Was Andrea Yates Just Getting Revenge?

I watched the prosecutors' closing arguments on TV, and they made some very powerful points which not one single newscast has ever mentioned. The prosecutor was telling the jury why he believed they should find Andrea Yates guilty of capital murder for killing her five children.

The prosecutor pointed out that the Andrea had been planning this mass murder for months, and had deceived everyone about her plans -- her husband, her husband's mother, her doctors, her kids, and anyone else she knew. It was a long, well-conceived plan that she followed.

The prosecutor then said that we don't know her motive in killing her children, but one possible motive is that she had wanted to get even with her husband for being so poor. If she had simply killed herself, then he would still have the kids, but without her; by killing the kids, she deprives him of the kids.

Did Andrea Yates kill her children to get revenge against her husband, deceiving her husband, her husband's mother, the doctors, and the children as part of an overall strategy, and then later blame it on religion, knowing that feminists the world over would side with her, and find a way to blame her husband? It's as good an explanation as any I've heard, and better than most of them.

This was a very powerful argument, and if I had been on the jury, I would have considered this a possibility. Indeed, it may have been this particular argument that convinced the jury to reach its guilty verdict so quickly -- within three hours. However, I've seen probably dozens of news stories and analyses on TV about this case in the last 48 hours, and not a single one has mentioned this closing argument.

Shock at the verdict

Women's activists have been shocked not only with the verdict, but also the rapidity with which it was delivered.

A major part of the reaction has been to argue that her husband, Russell Yates, should also be found guilty of murder, because he didn't prevent his wife from killing the children.

This whole affair has been very interesting to me, because it's confirmed the worst in feminists that I'd always talked about.

Feminists have been apoplectic about the verdict, and they're using any argument, however flimsy, to blame the murder on Russell.

If Russell had killed five children, these same feminists would never say, "Let's indict Andrea too, since she shouldn't have had another child."

This exposes a double standard -- a hypocritical double standard -- used by women's activists. For these women/feminists, the rule is: if the man is violent, it's the man's fault; if the woman is violent, it's the man's fault. In this case the violence is the murder of five beautiful children, and feminists are still trying to find a way to blame it on a man.

Condoning and Excusing Violence

Even worse, these attempts by women's activists are condoning and excusing violence by women.

This explains a mistake that feminist "theory" makes about men. Feminists have always claimed that men stand together to condone and excuse violence by men against women, even though I've never heard men excuse violence against women in my 58 years.

The reason that feminists make that mistake about men is that they assume that men are like women -- that since women sometimes condone violence, and even mass murder in the case of Andrea Yates, it must be true that men do the same. However, in my experience, the opposite is true: there may be some men somewhere that condone some violence against women, but it's very rare; men just don't condone violence and murder the way feminists do when it's convenient to do so.

One of the reason that so many mothers kill their children is because they get away with it. There are many stories of mothers who kill their children and are let off the hook by just this kind feminist nonsense.

To those of you who are looking to blame Russell for the murder of five children, I say this to you: If some other mother reads your opinion and is inspired to kill her own children and be a little more clever than Andrea was at blaming it on her husband, knowing the women like you will support her, then you would be indirectly responsible for the murder of those children.

It may well be that Andrea thought she could kill her five children as revenge against her husband and get away with it, knowing that feminists the world over would support her, based on the kinds of statements that feminists have made now in support of Andrea.

I'm glad that Andrea Yates was convicted of capital murder. If she stays locked up in jail for the rest of her life, then that's OK with me, but I wouldn't shed a tear for her if she's executed. That woman planned and executed the murder of five beautiful children, and there's no punishment she could get that she wouldn't deserve.

Is Andrea Yates another Medea? Click Here to find out