Wednesday, April 04, 2018 by Jayson Veley
Last week, an AP American History teacher by the name of Julianne Benzel appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight to describe a scenario in which she was put on paid leave for daring to question the student gun control walkout, even though she never explicitly gave her opinion on it or condemned the protesters that did choose to participate.
During a separate interview with The Daily Wire, Benzel explained that she asked her students to think about whether or not they believe it is a good idea for the school to be allowing students to walk out of class in support of a political cause. Considering the fact that the school apparently has no problem with students participating in an anti-gun protest, does that mean that the school would also have to back a student-led pro-life demonstration? Benzel encouraged her students to go home and discuss the issue with their parents.
On the morning of the walkout, Benzel was informed just thirty minutes before arriving at school that she had been placed on administrative leave because a few of her students had apparently complained about how she had questioned the school’s decision to support the anti-gun student walkout.
However, in her interview with Tucker Carlson, Benzel mentioned that one of her “very brave” students was planning on finding out whether or not the school will allow pro-life students to participate in a walkout in the same way that the school allowed students to walk out in support of stricter gun control laws. Thus far, it appears as though the pro-life walkout is still only in its planning phases, but when it does eventually happen, the school had better be okay with it if they want to avoid coming across as a bunch of partisan, left-wing school administrators.
Frankly, injecting the debate over abortion into the debate over gun control and the Second Amendment reveals the sheer hypocrisy of the political left. Why is it that liberals want to make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain a firearm as a means of decreasing senseless violence and murder, yet are perfectly okay with the idea of innocent, defenseless, unborn babies being crushed into pieces and vacuumed out of the womb? Are lives that come to an end as a result of gun violence somehow more important or valuable than lives that come to an end before birth?
Just weeks following the tragedy that happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut where 20 young children and six adults were killed, Barack Obama addressed the country and used the classic “if we just save one life” argument to advance his gun control agenda: “Because while there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely, no piece of legislation that will prevent every tragedy, every act of evil, if there’s even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation to try.” (Related: Gun control is incredibly popular among people who live under tyranny and oppression… don’t they get it?)
First, more gun laws do not save lives – for proof, all one has to do is look at New York, Chicago or Los Angeles. Second, Barack Obama doesn’t seem to care about saving “even one life” when he openly supports Planned Parenthood and what he and other leftists call a “woman’s right to choose.” The people today who are marching in the streets for more gun control are just as hypocritical – they claim that they want to save lives, yet they fail to take into account all of the innocent lives that are lost due to their support of pro-choice policies and legislation.