Last January, I posted the above documentary about Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his murderous late-term abortion clinic. My hope then was that the video might go viral and attract widespread public attention. My thought was that if we could just put this story before as many people’s eyes as possible, they might reconsider their indifference about the horror that unfolds every day in abortion clinics around the country. I’m not sure that the documentary has yet had that impact.
Over the last week, however, Dr. Gosnell’s trial began and offered a new opportunity for the public to witness the horrors that took place in his clinic. Dr. Gosnell is on trial for causing the death of one woman seeking an abortion and for killing seven live-born babies who survived abortions. Since the trial began, the details have begun to emerge, and they are even worse than the charges. One worker in the clinic says he witnessed over 100 executions of live-born babies in Gosnell’s clinic. Another worker saw live-born babies take a breath and then die as they were decapitated with scissors. He said that at times it would “rain fetuses” in the clinic as women were given drugs to speed up their deliveries. When babies were born before they could be killed, Dr. Gosnell and workers killed them after they were born.
As I said, this trial has given another opportunity for the public to see the truth. But that hasn’t happened this week. Why? Because the national media has by and large turned a blind eye to the trial. The same media that gives daily attention to trivialities in slow news cycles does not find the mass-murder of live-born babies to be newsworthy. How can this be? How could they possibly pass up this story? Could it possibly be that they understand the implications of this story? Perhaps if the American public sees reports on the killing of live-born babies, they might conclude that there really isn’t any real moral difference between the live-born babies and the unborn ones. Perhaps the public might recognize the moral insanity of suggesting that a baby in the birth canal is killable while that same baby outside the birth canal is not.
Here’s the bottom line. What happened in Gosnell’s clinic exposes not just his crimes. It also underlines the moral bankruptcy of pro-choice arguments that routinely and callously disregard the humanity of the unborn. The entire pro-choice position requires persons to ignore the personhood of unborn persons who die daily in those clinics. That reality cannot bear the light of day, and that is why Gosnell and every other perpetrator like him are enjoying a media blackout.
Kirsten Powers is a liberal commentator, and in today’s USA Today she writes a powerful exposé of the media’s dereliction of duty in reporting this story. It would be worth your time to read the entire thing, but I’ll conclude with her words:
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.
You don’t have to oppose abortion rights to find late-term abortion abhorrent or to find the Gosnell trial eminently newsworthy. This is not about being “pro-choice” or “pro-life.” It’s about basic human rights.
The deafening silence of too much of the media, once a force for justice in America, is a disgrace.