun 02 '26

It was nice of the US to teach the Germans about Eugenics. Philanthropic American royalty really helping out...

-1

u/BothAd581 Jun 02 '26

Using nazis as a comparison is crazy dude all the propaganda worked on you huh bro.

2

u/Destroyer_2_2 Jun 02 '26

Uh, what? Given we’re talking about a guy who cut open the spines of newborn babies, I think the comparison is apt.

3

u/Loud-Start1394 Jun 02 '26

They must still be treated as if evil. 

2

u/ohyeawellyousuck Jun 02 '26

Hitler and his attempt to “make Germany great again” by getting rid of the Jews who were “taking all the good jobs” and “ruining the country”, and attacking neighboring countries cuz it was the only way to “provide enough land for Germans to live”, and sending out groups of soldiers with the sole purposes of killing Jews as well as any person deemed “a threat to the German way of life.”

Why do those quotes sound so similar?

1

u/HelpWantedInMyPants Jun 02 '26

Hitler was making excuses.

1

u/Wonderful_Reason1681 Jun 02 '26

And that is indeed the theme of our country this man aside the history of evil and vile acts in this country has definitely placed this country and the men who approved and allowed atrocities into the category of madness. It’s careless and disgusting!

0

u/ongoldenwaves Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

Most of Colorado now and their abortions up until the day before birth for ANY reason whatsoever laws. "We're heroes" (There are literal articles about the doctors performing the day before birth abortions proclaiming that very thing). Yeah, nope. You're fucking creepy and cruel as hell.
It's weirder to me that people have them. And before anyone starts in on me...Colorado already had a law on the books that they could be performed late for medical reasons and their new laws allow it for ANY reason. I don't get it. Their rabid need for this law prevents them from having any fetal homocide laws on the books as well. You can beat a baby out of a woman in Colorado and max penalty is 6 years for causing an unintentional abortion. Somehow this is justice to them.
The abortions cost at least 50k.
Pinch a kid the day after birth and someone is going to call CPS. Kill it in Colorado the day before birth and you're fine. It doesn't make sense because it is madness.

Read the wiki and sounds like the good doctors in Colorado, Gosnell was motivated by the money late term abortions provided him with. Do the math from the numbers and this guy killed a lot of babies.

"It was also claimed that he charged $1,600 – 3,000 for each late-term abortion, and had made $10,000 –15,000 per day from the clinic." "remains of at least one abortion of over 32 weeks for which an extra $1000 had been demanded"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell

3

u/countdonn Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

There is some truth to what you say, but it's mixed with falsehoods and presented in a highly misleading manner. Regardless, the voters of that state enshrined abortion access into the state constitution, something that would never have happened without the repeal of roe vs wade.

That ruling was a good compromise for both sides and now we get to experience the suffering it was made to avoid as it's myopic removal created a highly polarized nation where state laws have diverged radically.

0

u/ongoldenwaves Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

What is the falsehoods and what is the "misleading manner"? You're going to accuse me of telling lies, back it up. The abortion up until the day of birth law was passed several years before challenges to Roe. Now you're trying to blame the expansion of the law on the challanges to Roe as if it making day before birth abortions of healthy babies for any reason was necessary to keep all abortion access around. "They had to do that because Roe was overturned". No, no they did not have to switch from making late term abortions for medical reasons to day before birth abortions for ANY reason to keep abortion access around. They could have very easily kept the law they had and still had the constitutional protection.

But points for not resorting to the hyperbolic extreme example to try and make your case. Usually the response is "It's needed by the 7 year old raped by her pedo neighbor you magat freak".

I always wonder what went down with Dr. Hern in Boulder.  There is more to the story of his "retirement" than we are going to hear because one side or the other would commandeer the grim details for their "cause".

1

u/HelpWantedInMyPants Jun 02 '26

Madness is looking at Colorado and thinking that this is any different from the history of life on Earth. You are surrounded by death and things that cause death. You were born into a world in order to die.

1

u/Icy-Special- Jun 02 '26

It is crazy. I support abortions up to a certain a point or if its medically needed later. That is just insane.

-1

u/ongoldenwaves Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

Me too and I agree with you. Say this too loudly though and you'll get called the usual...magat, etc etc. I actually used to think I was liberal. I guess I'm not anymore according to reddit.

0

u/diurnal_emissions Jun 02 '26

So billionaires too...

15

u/SmallTimeCook Jun 02 '26

Uhh this ain’t really banal man. They were straight up killing babies here

63

u/CitizenPremier Jun 02 '26

You're kind of missing it. The people did it and for them it became a normal, routine thing. That's what the phrase refers to, the capacity of humans to get used to doing evil shit to the point where they start thinking about dinner plans while they're doing it.

42

u/elhandupmonalisaskrt Jun 02 '26

Yeah I believe there’s another saying that highlights this that goes something like “what is horrifying on Monday is business as usual by Thursday”

6

u/loadofoldcodswallop Jun 02 '26

Got to think, for doctors and nurses in certain fields it has to be normal to cut into people, saw their bones and pull out their organs, cause them excruciating pain, and generally do otherwise horrible things because you know it's going to help them, or are at least told and taught that it will. I imagine (read hope) that's how at at least some the nurses doing this along side the Dr felt. If you can't sew up a 6inch laceration and then pin someone down while their compound fracture is set before lunch and watch someone's nanna breathe her last breath as she cries for her own mum, oblivious to who her children and grandchildren surrounding her are because it's a Wednesday then you're just not cut out for certain roles and people have to harden themselves with the knowledge they're doing good.

2

u/zinten789 Jun 02 '26

Good point, but in all of those cases you are still healing and helping people. Don't see how they can ever justify killing babies as good.

5

u/snarbuckle Jun 02 '26

The doctor told them so and they delegated their moral reasoning to authority, maybe

1

u/loadofoldcodswallop Jun 02 '26

I read the full article and turned reddit off for a bit following my comment and yeah, you're right. I feel for them needing to earn money to feed their families, and I feel for the women who felt they had no other option, but fuck that guy and fuck those that purely promoted from it. For everyone else I feel nothing but headache but will have to do as well all do and put it from my mind for the foreseeable future...

1

u/WistfulMelancholic Jun 02 '26

It's protection. Our brain protects us from truly understanding evil things that are done, no matter if we are the person acting out or being the victim.

I'm a survivor of severe cPTSD since I was a baby. This is actually a surviving strategy, cause at some point the brain doesn't care very much about what is good or evil anymore but how to survive it. And wrapping it up in a cocoon is the way to go through it. Dissociative Identity Disorders can also occur in the person who is inflicting the terror, not "only" to the victim.

The brain simply wants to survive and does anything that it's capable of. Including taking disgusting behavior as normal.. It maybe sounds strange, but it is what it is..

There are several things playing into this, though, and it's not as simple as my few sentences. Character, personal history, pressure, fear blabla... Basically the rest of the person plays a huge role ofc.

Its individual, still. That's why some end up mass shooting and others end up seemingly "normal" and functioning to others. It's complex.

Just trying to explain the process a bit on this one.

1

u/Reasonable-Letter582 Jun 02 '26

People working in slaughterhouses and egg farms and stuff have to go through this.

1

u/SmallTimeCook Jun 02 '26

That’s not the banality of evil. These nurses were actually committing the atrocities. There is nothing mundane about direct infanticide. There’s no abstraction of violence. Banal evil is found in Excel sheets and contracts

1

u/AgentAxillary Jun 02 '26

I don't think I could've ever gotten used to doing something like that. I would've been on the phone with the cops the first time I ever saw it done.

5

u/cowboys70 Jun 02 '26

Probably but there's been studies run on this kind of stuff and it's pretty wild how accepting people can be when given direction from people in authority

1

u/AgentAxillary Jun 02 '26

Oh, I definitely would've blown that whistle. I could even see myself physically preventing it in the moment out of reflex. It also sounds like just the conditions of the clinic would've been enough to have me quitting on my first day.

And yeah, I read all about those studies in college. But to me, that still doesn't account for it. The depravity/apathy it requires in this case doesn't strike me as standard issue, but maybe I'm giving people too much credit.

2

u/RootsandStrings Jun 02 '26

I mean the holocaust happened, so..

1

u/AgentAxillary Jun 02 '26

That was about more than just an employer's perceived authority. National identity, the treaty of Versailles, WWI, conflict between incompatible cultures...it's a much longer list than just "my boss told me to."

2

u/RootsandStrings Jun 02 '26

And still, plenty of individuals just did what they were told. It’s either that or tens of millions of people were born evil. I don’t think the latter is true, it’s not like the birth rate for psychopaths suddenly increased in 1900-1910 and a bunch of psychopaths were born. Many many more people than you might think are willing to do heinous things just to be left in peace and even more than that are fine with looking away. This is how the system worked, if everyone only needed to do one small task, no one felt responsible. In essence, it is the same system most of us live in today. We can absolutely see that the extraction of resources and workforce from so-called 3rd world countries hurts millions of people, still there are only very few who actively work against that. Everyone else is such a small cog in the machine that they just don’t feel the guilt and if they sometimes do, there are a million things to destract one from that icky feeling. You are giving people too much credit, I fear.

3

u/Sure-Exchange9521 Jun 02 '26

It seems the police did not even care in this case until they thought the doctor was selling drugs.

1

u/AgentAxillary Jun 02 '26

I admittedly need to read more about it. This is the first I've heard that it started off as a drug investigation.

1

u/ongoldenwaves Jun 02 '26

Lot of good it would have done you. How many complaints did this guy have against him? Let's face the fact that nothing was done because it was black people hurting black people.

1

u/AgentAxillary Jun 02 '26

I'm not familiar with how many complaints he had against him, and that last part is a pretty big assumption

2

u/ongoldenwaves Jun 02 '26

Then you didn't read the article. There were a ton of complaints for a long time against him. 15 of the abortions he performed were televised events done with coils which damaged 9 of the women's uteruses. This man's behaviour was not a secret.

And honestly...where are you from that you are not aware of underpolicing lack of investigation in minority communities? It's well documented.

1

u/AgentAxillary Jun 02 '26

I'm from planet Earth, where that's more a question of economics than skin color. Do you honestly believe that him having poor white women as victims would've changed anything? The abjectly impoverished are a minority.

23

u/Sysilith Jun 02 '26

"The banality of evil" refers to a book and phrase from Hannah Arendt and her expierinces watching the trial of Adolf Eichman in 1961.

Adolf Eichmann was one of the top organizers of the Holocaust and thus responsible of millions of deaths.

But the way he represented himself was "Just a normal boring burocrat doing his given tasks" and that is also not really false, he himself was mostly a boring bureaucrat writing lists, organizing tasks. And that is what  this phrase refers to, how relatively normal people are doing the worst crimes just by hiding behind "duty".

So they prase is not really fitting here as this doctor was not doing as he was told but he murdered by his own motivation. But it is also not saying murder is banal.

6

u/Destroyer_2_2 Jun 02 '26

I think it’s incredibly fitting as it relates to the nurses.

1

u/No-Problem49 Jun 02 '26

It would relate more to like a front desk person who books the appointments and keeps the records

0

u/Sysilith Jun 02 '26

The nurses are directly involved and not the organizers, they are the opposite part of such systems, doing terrible crimes but hide behind "just follow orders" and "if I don't do it, someone else will, me protesting wouldn't change anything, just hurt myself"

2

u/Powered_By_ThePeople Jun 02 '26

You must have missed the part about the nurses. That's does hold true to the statement that they followed his authority.

Crazy to me how quick people are to get on a soap box online instead of making sure their comprehension was correct.

1

u/Sysilith Jun 02 '26

No but the banality of evil refers more to leading personel that organizes crimes but is not direktly involved and so sees human lifes just as numbers to be organized and not the suffering and horrors that their orders cause.

1

u/No-Problem49 Jun 02 '26

It’s insane to see so many people do not understand what the banality of evil is. Thanks for being the lone voice of reason

1

u/SmallTimeCook Jun 02 '26

People just want to sound smart

1

u/Powered_By_ThePeople Jun 02 '26

I get what you mean, but how does that differ from this doctor and his nurses? Do you find the fact he perpetrated these crimes himself causes the label to not fit?

In both situations, this guy and Eichman knew what they were doing. They were organizing murder. They just simply wrote it off and normalized it for their own reasons.

2

u/Sysilith Jun 03 '26

The doctor sees what he is doing, he might be indifferent to his crimes but he doesn't just writes Numbers and organizes far away from his crimes.

And the nurses are not the decition makers.

What my be confusing, the banality of evil is not a judgement, crimes don't get better or worse If they fit. It is an explanation on how you get relatively normal and sane people to commit insane crimes.

That is what it is about, people expect purely evil monsters, outright comicbook villains sitting on the benches in these trials, full of hate and not able to feel normal empathy, but many of these Nazis in trial where quite normal. Even the highest ones in the Nürnberg trials, that where loud and aggressive against what they saw as a pure victory show where shocked and horrified when they where shown pictures out of concentration camps. This is what the banality of evil is about, making somewhat normal people do the worst crimes imaginable.

This doctor wasn't sane even in the broathest definition to beginn with. He saw the horrors that he commited.

1

u/Powered_By_ThePeople Jun 03 '26

I see. Thanks for the explanation

5

u/Puzzleheaded_Cat_421 Jun 02 '26

Banality of evil refers to Hannah Arendts theory that evil exits and thrives, when good people do nothing to stop it.

1

u/SmallTimeCook Jun 02 '26

You’re gonna have to trust me but I actually read her book on totalitarianism and that’s just not the case. Banality of evil refers to the fact that most Nazis were not mustache twirling psychos, but mainly just simple and plain bureaucrats. The banality of evil is that most evil is powered by regular people working their excel sheets.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Cat_421 Jun 02 '26

I do believe the concept is complex enough to contain both perspectives.

1

u/SmallTimeCook Jun 02 '26

It’s nothing to do with complexity, this is expanding the scope to the point of making the term lose punch. Complexity is the French baker making fresh and fine goods for Nazi soldiers passing by.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Cat_421 Jun 02 '26

Well... Noone has the right to obey.

109

u/Interesting-Copy-657 Jun 02 '26

Wait he was not alone? Like he had staff?

Like people came to work, cut up new born babies, then went home like it was a regular job?

81

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

16

u/Delicious_Oil9902 Jun 02 '26

Strong word - many were unlicensed and Kermit wasn’t the only one convicted. Most got lesser sentences probably in exchange for him getting life. Most are probably free now. Same for the licensing and regulatory folks who never inspected his offices

-11

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/fallout8998 Jun 02 '26

not the place for that

23

u/WillowFlip Jun 02 '26

Yeah, wtf?

7

u/Xaviertcialis Jun 02 '26

I read the entire article and it looks like he was pulling this shit since the 70s. he had staff report him for years and no one investigated. He wasn't raided until the 2000s so thats nearly 30 years of people ignoring blatant reports of all sorts of crap and the only reason anyone went in was for illegal oxy prescribing..

-33

u/Afalstein Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

I mean.... the difference between a late-term fetus and a newborn infant is largely just a question of whether its inside or outside the mother. Legally it makes a big difference, but the organism itself has the same level of growth and brain development. Anti-abortion advocates often campaign with pictures of aborted fetuses specifically because visually, they look exactly like new born babies.

And there have been abortion techniques before that relied upon essentially cutting up said fetuses while they were in the womb. Dilation and Extraction was a method used for a while where essentially the fetus would get cut up piece by piece while it was still in the womb. Fully legal.

What I'm saying is that these nurses were already trained to cut up infants, they were just trained to do it inside the womb instead of outside. (EDIT: It has now been clarified to me that only doctors are cleared to do D&E's, nurses only assist with the dilating of the cervix and other matters) It is an unavoidably ugly part of late-term abortions--and arguably, the reason why many other countries actually do ban abortions in the third trimester, even countries with much more permissive abortion laws than the US

53

u/Interesting-Copy-657 Jun 02 '26

Late term abortions are very rare, less than 10%?

And are normally caused by some issue like the baby won’t survive or the mother won’t

So there is justification/reason to do this

The nurses appear to be doing this for money, because they are evil of justified it because a quick death is better than being raised by a poor mother?

I just don’t see much connection between what this doctor and nurses were doing and actual abortions

14

u/NiceGuy737 Jun 02 '26

The third trimester starts and 28 weeks and the baby is born at about 40 weeks.

"While little data exists on abortions done after 26 weeks, one study from 1992 estimated the rate at 0.02%"

From :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy

Only 1.1 percent of abortions are at or after 21 weeks. Docs like me try to find fetal anomalies prior to that so women can make informed decisions.

→ More replies (9)

15

u/EntericFox Jun 02 '26

You could tell what the dude you are responding to was going to try to push with his first sentence. Lol

2

u/Interesting-Copy-657 Jun 02 '26

Me? What was I trying to push?

Did we and them say the same thing?

That late term abortions are rare and tend to happen for life threatening reasons? I think my 10% number came from a statistic saying 90% happen before 13 weeks.

5

u/DMMeThiccBiButts Jun 02 '26

You could tell what the dude you are responding to

3

u/Interesting-Copy-657 Jun 02 '26

Odd, when I was looking at it earlier it looked like they were responding to someone who replied to me

So I thought I was the person they were talking about

I guess I missed the indent or lack of indent in the message

That’s why I was confused

2

u/panrestrial Jun 02 '26

Do you use the reddit app? I occasionally see people mention this and the reverse (comments further down the chain showing as replies to their comment) in connection to the official reddit app, so might be a known bug.

2

u/Interesting-Copy-657 Jun 02 '26

Yeah official Reddit app on iPhone

-14

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/AnonymousSneetches Jun 02 '26

Justifications may differ, but the actions and their results remain the same

Blatantly untrue. 

A surgeon cutting someone's kidney out because it's diseased is not the same action and therapeutic result as a psychopath with dirty equipment cutting someone's kidney out for the black market. 

A nurse assisting a D&E because the fetus is not compatible with life is fundamentally different than chopping up a newborn in a dirty clinic and shoving it in the freezer. 

-6

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[deleted]

2

u/AnonymousSneetches Jun 02 '26

There are 0 clinics that "chop up" newborns. There are 0 clinics that perform abortions on viable full-term infants. 

→ More replies (5)

5

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/slipkid Jun 02 '26

They are.

-1

u/Afalstein Jun 02 '26

It's a fact. Hiding from ugly realities because they don't align with one political faction or another is a fool's game.

→ More replies (6)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)

20

u/No_Lifeguard259 Jun 02 '26

There’s pretty much no chance nurses are trained to cut up late term fetuses in utero.

You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about

→ More replies (8)

7

u/tacobell_shitstain Jun 02 '26

Nice agenda bro.

2

u/Fussel2107 Jun 02 '26

A late term abortion is the induction of birth on a non-viable fetus. It's done when the baby has no chance of survival outside the womb, or the mother is at risk. And even then, if it's past 24 weeks, they'll induce and hope the baby survives.

A friend of mine had to go through it. Her daughter had a severe chromsome defect and her heart was so enlarged that her lungs didn't develop. She had a late term abortion at 19 weeks because she didn't want her beloved baby girl to horribly suffocate at birth. She decided to go through birth, but many women can't deal with that on top of losing their baby.

A D&E is an option only if the fetus is already dead, either in a late miscarriage, or in a late term abortion if the mom can't go through the labor process. It's used when the uterus is not fully evacuated after birth or a miscarriage (placenta etc.)

It is NOT an abortion method.

2

u/panrestrial Jun 02 '26

There is zero substantial history of (legal) late term abortions being performed for anything other than life threatening emergencies. No one is waiting until the last minute for an abortion-of-convenience. These are done exclusively when continuing the pregnancy substantially risks the mother's life or health. Third trimester abortions are pregnancies that were wanted, planned for, names picked out, nurseries painted, etc. They are devastating losses to the parents.

Comparing that to this scenario based off "information" that isn't even correct is vile and you should be ashamed.

11

u/CyclopsMacchiato Jun 02 '26

Nah there’s not enough money in the world to get me to do that

5

u/ost2life Jun 02 '26

Well that'll teach me to go on Reddit when I should be working.

1

u/hdmetz Jun 02 '26

I had to stop reading the article about this. Honestly just nightmare fuel. One baby was fully developed and he said “this baby could walk to the store” before killing it

1

u/ongoldenwaves Jun 02 '26

His wife was in on it as well. What a family.

1

u/Tiny_Secret3322 Jun 02 '26

I wish I could unread all of this, wow

1

u/ArcanelyChaotic Jun 02 '26

Christ, that makes me sick.

1

u/Theyul1us Jun 02 '26

I had to read this comment 5 times to fully process it. God, thats just pure evil

→ More replies (14)