Maybe the media would have more of a problem with infanticide if those practicing it dressed differently?

If you’ve been paying attention at all to the American news media over the past day or so, you’re aware that a 1984 yearbook photograph has been discovered showing the Democratic governor of Virginia, Ralph Northam — then a student in medical school — either in blackface or dressed in the robe and hood of the Ku Klux Klan.  (It’s not obvious which of the two people in the photo is the future governor, although the caption says that one of them is and although he has admitted that fact.)  As a result, Mr. Northam finds himself under mounting political pressure, with dwindling support:

“Pressure intensifies on Northam to resign as key allies pull their support”

“Ralph Northam is done, whether he knows it or not”

A couple of weeks ago, Florida’s Secretary of State Michael Ertel, a Republican, resigned when a photo surfaced showing him in drag and wearing blackface:

“Official resigns over blackface photo controversy”

Permit me to go on record as saying that, thus far, although I expect that Governor Northam probably will resign fairly soon, I see no compelling reason, other than the obvious political ones, for him to do so.  Was his little stunt foolish?  Yes.  Tasteless?  Very arguably so.  Immature?  Yes.  Embarrassing?  Definitely.  Malicious?  Probably not.  At least, I’m aware of no evidence to suggest that it was.  Racist?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Is there any substantial evidence in his policies — in his history as a physician or as a Virginia state senator, lieutenant governor, and governor — that Mr. Northam harbors significant racial prejudice?  If there is, I haven’t seen it.

The case of Florida’s Mr. Ertel is somewhat worse, I think.  Not only was his photograph taken just fourteen years ago, in 2005, when he was serving as a county supervisor for Seminole County, but he was expressly impersonating a generic victim of Hurricane Katrina.  That was a monumentally stupid and remarkably insensitive thing to do, and it shows — at the very minimum — striking lack of judgment in a fairly important local elected official.  Does it constitute adequate grounds for terminating a possibly useful career in public service?  (I know nothing about the man other than this story.)  I think that can be debated.

I disapprove of our modern zeal to destroy careers and people over the occasional tasteless joke or juvenile prank, often from decades back.  Flawed people can change and contribute.  Moses killed an Egyptian but nonetheless went on to distinguished public service, and, while St. Paul endorsed the murder of St. Stephen, his later career as an apostle, writer of scripture, and Christian martyr has tended to outweigh that in the judgment of most people.  Thomas Becket was a loyal consigliere to King Henry II before Henry unwisely appointed him Archbishop of Canterbury, in which office Becket defended the rights of the Church against the greedy king and ultimately became England’s great saint and martyr.  Robert Byrd held the highest office in his local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan — “Exalted Cyclops”  (I’m not making that up) — before being elected to the Senate of West Virginia, and then the United States House of Representatives, and, finally, serving as a Democratic member of the United States Senate (including stints as Senate Minority Leader and Senate Majority Leader) for more than fifty-one years.  Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before he became a prominent Republican leader.

Repentance is possible.

Now, I am not a fan of Mr. Northam.  His successful campaign for the Virginia governorship seemed cynical and manipulative at the time, and, in view of this new episode, seems strikingly hypocritical, too:

“Flashback: Northam Campaign Insinuates Gillespie, GOP Are Racist”

But what frankly baffles me is how much larger this controversy has grown than another very recent one involving him that, in my judgment, is incomparably worse:

“Virginia Governor Defends Letting Infants Die”

“What Northam’s Walk Back Really Means”

“Northam on Late-Term-Abortion Remarks: ‘I Don’t Have Any Regrets’”

But, after all, why should Dr. Northam have any “regrets” about his stance on late-term abortions?  Plainly, at least in certain quarters, while juvenile stunts that touch on race are unforgiveable, infanticide is perfectly okay:

“The Indefensible Morality of Andrew Cuomo: On abortion, Cuomo casts aside his supposed Catholic convictions with greater ease than he takes them up.”

“Catholic Leaders Call for Cuomo to Be Excommunicated over Abortion Bill”

“On the Separation of Church and State”

“The Infanticide Craze: Laws permitting abortion up to the point of birth follow naturally from the country’s expansive abortion regime.”

“Abortion Maximalists Claim the Moral Low Ground”

Should Ralph Northam be the governor of Virginia?  No, he shouldn’t.  But forcing him to resign over a stupid pose in a thirty-five year-old photograph rather than because of his position on late-term abortion, which seems pretty much indistinguishable from an endorsement of infanticide, strikes me as uncomfortably like finally convicting Al Capone . . . of tax evasion.

***

And thinking about Andrew Cuomo, Ralph Northam, and the murder of babies inescapably reminds me of a film that — quite unsurprisingly — garnered very little attention when it appeared.  But it tells a story that Americans need to know:

Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer