“Quiner intentionally and incorrectly misrepresents” human abortionists

By Tom Quiner

This man hurt the feelings of human abortionists everywhere.

This man hurt the feelings of human abortionists everywhere.

I should be “ashamed and condemned for making hurtful accusations” toward human abortionists.

These were the sentiments expressed by letter writer, Rick Smith, in this morning’s Des Moines Register.

He was responding to my “love letter” to human abortionists that appeared in the Tuesday edition of the paper.

Mr. Smith and fans of human abortion everywhere evidently had their feathers ruffled:

“Tom Quiner uses the outrageous and barbaric quotes of the defense attorney in the Dr. Kermitt Gosnell murder trial and claims his comments represent the view of all women’s reproductive choice providers [“Trial Exposes Myths of Abortion,” May 7].

Anyone remotely familiar with the obligation of defense attorneys realizes that the attorney is attempting to defend a monster charged with over 250 crimes, including operating an illegal women’s health clinic and murder. Quiner intentionally and incorrectly misrepresents the view of all legitimate women’s reproductive health providers by claiming “the attorney is speaking on behalf of human abortion providers everywhere.”

I don’t think Mr. Smith and I are talking the same language. It’s a problem I pointed out in yesterday’s post on this humble blog (“We’ve lost a common vocabulary”).

Human abortion factories have nothing to do with health. They have everything to do with death.

The intent of the so-called doctors and clinicians in these factories is to generate sales by ending human lives via human abortion.

Over a million human beings are killed in these factories in this country alone EACH year.

So I think I am accurate in suggesting that my piece does reflect the human abortion industry.

Mr. Smith is not deterred:

‘Quiner conveniently never mentioned that every major women’s reproductive health provider has condemned Dr. Gosnell and his practices.”

Lila Rose and Live Action films might not agree. They uncovered three more abortion clinics that admit they don’t have a problem letting a baby die who survives a human abortion attempt on her life.

It is certainly politically incorrect to publicly espouse the kind of butchery practiced by Dr. Gosnell. But when they think no one is listening, except for the potential customer sitting across the desk from them, they’re pretty open about their willingness to let people die who have just been born.

Mr. Smith tries to distinguish between the humans killed in Dr. Gosnell’s factories from those killed in others:

“Quiner asks his readers what the difference is between what Dr. Gosnell did and what happens in other clinics all the time. He clearly knows that comparing caring, clean, legal, professional reproductive clinics to an illegal, back alley, inhuman butcher is purely absurd. We all understand Quiner’s passionate opposition to reproductive choice, but he should be ashamed and condemned for misrepresenting the facts and making such hurtful allegations about legitimate woman’s health care providers.”

Although there are no shortage of folks to condemn my words, I stand by them without shame.

Here’s where we run into a language problem.

When Mr. Smith says reproductive choice, I hear the words human death.

When Mr. Smith says a human abortion factory is “clean, legal, professional,” I hear the words human death.

We have no common ground.

Ultimately, the only thing Dr. Kermit Gosnell did wrong in the eyes of the human abortion crowd is get caught.


  1. Lisa Bourne on May 9, 2013 at 5:18 pm

    ….. the alternate universe of the left …..

  2. theintrepidpage on May 9, 2013 at 5:29 pm

    We can only hope some of these “hurt feelings” are stung consciences.

  3. sally1137 on May 9, 2013 at 6:35 pm

    The 180 rule. Whatever the left says, you know the opposite is true.

  4. Karen Quiner on May 9, 2013 at 9:55 pm

    Notice how careful all of these people are anymore not to use the word abortion? It is almost comical the way they keep calling abortion mills reproductive heath clinics. Do they really believe there is any health care going on at those places? Maybe a little, but not much.

    As for abortion, there is nothing healthy about it. In the best of circumstances there are still risks and potential long term consequences. And in all circumstances it isn’t health care of the poor child.

    And as for birth control, it is a class 1 carcinogen according to the world health organization.

    It just isn’t natural for mothers to kill their young. I think it is natural for goldfish, but it isn’t natural for human mothers to kill their young.

  5. Shawn Pavlik on May 10, 2013 at 8:28 am

    Why is “choice” such a bad thing when it comes to choosing one’s health care or choosing your child’s school or choosing to own a gun, but such a “great” think when choosing to end the life of your unborn child?

    • quinersdiner on May 10, 2013 at 9:18 am

      We could have a theological, very politically-incorrect discussion on this political point, Shawn. You are right on the mark with pointing out the disconnect with liberals when it comes to “choice.” I suspect this evangelical Catholic and any evangelical Christian would come up with similar explanation for the disconnect.

  6. […] is the claim Rick Smith made in the Des Moines Register, as this blog reported yesterday (“Quiner intentionally and incorrectly misrepresents human abortionists”). Mr. Smith was responding to my essay which appeared in the Des Moines Register earlier in the […]

  7. Bob on May 10, 2013 at 10:56 am

    Calling an abortionist an abortion provider is like calling Osama bin Laden a terror provider. But calling an abortionist a “reproductive health care provider” is a linguistic perversion that would probably astound George Orwell if he were still with us.

    • quinersdiner on May 10, 2013 at 10:58 am

      Yes, Mr. Orwell is surely turning over in his grave.

  8. oarubio on May 17, 2013 at 9:50 am

    Such “caring reproductive health clinics” — wonder what the results would be if it were possible to survey the opinions of the torn-apart babies.

    • quinersdiner on May 17, 2013 at 10:00 am

      If only they had that chance.