"Rush Limbaugh"Americans wouldn’t be outraged about the verdict and about the death of Casey’s daughter if she had had an abortion instead

  • Thread starter Thread starter easter1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

easter1

Guest
www.lifenews.com/2011/07/06/rush-limbaugh-they-wouldnt-care-if-casey-anthony-had-an-abortion/
Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio talk show host, focused in on what many pro-life Americans have been thinking in the wake of the decision by a jury to find Casey Anthony not guilty of killing her two-year-old daughter.

Limbaugh put forward the notion that many pro-abortion Americans wouldn’t be outraged about the verdict and about the death of Casey’s daughter if she had had an abortion instead.

“You know, what I don’t understand about it is they’re [the media] all card-carrying liberals. When does the death of a child bother them? I’ve never seen them get so upset over the death of a child,” Rush Limbaugh said about the Casey Anthony verdict in his monologue on Wednesday.

“If the child had died, what, two years earlier in the womb this woman would be a star. She’d be a hero. And folks, I don’t think that is a cliche to say. And I don’t think it is as cheap attempt at humor. I think that while it may be uncomfortable to hear—one of the reasons it is uncomfortable to hear is that there is an element of truth in it,” Limbaugh added. …

“You people in the media, if you really, really think she is guilty and you want to feel better about this just tell yourselves that she waited a couple of years to get an abortion and then you’ll feel better.”

“Abortion is brutal, [it’s] never characterized that way and the reason it is brutal is because there is an element of truth of it. I just wanted to put it out there. Pure and simple, nothing more.” (video of remarks here)

That’s a similar notion as what Mike Strain of Stand True said before the verdict.

How is it that we can obsess over the horror of the Casey Anthony trial and not see the parallels to abortion? There is national lament and outcry over the murder of a two year old, but thousands of unborn children are dismembered and thrown away every day through abortion, and our society turns a blind eye.

The inconsistency about infanticide is astounding. While still a senator, President Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which stated that if a baby survived an abortion, it was illegal to kill it. Our President apparently believes that infanticide is permissible if an abortion was the original intent. This quite obviously did not make a big political impact, and his appalling vote on this bill took a back seat to the economy and job creation. However, if a mother kills her two-year-old daughter there is an entire month worth of news describing every little detail.

I don’t mean to downplay tragedy of the Casey Anthony case, but I can’t help but notice the inconsistency of public reaction, and the similarity of rationale for the act of murder. Abortion is often labeled as simply a personal choice, while the rights of the unborn are invisible and never mentioned. The chilling remark of “I made the right decision….This is the happiest I’ve been in a long time” is shockingly similar to the rhetoric that is thrown around by the pro-choice movement. I also don’t mean to say that every woman who has an abortion is exactly like Casey Anthony.
 
I don’t always agree with Rush Limbaugh,
but on THIS point,
he has hit the nail right on the head.
 
I’m so happy someone in the public eye said what I’ve been thinking. If having a child (in utero or otherwise) is gonna “cramp your style” or “ruin your social life”, killing them is not the answer (duh!). Both are brutal, cruel “solutions”…
 
I have to say this is one of the few times I agree with Limbaugh also.
 
I love Rush. You know, he sometimes purposely says outrageous things to ruffle feathers and so that the liberals will go bananas about it. I don’t really approve of that, but when he’s being serious, he’s normally spot on.

In this case, he is spot on.

In this country you are a hero if you kill a kid in the womb, the devil if they are a day old.

Funny how a difference of a day makes to people.

I remember not too long ago when I really found out how partial birth abortions were done, I nearly puked because I was so upset. Not that any abortion is less terrible than another but how barbaric that is.

I’m glad that Rush spoke up on the subject.
 
I didn’t hear him today, I am glad he said this.

It is true. I heard that Casey wanted to get an abortion but her mom wanted her to have the baby, and Casey as a sociopath would have been happy to use that baby to get her mother to do what she wanted her to. And if her mom made her angry or thwarted her plans, she would have no qualms about killing that baby to punish her mother. That’s how I think the whole thing went down, anyway.

I feel sick because of that darling little baby who could have had a great life if Casey would have given her up for adoption. But that takes caring about someone other than yourself and that is the one thing a sociopath cannot ever do.
 
I agree with the essential point - that people wouldn’t be upset, or even care “if [Ms. Anthony] had had an abortion”.

(I purposely left out the “instead”, since it’s nothing but a private assertion that she did actually murder her daughter - an accusation that that none of us know how likely to be true. I didn’t follow the issue much, but had heard about it. Given all of the media attention to the “lurid details” (i.e. - primarily items showing poor character & immaturity) I thought it sounded superficially credible, but as horrible as it would be if true, I hoped it wasn’t.

The prosecution didn’t prove it’s accusation of murder, so she was acquitted (although she does seem to have been removed from contention for the “Mother of the Year” award.) Given the public fervor over the issue, I was surprised at the verdict, but I continue to hope that it is the correct one.

That said, I would think that Mr. Limbaugh wouldn’t be so puzzled as to why the media got so upset over it all.

As Mark Shea puts it, the media’s job is to “sell beer & shampoo”, and that includes Limbaugh’s own programs.

They sell by stirring people up as much as possible. This entire story lent itself well to a major hanging in the court of public opinion…thereby driving up ratings and personal hyperventilation levels.

As an aside, given the huge number of folks who have digestive problems now that the court found differently than the “certain guilt” the media was able to assign, I wonder if they’ll be charging more for Pepto Bismol ads as a kickback for ginning up all the hysteria? Win-win for the ad sellers…

That’s why the media cares/cared so much about this particular child… It’s admittedly cynical, but I’m counting on the media to continue harping about this verdict as long as they can to keep milking people’s emotions and keep “selling beer & shampoo.”
 
It was even more ironic back in the trial of Scott Peterson who murdered his pregnant wife and (IIRC) was charged with TWO counts of murder.

So a wanted baby is a person, but an unwanted one is a clump of cells. Right… :mad:

People really do know what abortion is in their heart of hearts. They just are really good at distracting themselves from addressing what abortion really is. (which is the heart of the ‘choice’ rhetoric: changing the subject)
 
Limbaugh isn’t ‘puzzled.’ He gets the hypocrisy of those who tout abortion as a ‘reproductive right.’
 
Abortions are permitted, championed and called “freedom” and some wonder why we have this (apparently) growing problem of parents killing their children.

No need to wonder.

The Liar is busy at work blurring the lines of Life and Death.

The “right to choose” is a nebulous statement. Think there will be an uprising for the “right to infanticide”? It has been performed throughout recorded history – some have made a “case” for it. I suspect that infanticide is the underlying agenda for “term limits” in the abortion “debate”. Those “limits” seem to be getting nebulous as well and may be (I think) extended to after birth.

A Lie? Yes
Unconscionable? Yes
Intrinsic Evil? Yes
Unthinkable? No
 
Spot on! When is it not about the ratings?
ChrisWRIT said:
I agree with the essential point - that people wouldn’t be upset, or even care “if [Ms. Anthony] had had an abortion”.

(I purposely left out the “instead”, since it’s nothing but a private assertion that she did actually murder her daughter - an accusation that that none of us know how likely to be true. I didn’t follow the issue much, but had heard about it. Given all of the media attention to the “lurid details” (i.e. - primarily items showing poor character & immaturity) I thought it sounded superficially credible, but as horrible as it would be if true, I hoped it wasn’t.

The prosecution didn’t prove it’s accusation of murder, so she was acquitted (although she does seem to have been removed from contention for the “Mother of the Year” award.) Given the public fervor over the issue, I was surprised at the verdict, but I continue to hope that it is the correct one.

That said, I would think that Mr. Limbaugh wouldn’t be so puzzled as to why the media got so upset over it all.

As Mark Shea puts it, the media’s job is to “sell beer & shampoo”, and that includes Limbaugh’s own programs.

They sell by stirring people up as much as possible. This entire story lent itself well to a major hanging in the court of public opinion…thereby driving up ratings and personal hyperventilation levels.

As an aside, given the huge number of folks who have digestive problems now that the court found differently than the “certain guilt” the media was able to assign, I wonder if they’ll be charging more for Pepto Bismol ads as a kickback for ginning up all the hysteria? Win-win for the ad sellers…

That’s why the media cares/cared so much about this particular child… It’s admittedly cynical, but I’m counting on the media to continue harping about this verdict as long as they can to keep milking people’s emotions and keep “selling beer & shampoo.”
Click to expand...
 
One must remember that the majority are morally unformed. What are said to be moral positions are often merely sentimental responses. A visible neo-nate evokes sentimental response that an invisible foetus does not…hence the hysteria despite the barely there if there at all moral difference between infanticide and abortion.

We live in a society is which welfare, free provision of health services, etc etc have disconnected act and consequence and in which sexual activity has been taken out of the moral debate. One upshot is the fact that huge numbers of emotionally and intellectually immature women are falling pregnant the result of chaotic random copulations with deadbeat losers and it is wholly unsurprising if some children fall victim to the fallout.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top