Mass Murder Trial Ignored – Wonder Why

Amid the push for gun control after well-deserved mourning over the Newton, Connecticut mass murders of school children and the recent Boston Marathon terrorist bombings, has anyone ever heard of accused mass murderer Kermit Gosnell?

He’s been on trial in Philadelphia since March 18 for seven counts of first degree murder of babies, unequal treatment of black and minority women, and other smaller offenses.

Outside the Philadelphia area and the pro-life community, until recently the story has gone virtually unreported.

The defense abruptly rested its case - Gosnell could face the death penalty if convicted.

Closing arguments will be this week; many have never even heard of the case.

Grand Jury Indictment and Media Double Standard

If you have a strong stomach, you can read the grisly details of the Grand Jury indictment in the Atlantic here. The testimony of the medical staff is shocking, regardless of your views on abortion.

I like to focus on the positive, so I’ll just point out the double standard noted by Kirsten Powers in USA Today on April 11, 2013:

“The Washington Post has not published original reporting on this during the trial and The New York Times saw fit to run one original story on A-17 on the trial's first day. They've been silent ever since, despite headline-worthy testimony."

Kermit Who? vs. the Famous Sandra Fluke (Rush Hour)

Powers continues,

“Let me state the obvious. This should be front page news. When Rush Limbaugh attacked Sandra Fluke, there was non-stop media hysteria. The venerable NBC Nightly News' Brian Williams intoned, "A firestorm of outrage from women after a crude tirade from Rush Limbaugh," as he teased a segment on the brouhaha. Yet, accusations of babies having their heads severed — a major human rights story if there ever was one — doesn't make the cut.”

Pro-Life Voices Silenced – No Surprises Here

For those who have long labored in the pro-life movement, this comes as no surprise. Though there is no reasonable moral ground for a woman’s right to choose to end the life of another human being, or for a man to persuade her to do so, pro-life has mostly been called anti-abortion by major news media.

Everyone wants to be for something rather than against something. Pro-life people are pro-baby, pro-elderly, pro-handicapped child, etc. and provide more support for hurting women and their babies than pro-choice people do. Pro-choice is no-choice for the baby.

Every abortion destroys new DNA, and most abortions stop a beating heart. Every woman who leaves an abortion clinic after a “successful” abortion is scarred for life; she’ll be at higher risk for breast cancer and always wonder about the baby she could have let live.

Men usually have less trouble – the problem is put behind them and they move on with life.

Why the Double Standard?

Timothy Carney of the Washington Examiner sheds some light on the issue – the case has an inherent pro-life bias about abortion procedures. One of the murdered babies, an illegal late term abortion murdered outside the womb, was nearly the size of a medical assistant’s newborn daughter.

Hardly compassionate care for women who are in trouble, Dr. Gosnell charged $2,500 (the bigger the baby, the higher the price), according to the grand jury indictment.

Maybe he’s taking a higher risk, since he’s breaking the law he needs to charge higher prices – guess that’s a perverse argument for keeping late-term abortions legal. Huh?

Covering for Obama? Our Most Pro-abortion President

Carney writes, “In his first U.S. Senate race, Obama used Carhart's procedure as a fundraising pitch. In a 2004 campaign mailing, Michelle Obama tried to rally the donor base by explaining how Republicans were trying to ban partial-birth abortion, "a legitimate medical procedure," as Michelle put it."

“The most substantive difference between the partial-birth abortions on which Obama fundraised and Gosnell's abortions is this: Dr. Gosnell did the snipping outside of the mother's birth canal, while Dr. Carhart reaches his scissors inside the woman's vagina to snip the baby's spine.”

Geography or Time – Where to Draw the Line?

A fine point of geography doesn’t change things. Neither does time, to be honest. The only valid place to draw the line is when egg meets sperm and new DNA is created.

Because something is legal, does not make it moral or right. Slavery was once legal, too. Thankfully that is behind us in America. If one does not have life, there is no chance for liberty or pursuit of happiness.

Pro-life voices stifled – hmmm

Outcry over former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum’s cancelled April 24 speech in Grosse Pointe prompted the schools to reconsider, but this controversial speaker (who finished second in the Republican presidential race last year) still needs permission slips from parents for students to attend.

The Detroit News thinks “this sets a horrible example for their students by tampering with the First Amendment right of free speech. It was ridiculous to cancel the presentation just because some teachers don't like Santorum's views.”

What don’t the teachers like? Probably his pro-life, pro-traditional family views, which they think are too radical for their students to hear without permission slips.

Where do we go from here?

I’m not going to argue that we should make all abortions illegal again – that horse has already left the barn. Ideally no one would ever want or need one. An abortion to save the life of the mother meets pro-life criteria.

But surely there is some middle ground where life is valued and pro-life and pro-choice people find common ground to discourage this national epidemic tragedy. Reasonable legislation can be enacted to discourage abortions and promote life.

No Longer Safe, Legal and Rare, just Legal

At the latest Democratic Party national convention, the platform was changed: pro-choice people dropped their “safe, legal and rare” slogan. They continue to resist safety standards and efforts to discourage abortions, digging in their heels to keep abortion legal at all costs.

As their latest push, they want pro-life people to pay for contraception and abortifacient drugs as part of Obamacare – see the conclusion of this article for details.

President Obama's Speech to Planned Parenthood

On April 26, 2013, President Obama spoke at Planned Parenthood, which performed 663,409 abortions over the last two years.

During that same time, it received $542,400,000 in government funds. Its total assets are more than $1,244,000,000.

During his 12 minute speech, there was time for 7.6 abortions to occur at Planned Parenthood clinics. He cited two women that faced health problems with fertility and cancer and found help at Planned Parenthood clinics.

According to cnsnews.com, the President said, “As long as we’ve got a fight to make, make sure women have access to quality, affordable health care and as long we’ve got to fight to protect a woman’s right to make her own choices about her own health care I want you to know that you’ve also got a president who’s going to be right there with you fighting every step of the way”

“Thank you Planned Parenthood and God bless you,” Obama said.

Back to the multiple murder trial in Pennsylvania...

Courtroom Horror - The Shocking Part is What is Legal

Normally Andree Seu Peterson writes on spiritual issues for WORLD magazine. Her most recent column waded into the cultural battle going on here. She explained to her 81 year old mother the "arcane distinction between "abortion" (the killing of a baby) and "murder" (the killing of a baby)."

Later she writes about the prosecution's star witness, Dr. Feisullin, telling the courtroom how a D&E abortion is properly and legally done. After the defense attorney cross-examined her, she called out "Are we going to talk about how they're all over 24 weeks?" (above this age, abortions are illegal in Pennsylvania)

Meaning that even doctors like her who "legally" perform these procedures fudge on the gestastional age of the baby. Peterson's thoughtful article is poignant - she's a far better writer than I. It's worth a read, regardless of your views on abortion. I recommend her other columns for a deeper spiritual walk.

End the Double Standard – Equal Access for All Ideas

It’s time for an even playing field; at least let all ideas be heard and the best, truest ones win. Only then will we really have liberty and justice for all.