Patrick Archbold is co-founder of Creative Minority Report, a Catholic website that puts a refreshing spin on the intersection of religion, culture, and politics. When not writing, Patrick is director of information technology at a large international logistics company in New York.
Cognitive dissonance is defined as the discomfort one feels when holding to two mutually exclusive thoughts. It is natural to feel such discomfort since one of the thoughts must obviously be false.
However, when one holds two mutually exclusive thoughts by remaining untroubled and comfortably numb even in the face of such conflict, we call that the media.
Generally, the media holds its own hands to its ears yelling "La! La! La! La! La!" so that they do not have to face or cover any story that reveals the true horrors of elective abortion. So much so that when elective abortions make the horror manifest, such as in the Gosnell case, the media can barely muster a mention even in the face of relentless criticism.
Yet, when a case such as that of the Cleveland kidnapping occurs and includes forced abortions, the media can somehow face the truth about abortion. Why is that?
This is textbook cognitive DoubleThink.
Abortion is abortion and the result is an assault on the baby (and the mother) that results in the death of the baby. The media somehow find no issue with referring to the fetus as a baby, somehow have no issue with calling it murder, simply because it was not something the mother willed. As if will or desire can change the nature of the horror.
Now some might contend that the reason the media can cover these abortions and not others is because they are really covering the assault of the mother. Not so. Those women in Cleveland were assaulted in numerous horrific ways, but the forced abortions naturally rise to the top of the list of horrors, even for the media. This is because the media understand the brutality of the act and the murderous consequences.
Yet, at the same time they cover this, there are multiple stories of women and children being brutalized and murdered by an abortionist on trial and the media resolutely refuses to cover it. What is the difference.
The short answer is there is no difference. A better question might be, what is the difference in the dissonant mind of the media?
The women in Cleveland did not desire the death of their babies, so the babies deaths are horror.
The women in Philadelphia did desire the death of their babies, so the same brutality and death is acceptable, even laudable.
The idea that the horror, brutality, and death of babies is wholly dependent on who desires the death is absurd in the extreme.
The nature of the act is the same no matter who wants it.
Cognitive dissonance is actually a good sign that the conscience is troubled. Collectively, the media have no conscience and are free and comfortable in their DoubleThink.
But the truth remains, a murdered baby is a murdered baby.