The Hitlers and Stalins find murder necessary, but they don’t advertise their callousness, and they don’t speak of it as murder; it is “liquidation,” “elimination”, or some other soothing phrase.
-George Orwell

Recently our President addressed the nation in regard to the tragic Oregon shooting that took 10 lives. He called on us to see the necessity for gun control; and later the New York Times said we need to take any means necessary to end this carnage of mass shootings.

The New York Times is the same institution that completely ignored the story of the Planned Parenthood videos. Until they had the opportunity to simply criticize them for being heavily edited, they did zero coverage on the nationwide protest of Planned Parenthood and simply parroted the words of Planned Parenthood’s defense. And our President, who refused to watch the videos or to comment on them, then voted against the bill that would save the lives of babies born alive from failed abortions. He voted that babies born alive and viable, because someone wanted them dead, ought to be left to die.

When President Obama speaks on mass shootings, the issue he takes isn’t the loss of life; murder is something he has already deemed a necessity for the success of our nation. He takes issue with the method. He turned the tragedy of ten lives stolen into an argument for his agenda on gun control. He takes no issue with the mass murder of infants within and without of the womb, so long as it occurs in a sterilized clinic at the hands of a man or woman with forceps instead of a gun, and like those before who have learned to craft their speech to appease and convince the masses he doesn’t make his callousness for human life obvious; he shades it with euphemism. It is “abortion” not murder that he sanctions. He says it is necessary, he has made it soothing and palatable, and even convinces us that he’s doing us a favor by removing all restrictions. President Obama is only one among an entire group of people: he is the voice of Pro-Choice Progressives.

But there is a problem with this ethos, because the callousness that exists toward life in general in our country (and perpetuated by Pro-Choice politics), where over 3,000 babies are killed every day, and where yet another state has turned physicians into hired killers under the palatable phrase, “euthanasia”, is the root of mass killings. We have created a culture of death. We have stripped life of any inherent value. Value exists only in our being “wanted”, or our level of “health”. And we cultivate these ideas, that people are not persons unless someone determines them to be so, and we say that our rights extend to hastening death to outrun suffering because suffering means loss of dignity, so too dignity is tied to our quality of life. Dignity, value: these are terms that we have deemed must be earned by way of proving humanity. Instead of value being inherent by being human, and dignity being a state of being regardless of externals, we have made them relative terms that are decided by outward manifestations, brain waves that we can measure, or an average “normalcy” that we can attach. And so, those whose deaths involve a disease where their bodies or minds deteriorate are only dignified if they commit suicide. And those who have down’s syndrome, congenital defects, malformations, or who simply were conceived at an inconvenient time, are better off dead because they aren’t quite as human as the rest of us. Those who cannot prove to us by our measurement of value that they are human, are decidedly not human and thus dispensable.

We have undermined the virtue of strength, because strength is a virtue by nature of its defense of those weaker, and we have made voluntary sacrifice and moral obligation out to be foolishness. Then we are shocked when a man walks in, unhindered, and shoots ten people as others stand by frozen in shock and unwilling to interfere. But for one man, one man who defied death culture by his willing sacrifice of himself for the sake of others. But instead of seeing him and recognizing our need to reconstitute our thinking to raise up more men like him, we default to thinking this shouldn’t happen in our “civilized” nation. So, it must be that we are not “civilized” enough, and it must be the access to methods that is the problem.

Because, if a man kills hundreds of babies a day with a vacuum it is civilized, necessary, and applauded. But if a man kills 10 people with a gun it is barbaric. And we decide the gun is the problem.

It isn’t really the man.

It is the method.

Because if that man could satisfy his thirst for murder by sucking the brains out of an unwanted infant halfway out of the birth canal, then he would be applauded as a women’s right’s activist, a champion. A hero. But because he ended live’s that we’ve decided are worth something, and he did it with a gun, he is a criminal.

And we have been fooled. We have been fooled by these careful words delivered calmly, convincingly. We have accepted the madness as sanity.  We nod our heads along, “Yes murder abortion and euthanasia are necessary. Unfortunate certainly, but morally necessary. And to say otherwise is barbaric.”

Murder is only murder if our gentle constitutions can’t handle it.

That is why so many who support Planned Parenthood still refuse to view the Planned Parenthood videos, because suddenly, abortion looks like murder too.

And we’d rather blame the guns.

Because then we don’t have to admit, the problem isn’t the method, it’s the madness within our own hearts.

Like the Cheshire Cat says, “we’re all mad here,” and we celebrate the madness; dancing in the blood of the innocent while claiming we want peace, and melting down guns over the fire we’ve fueled with the bodies of our murdered children, all while chanting “progress”.