Why The Media Remains Silent On The Gosnell Infanticide Trial

Edmund Burke said: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Evil is so pervasive in our lives that we often don’t see it right in front of our eyes. We watch the news, see all the crime and political scheming, and we just absorb it, and pack it away. It’s come to the point that we often rely on others to make judgements for us. We watch pundits, and celebrities so that we know what to hate and what to praise; who to love, and who to declare evil. But what happens when the media–the source of all our understanding–decides that something is not worth our time? What happens when the media redacts a story that they believe will hurt their own agenda?

The trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor, Kermit Gosnell, has been moving forward for quite sometime. The evidence and testimony being presented is staggering, and disturbing; but the media is in complete blackout mode. Why? We will get to that soon.

In an article for USA Today, Kirsten Powers writes:
“Infant beheadings. Severed baby feet in jars. A child screaming after it was delivered alive during an abortion procedure. Haven’t heard about these sickening accusations?…It’s not your fault. Since the murder trial of Pennsylvania abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell began March 18, there has been precious little coverage of the case that should be on every news show and front page. The revolting revelations of Gosnell’s former staff, who have been testifying to what they witnessed and did during late-term abortions, should shock anyone with a heart…Here is the headline the Associated Press put on a story about his testimony that he saw 100 babies born and then snipped: ‘Staffer describes chaos at PA abortion clinic.’”

Powers goes on to correctly state that it was certainly much more than chaos going on at the Philadelphia abortion clinic. Infants were being aborted after the designated 24 week cut-off point. In addition, infants born alive were having their spines severed, effectively decapitating them, post-birth. In a word: infanticide. Now, Powers goes off the reservation when she declares that no matter what you think about abortion, these are disturbing incidents. She attempts to distinguish between abortion and post-birth spinal cord severing infanticide.

Powers writes:
“Regardless of such quibbles, about whether Gosnell was killing the infants one second after they left the womb instead of partially inside or completely inside the womb — as in a routine late-term abortion — is merely a matter of geography. That one is murder and the other is a legal procedure is morally irreconcilable.”
Her defense of infanticide slightly before birth notwithstanding, she makes an interesting point. After performing a Lexus Nexus search, she found that there was almost no coverage of the Gosnell trial in the mainstream media. How could that be? Powers asserts that this is certainly front-page worthy. I know the answer; and it is resting comfortably within the paragraphs of her own column.

Liberals will endlessly defend abortion–up to, and including late-term abortion. However, it is obvious to anyone who possesses a functioning brain that there is absolutely no difference between a late-term abortion and a post-birth slaughter. The difference is a matter of seconds, and legal jargon. The media cannot cover the Gosnell trial with any sort of vigor because it has no moral ground on which to stand.

Kirsten Powers firmly asserts that the difference between the two acts is “morally irreconcilable.” My question is: Why? She writes that the only actual difference in the procedures is “geography,” so why become so indignant about post-birth termination?

It’s a non-starter for the Liberal press. With the only real difference being “geography,” the media has nowhere to go with the Gosnell story without positioning themselves as hypocrites. Even they can see that there truly is no difference between severing the spinal cord of an infant in the womb, and severing the spinal cord seconds after live birth.

The media is responsible for a complete blackout on one of the most horrific news stories of this decade, simply because reporting the story will effectively cause their agenda to crumble. Those in the Liberal media cannot allow their agenda to be countered, so they are acting as if this tragedy never happened. That is truly disturbing.