Over the weekend,t he nation became engulfed in a massive debate about a gorilla at the Cincinnati zoo who was shot and killed after a baby boy accidentally tumbled into his sanctuary.
The gorilla was put down after a child climbed into his habitat in Ohio when parents went into a restricted, unauthorized area. The gorilla tussled with the little boy until officials finally decided the boy’s life was a risk and his safety and well-being necessitated putting the gorilla down to be able to rescue him.
Liberals, celebrities and abortion advocates on Twitter were outraged:
Oh the poor gorilla,he did nothing wrong,if you watch the video,so sad..as a mother I would’ve jumped in too.
— Lisa Vanderpump (@LisaVanderpump) May 30, 2016
If I ever let my toddler fall into a gorilla enclosure please leave the gorilla alone and just shoot me. — John Fugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) May 29, 2016
If your kid purposefully falls into a gorilla cage, you should just tell your kid goodbye. That’s called Darwinism.
— Joseph Kahn (@JosephKahn) May 30, 2016
Butt Matt Walsh, writing at the Blaze, puts the people outraged about the gorilla’s death and saving the little boy into perspective. Walsh, with his usually biting nature to his writing, drives the point home:
SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you like this pro-life article, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!
I call it a happy ending because the young boy lived, which is a result that would have seemed very much in question to anyone who happened to witness the situation in real time. Of course I’m not happy the ape died – I didn’t wake up on Saturday morning hoping that a gorilla in Cincinnati would meet his untimely demise – but when a human’s life is threatened by an animal, the only thing I care about is saving the human. The moment the gorilla grabs the boy, my first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, one hundredth, one millionth, etc., priorities are to save the boy. If the boy is saved, then I am happy. That’s all.
But, predictably, my priorities — and more importantly, the priorities of the zoo workers and police officers on the scene — are not shared by everyone. We are living in the days of neo-paganism, where legions of depraved souls seem only capable of mustering compassion for wild beasts. As for human beings, they feel only contempt and indifference.
Others have been more blunt. If you make the mistake of reading the reactions on Twitter or in the comments section under articles about this incident, you’ll find that a good number of folks think this should have been settled by “survival of the fittest.” Let the preschooler and the quarter ton beast work it out between them. If that means a child is ripped apart, so be it.
And now it is necessary to point out that today, while the media obsesses over an ape and thousands of people cry that they will ”miss” a zoo animal they didn’t even know existed on Friday, there will be another 125,000 abortions. On a daily basis, a group of people larger than the population of Provo, Utah are systematically exterminated. None of them are given a name, and there will be no candlelight vigils for any of these victims.
But outrage over the death of a jungle beast is far more mainstream. And this was a beast directly threatening the life of a child. One can only imagine how most Americans would react if a demented zookeeper decided to kill a baby gorilla by dismembering it and crushing its skull. I expect angry mobs would burn down the zookeeper’s house and stone him to death in the street. Then they’d build a golden icon of the unfortunate creature and every year, on the date of its death, they’d make pilgrimages to the holy shrine. In fact, they’re pretty much already doing that with Harambe, and it’s only been two days.
This incongruent concern for animals but not unborn children was recently seen in New Zealand.
A 24 year old Danish student tourist, Rasmus Zetner, was fined $10,000 by Judge Brian Callaghan in the Christchurch Court for killing a Whio duck, an endangered specis in South Westland.Under the Wildlife Act 1953, the whio duck is an absolutely protected species.
Its killing is a serious crime, on conviction the offender may be fined up to $100,000, or imprisoned for up to two years. This crime was considered important news and was given extensive coverage by all the media in New Zealand.
Yet New Zeland allows the killing of an unborn baby.
“Why is a whio duck given absolute legal protection for its right to life, while the unborn child’s right to life is given no legal protection?” pro-life advocate Ken Orr of New Zealand Right to Life asked.
And that same question could be asked in the United State. Why are those who are outraged over the death of a gorilla to save the life of a baby boy not more concerned about the child’s welfare and why are they not outraged by the deaths of unborn children?