Was “Catcher in the Rye” to blame for Mark David Chapman killing John Lennon? How about video games being held responsible for the the deranged Newtown, Conn., shooter who loved them?
There’s a good chance that some link to a motive can be found for every murder.
Hillary Clinton and Co. said that a video was responsible for Benghazi. Satirical cartoons were responsible for the Charlie Hebdo terrorist acts.
The latest claim is that videos showing how Planned Parenthood kills and dismembers unborn babies was the trigger for Robert Lewis Dear’s murders at the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood facility where no PP employee was killed.
Read related article: “Why Weren’t Any PP Employees Shot at PP Facility if the Shooter Was after PP?“
There are tens of millions of people who oppose abortion like there are tens of millions of high school students who read “Catcher in the Rye” and watch violent video games who haven’t killed anyone.
Here’s a question that I have not seen answered. Where did Robert Lewis Dear hear about the “baby parts” if (1) he lived off the grid with no electricity and (2) since very few news outlets reported on the Planned Parenthood videos? There are many unanswered questions, but we can be sure that the pro-abortionists will pull out all the stops to make sure that it’s still OK to kill unborn babies in the United States
Read related article: “Why it’s Impossible to Soften Language against Killing Unborn Babies.”
Jonah Goldberg has written an excellent article on the claim that it was the PP videos what motivated John Lewis Dear’s killing of no PP employees but one pro-life police officer. As Goldberg notes, “Craig Stephens Hicks, an atheist who killed three Muslims in North Carolina in February, was supposedly a big fan of Rachel Maddow and Bill Nye the Science Guy. It is just as grotesque to blame Maddow or Nye for those crimes as it is to try to smear the average abortion opponent with the Colorado shooting”:
“No more baby parts.”
As of this writing, that statement by Robert Lewis Dear is the only evidence that the “Planned Parenthood shooter” in Colorado Springs, Colo., was motivated by anti-abortion rhetoric.
Dear’s comment came amid a rambling interview, and law enforcement officials have not said what his motivations were.
That didn’t stop abortion-rights supporters, led by Planned Parenthood’s formidable PR operation, from placing the shooting at the feet of abortion opponents, including Republican presidential candidates and particularly the producers of the undercover videos about Planned Parenthood and the sale of fetal organs.
Pretty much the only things we know for sure are that three innocent people were killed and that Dear is, by most people’s standards, not right in the head.
Dear is a recluse fond of living off the grid — literally, as in without electricity — who apparently scared pretty much anyone he came in contact with. It is unlikely but not impossible that he was partly inspired by anti-abortion or anti-Obama rhetoric or by the undercover videos released by the Center for Medical Progress.
But let’s assume Dear was inspired by those videos. My sincere question is “So what?”
I understand that many abortion rights activists don’t want abortion rights to be up for debate, hence the effort to cast any opponents of unlimited abortion as not just wrong, but as anti-woman, anti-health and in some sense in league with someone like Dear: an alleged domestic terrorist.
But that’s not only ridiculous on the merits, it’s not how the 1st Amendment works.
I agree entirely that leaders of the pro-life movement and other social conservatives should condemn violence and do what they can, within reason, to discourage anyone from killing in their cause’s name.
Read the rest of the article here.