If you haven’t heard, earlier this week a jury convicted abortionist Kermit Gosnell for murdering babies born alive after he failed to kill them in the womb.
I will spare you the horrifying details, but you can read them here if you are curious.
What was almost as shocking as Gosnell murdering babies born alive was major media’s blackout on reporting the trial.
It wasn’t until Fox and other media on the right began calling out the rest of the media that they reluctantly showed up and began reporting.
The cry from the right was that the major media silence on the Gosnell trial was driven by political bias. In other words, even though the media thought what happened was terrible, they didn’t report it because they thought it would mar the public image of abortion and give ammunition to pro-life groups. t think it was something more fundamental and more disturbing.
I think the media didn’t initially report on the trial because they didn’t think what Gosnell was such a big deal. I’m not suggesting they even thought this on a conscious level. I suspect the decision was made on a deeper and more obscure level.
Let’s face it, what’s the difference between killing a baby that is moving in the womb or killing it a minute later when it’s outside the womb? I believe that on a level where thoughts like this aren’t critically examined major media decision-makers just didn’t think what Gosnell did was that big a deal, and that’s what’s most disturbing.
Cultures have tumbled down such slippery slopes in the past. If the African race is subhuman, what’s wrong with enslaving them and treating them like property? If Jews are subhuman, what’s wrong rounding them up and sending them to the gas chamber?
The only difference between abortion and infanticide is the location of the victim. Those who call the shots in the mainstream media aren’t stupid. They recognize this, even if they don’t admit it. GS