...the accused is an abortionist, Kermit Gosnell, and the murders he is charged with are one of his patients and several of the babies who were born alive before being aborted.
It's a gruesome story, but I'll link to the Get Religion post that discusses the lack of media coverage of this story. As one source cited in the post says, this story is to abortion what Sandy Hook is to gun ownership.
The mainstream media are pro-abortion. And those with national influence - the major networks, the major news outlets, the major papers with national reputations and readership - they are not covering it.
Thank God they are not the only information source.
It seems to be covered by the local media - the newspapers and local TV stations in the Philadelphia area.
And it is being covered by the pro-life media.
But you have to wonder: Why on earth is this story so off the radar of of the national media? Not even FoxNews is covering it, it seems.
If you to to Yahoo, you see their big features that have been getting top billing for the past few days: Putin got protested by topless women. A kid got sent home from school because of his haircut. Stuff about celebrities I know practically nothing about. Search "Gosnell" in Yahoo News, and the first item is some murder in New Zealand via Yahoo's New Zealand news service. The next item is a news story about this abortionist - but not from Yahoo's US news service, but from the Philadelphia newspaper.
Search Google for Gosnell, and there is not a single major national mainstream news outlet listed on the first page, unless you consider Life Site News and the Washington Times as major national mainstream news outlets. Search for Rice and you get (besides stuff about the university and the food) - on the first page - CBS Sports, ESPN, and USA Today all with stories about the small-time college basketball coach who threw balls at players and once or twice used gay slurs when yelling at them. You see, because being mean and using gay slurs that is a far, far greater crime than mass murder committed in the process of providing abortions.
Here's the ethical and news-reporting quandary: If killing those babies after they were born is murder, then what would it be if they were violently dismembered on that day in the womb? The latter is the right of the mother and the doctor, and the former is murder? The media don't know how to handle this without making abortion itself seem bad.
So it's hands-off.
And remember this about the abortion issue: It is more about the right of the physicians to perform the procedure to make money than it is about the right of the woman to procure one. While many states penalized the women with abortion restrictions, not all of them did, but every single one of them penalized the physician, and more harshly than the women who were penalized. There is no reason to think that future abortion restrictions should penalize the woman at all - and the pro-abortion people realize that. It seems to me to be more about the abortionist's rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment