“Baby killer’s day out from prison to go shopping”

“Baby killer let out to visit mall”

Just two of the many headlines from several pages of The Daily Telegraph’s (DT) diatribe on Friday 26th June 2009 rallying against the supervised shopping trip of one Phillip King, who was imprisoned after he “killed his own baby son in a fit of rage when he punched and kicked Kylie Flick’s stomach after she refused to have an abortion”, the DT reports.

“He didn’t steal a car, he stole a life”, was one expression used by Kylie Flick to express her anguish over the memory of the birth of her stillborn son, whom she Christened Jonathan.

The DT also point out that Ms Flick’s son “never drew breath” – a seemingly redundant piece of information – and that King’s “horrific 2002 crime led to a new law with a maximum 25-year jail term for people for people who kill a foetus…”

This attack by the media you might say is fair game. He did take the life of a defenseless human being after all, and injured several others both physically and emotionally in the process. So why shouldn’t the media have their pound of flesh? Well it’s the inconsistent way that they go about it that irks me. Here are some more of the headlines and comments from the same articles.

“Shopping with evil: Beast Blends into the crowds on day out from jail”

“Sympathy for a devil as a victim lives in fear”

“evil” … “beast” … “devil”! Pretty strong words. Then came what was (for me) the coup de grâce for the death of respectability as far as the DT goes on this little collection of articles:

“…King mixed with mothers pushing babies in prams yesterday at Bass Hill Plaza”

So according to the DT was it the fact that Ms Flick wanted to keep the child that makes King’s act so horrific? Or is it just the fact that Mr King’s actions resulted in the loss of an innocent unborn child … Period! – regardless of Ms Flick’s feelings on the matter? Because if it is the latter, then I don’t know if the editors of the DT are aware or not, but there are “devils” and “beasts” roaming our local shopping centres everyday, mixing it with mothers pushing babies in prams and stuff.

Seriously… they work at places like Planned Parenthood, who offer “health services” to women, one such service being the “removal of an unplanned pregnancy” (psst … that kills the baby by the way!). Look out anyone who is pushing a stroller in the shopping centre around the Newcastle area. There is a Planned Parenthood employee just a few kilometres away at Broadmeadow and they kill little children. No kidding! They even admit it right on their website, and they’re not even locked up! They kill innocent children and then they’re allowed go home to their family, maybe even swing by the shopping centre – unsupervised mind you – to buy some milk on the way; right where other mothers are pushing their babies in prams and stuff. And to paraphrase Ms Flick, these guys are not simply removing cars from driveways, they’re removing living human beings from a uterus and they admit as much right on their website. They are taking the lives of the most defenseless examples of humanity that exist. At least that’s the way I see it without my PC glasses on. And by the way, that is no reflection on Ms Flick. I don’t know what her position is. I am simply pointing out the inconsistent and gratuitous reporting in the DT and in some respects on a larger scale, the inconsistent way we treat human life as a culture. Slaughtered whales and dolphins get more press in our PC culture than slaughtered unborn children for goodness sake!

What I find sadly ironic is that if Ms Flick had agreed with her boyfriend and sought avenues for an abortion, the result would have been exactly the same. Baby Jonathan would have been killed, having “never drawn breath” - to use the same redundant statement as the DT. A life would still have been stolen, regardless of the reason or who was doing the “stealing”. So why is it that Planned Parenthood and organisations like it escape the demonization of the DT while Phillip King (dolphin hunters et al not far removed) is considered such a demon for committing exactly the same crime?

Simply, it falls within the bounds of political correctness to say that an assault on a pregnant woman is evil. But it’s not PC (or for that matter, convenient) to say that a woman who participates in the assault on their unborn baby occasioning death has committed a serious irreversible evil herself.

The Daily Telegraph articles can be found online here:

Beast blends into the crowds on day out from jail
Baby killer’s day out from prison to go shopping
Sympathy for the Devil

Other related Aristophrenium articles: