Acknowledging all victims of violence against children

“Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?”
–President Obama, Newtown vigil

In the wake of the tragedy in Newton, CT, President Obama reached out to survivors, the families of victims, and the entire grief-stricken nation in a televised address at the Sandy Hook vigil last Sunday. The president aptly summarized the acuteness of the tragedy and, at the same time, assessed the need for solutions that we as a nation are called upon to explore in order to prevent similar acts of violence from being perpetuated. While many may disagree about what the solution may be, no one denies the gravity of the tragedy committed at Sandy Hook Elementary this week.

The affection and sympathy that the nation has expressed for the families and survivors of the Newtown tragedy are encouraging. And I believe there may have been many viewers of the president’s speech who couldn’t help but hear him speaking – unknowingly – to the victims of abortion violence as they simultaneously addressed grieving Newtown families.

ObamaNo single law, no set of laws, can eliminate every senseless act of violence in our society, but that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely we can do better than this. If there is even one step we can take to save another child … from the grief that has visited [shooting victims] … then surely we have an obligation to try. What choice do we have? … Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage? That the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

The president acknowledged that the causes of such violence are “complex,” but he was adamant that complexity does not justify tolerating tragedy. President Obama has made a decision – conscious or otherwise – to allow these noble sentiments of his to apply to a certain group of his citizens (victims of shootings), but not to others (victims of abortion). One must wonder if, with such a one-sided view, it is really possible to discover a solution to this kind of violence. Some may ask how a president who  acknowledges the preciousness only of certain young lives and not that of others can make positive strides towards ending violence against children.

The president is not, in the truest sense, an advocate for our youngest Americans. But we cannot let that fact be an excuse for inaction. We must soldier on in defense of all young lives despite the reality that we will most likely be challenged by a pro-abortion president every step of the way.

As we approach the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade next month, we acknowledge the 55 million American citizens who have become victims of abortion since 1973, whose lives were not protected by elected officials. We acknowledge the mothers and families of these victims who have all been affected by their violent deaths in some way. And we affirm the words of the president of the United States when he says that we cannot allow the perpetuation of violence against innocent children to be the price of our freedom.

  • Julia

    “What choice do we have?”
    Oh no, he’s being anti-choice. :)

  • Whenever someone questions whether the cost we are “paying” our for freedoms is
    too high, they are talking around their real question: “What tragedy
    can the government turn to their advantage in order to limit the
    peoples’ freedoms?”

    Freedoms and rights are not to be bartered. They are absolute. The price of
    our freedom is self sacrifice. To sacrifice the freedom itself is not
    the solution to an individual event, nor to a string of similar events.
    The problem is in the underlying condition that causes a person to turn
    violent: politics, social problems, illness, defect, economic and
    financial struggles, jealousy, rage, fear, etc, etc.

    Until we can detect and deter when someone will turn violent and decide to
    act on it, we must prepare for the next event. Disarming law abiding,
    good people is not a solution.

    Improved technology and armed faculty and/or security personnel would be
    effective. Surveillance cameras monitored by multiple faculty and
    security locations, RFID chips in badges monitoring student’s movement,
    perimeter security with limited number of entrances, and so forth, would
    be effective against a variety of threats, not just firearms. We have
    panic buttons/pulls for fire alarms. Why not have similar systems for
    security response? They can be used to summon on-campus security. They
    could also be set to notify law enforcement so a COP can be dispatched
    to check on the situation.

    I think we’ve gotten ahead of the issue by reacting to the Sandy Hook
    shooting much too quickly. Emotional responses are seldom effective.
    We need data, analysis, a range of options, and above all, an
    administration to LEAD instead of giving speeches. Impotence is the
    hallmark of Obama. Failure to execute logical, appropriate measures in
    this case will result in even more deaths. That is not acceptable.

    • Amy

      Well said! I especially agree with not disarming responsible citizens (two of my siblings own firearms, and they are very responsible with them), and I like your idea about the security alarm that works like a fire alarm does. Assuming people didn’t abuse them like they do the fire alarms at my school, they could help prevent some violence at schools. Thank you for clear articulation—God bless! :)

      • Anonymous

        Just keep in mind that this article has nothing to do with gun rights. It’s an acknowledgment that violence affects MANY children, and that the president is not trying to do anything about the violence that is being perpetrated against an entire class of children (the unborn). He IS addressing the violence against the school children/shooting victims (how you think he should address it is an entirely different subject for an entirely different article). The point is that all victims of violence deserve attention, and these comments are somewhat detracting from the subject.

        • Amy

          I know! Don’t worry :)
          I absolutely agree that Obama needs to recognize all violence against children, not just those who have been born, but I was just agreeing with Doug about his opinion on gun control.

  • Richard

    Imagine debating a pro-abort type person, and while in the midst of impeaching you they cite facts and statistics from THEBLAZE.COM. They proclaim “you are wrong because THEBLAZE.COM says this…”. How would that make you feel as a pro-life person? Would you feel a sense of validation that your position has merit? When the opposition uses your side for reference, you absolutely would.

    Getting to the truth is the most important part of any issue. And if both sides cite the same source, I think we’re in agreement the source is true.

    A contributor to this site,

    Calvin Freiburger


    while supporting his pro-life position on December 8, 2012, cited the Guttmacher Institute. Here is their most recent video:

    Here is Mr. Freiburger’s quote:

    “Your premise that “women” per se is who we’re talking about is yet another lie, when the truth is that we’re merely talking about one subset of women. Guttmacher says a little less than a quarter of pregnancies end in abortion, and women are often *more* pro-life than men. That means the clear majority of women ARE smart, strong, and just enough to see through the lie and do the right thing. The subset who consider abortion consists of those who either have been lied to by your side about what abortion does and what their baby is, are in circumstances where they’re not thinking clearly, or are so callous that they don’t care that they’re murdering their offspring”.

    Mr. Freiburger has, therefore, decidedly given credibility to the statistics supplied by the Guttmacher Institute, consequently giving it respectability in the eyes of the pro-life movement.

    The next time you are told the elimination of Planned Parenthood is a just act, consider this video.

    Mr. Freiburger gives you his blessing.


  • matermax

    Beautifully articulated. We need more writers who can gracefully stick to topic without becoming “the angry prophet”. This article invites discussion, while at the same time, is grounded in a truth for the dignity of human life that is unshakably the base foundation for humanity. The gun issue surrounding the tragedy does not play into this article and therefore, brings us back to the love of life and our part in its daily unfolding.