May
27
Animals, Humans, or Something In-Between
“These aren’t people, these are animals, and we’re taking them out of the country at a level and a rate that’s never happened before.” — President Trump, in response to a California sheriff’s frustrations with state “sanctuary” law making it difficult to deal with MS-13
You’ve probably heard about this story already, but allow me to recap….
Several days ago, President Trump referred to MS-13 gang members — who, when found in the U.S. are often here illegally or come in under “Special Immigrant Juvenile” status — as “animals”. Certain journalists and a few elected Democrats (e.g., Rep. Nancy Pelosi), ignoring the context, accused the President of calling all illegal immigrants “animals”. When enough of a stink was made about this obvious misrepresentation, some media printed a retraction/correction.
However, many still castigated Trump for using the “animals” term even for violent MS-13 gang members, as if he were a racist bigot who considered such people inhuman. As per The Federalist,
“CNN commentator Keith Boykin blasted the president for using a “dehumanization tactic” and linked him to “slave traders and slave owners” who justified the oppression of black people for centuries.”
What baloney! I can’t comment on other languages, but in English, calling someone an “animal” can mean various things. It can be positive or neutral, though it usually has some measure of negativity associated, either seriously or in jest. It can merely refer to persistence (like a dog with bone) or aggressiveness or crudeness or lack of self-control or even an especial brutality, showing little-to-no signs of “human decency” or moral conscience. Given the atrocities that the MS-13 gang is known for, it was this last connotation of “animals” that President Trump clearly had in mind. (And it wasn’t the first time.)
To quote Ben Marquis at Conservative Tribune,
“Bear in mind that even by criminal gang member standards, MS-13 is the worst of the worst, evil individuals whose motto is “rape, control, kill,” who enjoy sadistically brutalizing and torturing innocent people to death and prefer to use knives and machetes instead of firearms to do their worst.”
You would think that Trump’s accusers were not familiar with the use of metaphor and hyperbole, or perhaps with MS-13’s reputation. But, of course, they are. They just don’t care. Even if they know better, they can continue their anti-Trump, anti-GOP narrative, knowing that many of the rank-and-file among their readers/listeners will not bother to get more informed or think carefully about something like that. The nasty accusations fit what they’ve already been told and choose to believe, so they accept it. How very sad, and incredibly frustrating for the rest of us. (Though, to be fair, we all probably do this to some degree, which makes it all the worse.)
“You said the other day that these individuals are animals. You’re correct. They are animals in how they kill, how they get these kids and they torture them. No child should ever, ever have to suffer.” — Evelyn Rodriguez, mother of a young girl slain by MS-13 gang members, to President Trump
Pelosi expressed concern for “the dignity and worth of every person”, even for murderous, rapist thugs like MS-13, apparently. I actually agree. But, I also think that these vile gang members are clearly reprobate and deserve the severest of penalties. When they act like animals (in the harshest sense of the word), then calling them such is justified, and I seriously doubt it will hurt their feelings.
Yet, Pelosi and many like her fail to recognize that very human dignity and worth in the most fragile and innocent of all, the unborn human child. (Please forgive the clumsy segue….)
In fact, many pro-abortion advocates still — in defiance of both scientific/medical and philosophical affirmation — deny that the unborn is even “human”. Or, if they concede that, they deny that s/he is a “person”. Either way, they seek to “dehumanize” the unborn, disavowing her/his “inalienable rights” and giving themselves justification for ending that child’s life for merely being inconvenient. And, as we all know, the biggest single promoter of that “service” in the United States is Planned Parenthood, which, under Title X, receives many millions of dollars per year in federal funding.
While recent events have left us a Senate with a majority opposed to defunding Planned Parenthood, the Trump administration is still doing what it can to fulfill its pro-life campaign promises. A little over a week ago, it implemented a new proposal that should put a major crimp in Planned Parenthood’s activities and/or funding. In short, the “Protect Life Rule” will prevent Title X programs from conducting, counseling for, or referring for abortions. According to Operation Rescue’s Troy Newman,
“In 1988, President Reagan tried to create a line of separation between Title X funding and any facility where an abortion is performed or supported. But years of legal battles and liberal administrations meant this rule was never implemented. Today, there are 266 Planned Parenthood abortion facilitates that currently receive Title X funding.
Now, President Trump has made one of the strongest pro-life moves yet by announcing the Protect Life Rule, which would deny about $170 million in taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood every year.”
As a Trump administration official explained to The Weekly Standard,
“The proposal would require a bright line of physical as well as financial separation between Title X programs and any program (or facility) where abortion is performed, supported, or referred for as a method of family planning….
Unlike the Reagan regulation, the proposal will not prohibit counseling for clients about abortion, but neither will it include the current, potentially illegal mandate that projects must counsel and refer for abortion. This proposal does not necessarily defund Planned Parenthood, as long as they’re willing to disentangle taxpayer funds from abortion as a method of family planning, which is required by the Title X law. Any grantees that perform, support, or refer for abortion have a choice – disentangle themselves from abortion or fund their activities with privately raised funds.”
As Newman pointed out,
“[T]his rule as currently written can only remain in force until another president comes along and undoes it. In order to make it permanent, it must be passed as a law by Congress.”
So, while not ideal, it is a step in the right direction, until circumstances allow for an actual defunding of Planned Parenthood and, preferably, any other abortion provider/promoter.
Now, some ardent pro-lifers would say that everyone involved in the abortion industry, especially those who perform the procedures, are just as much “animals” as the MS-13 gang members. And, whereas they may be more “civilized” in other aspects of their lives, in some cases, I would agree. However, I also think that some are just woefully misinformed, misguided, but redeemable. Indeed, there are cases of such people being converted to the pro-life cause.
But, I would rather focus on the need to recognize that “the dignity and worth of every person” can and must include the truly innocent and defenseless unborn children, regardless of their size or stage of development, being carried in their mother’s womb (or, perhaps, that of a surrogate). We must not dehumanize them by defining them outside the human race. For they are fully human and deserve to be treated as such.
