The Virginia Tech Massacre is currently at the top of the news. And I think with good cause. We should learn what motivated him to commit the murders, but in a sense I am glad we are exploring his motivation postmortem. If he did one good thing killing himself might have been it. Imagine the additional suffering caused by liberal groups victimizing Cho? Would the ACLU represent him? Would the Democrats blame his mental state on President Bush? They may still. Cho was enraged, angered and wanted to get back at those who had more money than him. Wouldn’t that make him a poster-boy for socialism?
His motivation wasn’t the sole purpose of my post. I also wanted to comment on how we daily accept many people who are motivated to kill children. This photo is from an article about women that are enraged and angered at limitations on their rights to kill children. Look at these women in this photo; some are enraged with smirks, but clearly they are all enraged and angered. Women are usually known as the caretakers and the nurturers, but what could make them demand a right to massacre children on a scale that dwarfs Virginia Tech?
And does marching around with catchy slogans make it OK to kill children?
- Keep Abortion Legal
- Keep Abortion Safe and Legal
- Vote for Choice
- Protect Women’s Health
- It’s your choice not theirs
I’d like to assume that the “theirs” in the last line is not referring to the unborn child, but that would be presumptuous since the whole group is demanding their right to happiness over the child’s right to life.
Could Cho have stood next to this group with signs demanding his right to kill college age children? Many of the children he killed were helplessly locked in a room when he committed his murders. Sounds eerily like an abortion. What would his sign say? Is there anything it could have said that would have justified his acts? Do these signs and slogans really justify abortion?
If we seek to understand what motivates these killers we may someday understand what motivated Cho and others like him.
4/20/07 -The paper version of the Herald had a little fact box that listed 1,000,000 abortions performed with only 2200 being the kind that this ruling limits. That’s 2200 lives saved and 997,800 more that need saving. I do commend the Herald for front paging these facts and describing the procedure “…involves partially removing a fetus intact from a woman’s uterus, then crushing or cutting its skull to complete the abortion.” Why so many refer to this as “procedure” is beyond me to fathom. Look also at Does a Pre-Birth Baby feel Pain?