How the press covers violence:
- An Army doctor known to have expressed views sympathetic to jihad kills 13 and wounds 32 at Fort Hood. The administration initially floats (and the mainstream press runs with) the label it’s “workplace violence” rather than anything to do with Islamic-inspired terrorism.
- A man shoots up a Marine recruiting station, and the public is cautioned at first not to jump to conclusions that it has anything to do with Islamic terrorism.
- Two Chechen brothers, allowed to grow up in the United States after their father filed for political asylum due to the fighting back home, bomb the Boston Marathon. The intelligentsia goes out of its way to tell people not to blame all Muslims for the actions of these two… and years later ups the ante by suggesting the United States take in THOUSANDS of refugees from the latest region churned by Islam: Syria.
- A loner who’d lived as a recluse in North Carolina and Colorado gets in a shootout with police from a Planned Parenthood building. The press (understandably) immediately draws the conclusion this is anti-abortion violence (though authorities have repeatedly said it is not yet clear what motivated the attacks). Then the press goes on (not so understandably) to indict the entire anti-abortion movement as rhetorical accomplices. Other coverage tries to place this in a context of “an escalating campaign of anti-abortion violence,” despite the fact the last fatality among abortionists was six years ago, and the one previous to that was eighteen years ago. Who here would give anything for a six-to-18-year break in Islamic-motivated violence?
Before I go further, I’ll state for the record that violence in the name of preventing abortion is wrong… as wrong as the abortions themselves, and for the same reason. Murder is not justifiable, whether by convenience or political agenda.
It’s telling, though, to compare the coverage of these two types of violence. Nidal Hasan, the Army doc mentioned earlier, killed and wounded more people in a single incident than have been harmed by beyond-the-pale anti-abortionists in the last couple decades. But where the public is always instructed by its social betters not to associate Islam with violence — that somehow, those actions aren’t representative — that same distinction is rarely offered to the Christian community. In some media circles, one could almost sense the glee Friday: “finally! We get to talk about the REAL threat: white males who can be associated, however loosely, with Christianity!”
That’s press objectivity for you.