Jill Stanek is doing the unmasking:
This tweet by Jodi Jacobson, editor-in-chief of the pro-abortion website RH Reality Check, is a great prospect for psychoanalysis:
Can someone tell me Y the phrase “including two infants” is important when talking abt 227 people lost on board air flight from Kuala Lumpur
— Jodi Jacobson (@jljacobson) March 8, 2014
...
The answer is because babies are, well, babies, the tiniest, most innocent members of our species. We instinctively seek to protect them most of all.
Along the same lines, this is why starving children are deemed more tragic than starving adults, or why we are more sickened to learn about child victims of sex trafficking than adult victims, or children strapped with suicide bombs. Grown-ups are supposed to protect children, the most vulnerable among us.
Which brings me back to Jacobson, who was obviously aggravated that the deaths of babies would warrant special attention over other deaths.
It makes sense that Jacobson would be hypersensitive about dying babies, since as of 2012 she made $179,293 annually to promote murdering those who are preborn.
It makes sense that Jacobson’s psyche would even be repelled by babies. She has turned off the instinctively compassionate human switch to protect them and turned on an abnormal switch to kill them.
I decided to tweet a reply, inspired by Ms. Stanek's piece:
@jljacobson Perhaps because most humans find the deaths of babies to be particularly grievous and don't make a living off of their deaths.
— Brutally Honest (@Ricksteroni) March 12, 2014
H/T to Mark Shea who adds:
Most of us call sorrow for the suffering of innocent children “normal”. But professional pro-aborts are radically abnormal.
