Whenever someone dies, regardless of their age, there is a ripple effect that has an influence on countless other lives, and across several generations. Mourning the loss of a loved one, even if he or she was lost shortly after birth, is the realization of having to cope with an unfillable void that a lost loved one has left behind.
Being pro-life is not only the recognition of the sanctity of the gift of living, but also the respect of the mourning process once we are separated from a loved one at death. Mourning is a solemn moment, one that requires respect for the living from those who are outside of the ripple effect of that loss.
By proclaiming in no uncertain terms that Thursday’s mass murder in Oregon should fall victim to politicization, President Barack Obama figuratively danced on the un-dug graves of the deceased.
Although his use of the word “politicize” set the tone for how he was not going to allow this crisis to go to waste, it was his emotionless wording when describing what had happened that said more than his words. In fact, his speech inflections didn’t change until he switched gears from talking about the tragedy, to talking about this new “opportunity” to talk about gun ownership restrictions.
Is it important for a leader to practice emotional restraint when discussing a tragedy of this magnitude for the sake of projecting a sense of control during a period of instability? Definitely. However, there was no feeling of sympathy, reassurance, or control in his voice for the survivors and the grieving families and friends. Instead, that act of evil was an opportunity to try to advance a political cause.
His lack of emotion was reminiscent of Hillary Rodham-Clinton near the debris of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Everyone who was interviewed by the media on that day was physically and emotionally shaken, except for then-Senator Rodham-Clinton. With no emotion in her voice, she used unusually-long pauses while she seemed to search for words to string together in an attempt to describe emotions that automatically express themselves in other people.
To Mrs. Rodham-Clinton, spontaneity is a public relations obstacle that is best avoided out of the danger of saying, “what difference, at this point does it make” when referring to the deaths of four Americans.
As for funerals, or as described by Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor Catherine Baker-Knoll when she crashed a military funeral in 2005, “functions,” any large group of people is an opportunity to push a political agenda.
When the funerals for Paul Wellstone and Rosa Parks were hijacked in the name of advancing politically-driven messages, the pain that family members and friends were enduring as a result of the deaths of those two individuals were deliberately forgotten in the name of advancing a political agenda in front of two large, captive audiences.
The politicization of Thursday’s murders, the perversion of funerals for political reasons, and Hillary’s outburst at the Benghazi hearings, are the products of people who not only believe that the end justifies the means, but those people also share a belief that the point when life begins is arbitrary. If a politically-driven group believes that the beginning of a person’s life is open to interpretation, then the end of a life – and the pain of grieving loved ones – are fertile grounds for exploitation.
Thursday’s mass murder in Oregon is yet another example of how evil will exist as long as free will exists. And it unfortunately became an example of how some people will use their free will to advance a political and/or personal agenda at the expense of murdered people, at the expense of those who mourn their losses.