From the Kermit Gosnell trial.
District attorney Seth Williams ties Gosnell's attitude to money
directly to the murders. In a legal abortion, the foetus is injected
with a lethal drug before the mother gives birth - but Gosnell didn't do
"That takes money and it was cheaper for him to just induce labour and then murder the child," Williams says.
Opponents noted that murdering babies was already illegal - it's just that in Gosnell's case, no one was enforcing the law.
There's a curious contradiction, in that giving a baby a lethal injection when it's still inside the mother is not murder, but taking the child's life after it is outside the mothers body IS murder. Regardless of the ethics of abortion, I wonder what legal and ethical hoops were jumped through to arrive at that conclusion?