Commentary and Analysis:
FOX NEWS' SEAN HANNITY: ABORTION
Rather than shed light on the truth that abortion is the taking
of the life of a helpless baby in the womb, the external womb abortion or infanticide of
Gosnell and his counterparts across the land, the
latest SEAN HANNITY program on Fox News merely served to display his
heightened ignorance, his hypocrisy, and
his heterodoxy. The man is
impossible! For a Catholic as he professes to be this is gross
dereliction of duty, scandal, in that he is a bad example to those with
a weak faith. Words almost fail!
For those of you who did not view the show - I tuned in because of the
abortion segment - this is how it went.
The premise for the segment on abortion was that Gosnell, the
Philadelphia abortionist on trial for murder is not the only one such
butcher. LIVEACTION.ORG, a pro-life undercover organization filmed
other abortionists admitting that they do nothing to help a baby born
alive from a botched abortion, with the result the baby dies, which is
the purpose, and or they deliberately kill this little person by
various means. Cold, calculated, without any humanity. The video said
Nothing new there as the abortion mentality, by definition,
hardens those who accept it as legal and those who also participate in
the killing, like the Nazis and those Germans who did not resist. The
willful murder of innocent children is so monstrous a violation of
natural rights, that in order for those who support it to continue to
do so, it is necessary that they first lie to themselves and then lie
about the truth of abortion to the rest of us. After a while they no
longer care. Beyond
belief, but so in keeping with human nature which takes its toll most
those who pretend that they can defy the law written in the hearts of
each human person because he is created by God with certain unalienable
natural rights, and placed there by a loving Creator since man is
responsible to God for his actions and must have rights to accomplish
those in accord with the intent of God. The first right, that of life,
is not a contingency right, it is the first
right, without which all
other rights are meaningless.
Our culture has chosen to set aside the natural law of rights and
reason for the sake of the pragmatic - the ignominy of extreme
self-service. The result: one out of every three children is slain
either in the womb or immediately after exiting the womb.
The arguments on
abortion tend to revolve around viability, possible repercussions when
the madness runs its normal coarse, and that old bugaboo, "choice." The
natural law? What is this anymore to us, we might as well exclaim.
Today in the interest of "choice" and "rights", gratis the US Supreme Court of
Disgrace, 4,000 years of Tradition is overturned on its head. We want
matters to be upside down, to wit:
Instead of a mother rightly, nobly, sacrificing her life for the sake
of her child, US law now deems it perfectly fine for the woman to
insist that the child, who is given no choice, must die for her sake.
The wrath of God is too good for us! Choice is such a mantra that it
has taken root down into our very souls as individuals, Sean Hannity
being but the premiere example among pundits who claim the mantle of
both Catholic and conservative.
His two women guests were FOX contributors, Julie Roginsky, supposedly
representing the liberal side of abortion and Jedediah Bila, supposedly
on the right. And then there were
none. How so?
All three, which includes the host himself, Hannity, approve of
abortion in the case of rape and incest, etc. A complete waste of time
and so much for FOX's reported "Fair and Balanced" reputation. It seems
that Hannity is for abortion here because as he justified it to Miss
Roginsky who correctly pointed out his hypocrisy in stating that he is
"pro-life", "that in these cases it is different - the woman has no
choice." Oh, but she does, she has a
choice not to have her baby killed by a hit man. She can choose adoption if need be. It is the baby who never has a choice.
Roginsky, a Roe v Wade
supporter does not accept that the baby has any rights until some
viability level has been reached, although she was never forthright
with Hannity about when that might exactly occur; she was intent on
calling him a hypocrite, an upbraiding he entirely deserves. Hannity is
outraged about the Gosnell imperative, but not if the baby is killed in
the womb for the crime of his father, essentially. Hypocrite is too
choice a word for what ails this benighted Catholic man who has
obviously forsaken the natural law in all of its breathtaking beauty
and safeguarding dimension, the fortress of justice itself! To deny one
part of the moral law is a heretical act for a Catholic. It is
indefensible for any and everyone who has attained the age of reason,
but for a Catholic it is undeniable heresy of the foulest odor. For a
Catholic it is inexplicable, damning on its face. Objectively, he is on
the road to perdition, to Hell. We leave the subjective aspect to God
Miss Bila seemed to want to argue both ways as did Sean Hannity, on the
one hand abortion is the taking of a human life, but it is okay in rape
and incest. Same baby, same life, same nature, same natural rights, but I choose to dispense with that right
in this or that case, because this seems more fair to me. Well,
in that case, the government is equally "justified" in deciding what
laws of the land to enforce or not. Which is precisely what the
Obamerites are doing with virtual impunity, much to the chagrin of
Hannity and Bila. How can they object to the principle, which they have
willingly sacrificed along with thousands of dead babies?
With so-called pro-life friends such as these, who needs an enemy?!!
Compared to these two Julie Roginsky appears almost pro-life, but only
in the sense that she recognized that abortion and sanctity of life are
all or nothing propositions, either the baby in the womb is a baby, a
human being with natural rights or he and she isn't. One cannot have it both ways.
Hannity and Bila have yet to reckon with this reality. I am guessing,
but I presume this is why Roginsky was hesitant to fully answer
Hannity's question about when the baby has rights. She would have had
to be even more honest with herself than she was being about Hannity's
stance. Clearly all three were not for infanticide extra utero, while the non-dynamic
duo, while arguing for the rights of the baby in the womb, see nothing
hypocritcal about suspending those same rights for the same baby,
depending on the circumstances of his conception, an utter deception
that both are blind to. What a shameful display of willful ignorance!
Miss Roginsky is on to something profound, unlike the two scalawags in
tandem. Now if only this bit of actual grace would lead to something
ever more sublime, Julie Roginsky's full embrace of the sanctity of
human life ethic, wherever the
person temporarily resides.
Let us pray for all three of these people, who at least were given the
gift of life outside of the womb. Let us pray for them and for ourselves, lest we are tempted to
go down the same road as the Hannitys among us. If we think we
are more perfect, think again. This world is a travail of a thousand
traps and many more burdens that gnaw away at the human being
constantly beseiged with the siren call of the alluring shibboleth ... sometimes it is only a matter of the
company we keep ...