Why Legalized Abortion Continues 33 Years Later

(Christian Gallery News Service, 1/31/06) Abortion remains legal 33 years after the pro life movement began because nobody--not you, not me, nobody--is treating unborn babies like they are fully human.   We not only fail to treat unborn babies like human beings, we are actually feeding off their dead aborted bodies, and in addition, are using their bodies to make the glue that holds this society together. This is no joke. If you don't believe it, read this article and see the horrible truth with your own eyes. Proof of such a ghastly indictment can only be delivered one item of evidence at a time.  Item one is this. See for yourself the disconnect between the things we say about aborted babies and the way we react to their death and you will see that none of us treat unborn babies like they are truly human beings.  Click the image below and compare the way ordinary people react when they are confronted by the imminent death of an innocent adult to the pro-life movement's current response to the imminent death of innocent babies.

  (The short video may take several seconds to load.  Turn your sound on.  When the video is loaded, it will start automatically.)

LION ATTACK. If a lion or a pack of dogs had bitten off your toes and was then moving to devour your foot with every intention of eating all of you, can you deny that your top priority would be stopping their meal? Furthermore, can you deny that you would expect others who say they care for you, if they saw you being devoured, to at least have the decency to act like they shared your top priority? But as evidence that Christian pro lifers have been conditioned to treat unborn babies as less than human, notice how you are now responding to the idea that decency would require you to respond to legalized abortion as those people in the video actually responded to the man being eaten by lions.  Do you hear words going through your mind that explain why it is unreasonable to expect people to react to legalized abortion the way the people in the video reacted to imminent unjust death?  Then you have been conditioned to treat unborn babies as less than human.Massive social conditioning has been implemented to train Christians to resist responding to legalized abortion as the people in the video responded to the man being eaten by lions.  Every pro-life leader from President George W. Bush on down, even when they claim to be defending unborn babies, has conditioned us well.  For example, when confronted with the spectacle of babies being legally butchered in this nation, President Bush said, "I believe our nation should set a goal: that unborn children should be welcomed in life and protected in law. This is the ideal: a generous society that values every life. I know there are many steps on this road. A democracy is ruled by consensus, not by edict. Laws are changed as minds are persuaded," the President declared from his bully pulpit in the calm, reasonable tones of a person who, when he looks in the direction of legalized abortion, sees no one in danger of imminent unjust death.And the pro-life community said Amen.The spectacle of large numbers of people acting in concert is a powerful conditioning tool for bystanders.  The American pro life movement has been such a power.  Two generations of American Christian pro-lifers have been conditioned to believe the protection of little unborn babies, as the President said, is "an ideal."  Christians have also been conditioned to believe that the Lord Jesus Christ, too, thinks that protecting little babies is merely "an ideal" and not an immediate, mandatory duty for every one who claims to follow Him.To see the disconnect created between people and reality by this conditioning, ask yourself this question: if the President of the USA and the American people he represented happened to be caught in public and were actually forced to watch people being eaten by lions as you saw in the video, would he mouth his words about consensus and persuasion, his words about ideal?  Of course not.  He would respond as he responded to 9/11 or he would not be heard above the screams of the American people.

But the President, like virtually every other Christian in this nation has been conditioned to treat unborn babies, not as real human beings, but as "ideal" human beings.  Whereas the President has no confusion about using the entire apparatus of earthly power to protect real human beings born in this nation, he does not hesitate to treat unborn babies with his "ideal" and not as real at all.  In short, to the President and the rest of the pro-life leaders of this nation, unborn babies are an abstraction.

As we watch the horrible morph shown here, we have been conditioned to refuse to respond appropriately to the truth the image reveals.  That is because we have been conditioned to believe we should tolerate what we see there.  In other words, every time we stand by and allow an unborn person to be killed, it proves we believe that person's death should be tolerated.

Why?  Because we have been conditioned by the very people who claim to want to protect unborn babies to believe they are not real people but to believe and act like they are abstractions.

For Christians to take such a position speaks volumes about the God they claim to worship.  If Christians tolerate the legalized slaughter of unborn babies, it says unequivocally that they believe God tolerates the slaughter of unborn babies.  Not only that but treating people conceived by God as abstractions treats God Himself as an abstraction as well.

This is a different message than one brought by Jesus Christ and the Apostles who claimed to have the mind of Christ.  They tell us about a God who is no abstration and about people He creates who are not abstractions either.  The Apostle Paul tells us that God has a plan for every person He creates.  Acts 17:26, "...he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27 God did this so that men would reach out to him and find him..."

Paul tells us that God chooses the time when every person should be born and the place where every person should live.  Now to imply that God is willing to tolerate the killing of innocent unborn people merely because their mother prefers them dead implies that God is willing to grant some people the right to decide who lives and who dies based, not on what those people do or have done, but on what other people think about the quality of their existence. Romans 13 makes clear that God grants no person or group of people on earth--no king, no President, no Fuhrher, no Judge, no Majority--the right to kill other people except in direct conformity with God's instructions.  Government agents are "ministers of God"  who are authorized to kill people when those people violate rules defined, not by people, but by God Himself. Every time we send a policeman to investigate the homicide of a born person, we prove that God does not intend to tolerate homicide period.  Romans 13 tells us that in the face of homicide God authorized the entire apparatus of human government, up to and including lethal force, to ensure the homicide was not a violation of God's law protecting the lives of human beings. To treat unborn babies differently speaks volumes about God's attitude toward them.  It says that God treats those people, not as real in the sense you and I are real; it says God treats them, as the President of the United States of America said, as an "ideal;" that God wants to wait until a "consensus" has been reached; that God is pleased with using the present means of "persuasion" to move people to enter into that consensus. Read what follows and you will see what kind of people such pernicious and noxious conditioning turns loose on earth.

TURNING THE BODIES OF UNBORN BABIES INTO OUR DAILY BREAD

Cannibals of Christ

Before you reject out of hand that anybody is feeding off the bodies of dead babies--is literally engaged in cannibalism in the USA today--you need to realize that it is possible to feed off the dead bodies of human beings who make up the species homo sapiens without actually having to put a human finger or an arm in your mouth and start chewing it.  It would be factually correct, for instance, to say one was feeding off a human being if a person sold the body parts of another human being for cash and then used the money to buy, say, a Big Mac, which was then eaten.  While this action would not be cannibalism in the first dictionary definition of the word, logic would demand the action be seen to be a sophisticated lower level definition of cannibalism because the Big Mac eater in this example can be seen to be literally feeding off the body parts of another human being in the same way a truck is "cannibalized" by using its parts to make another vehicle run.  Or to say the same thing another way, without the sale of the human body parts, the money to obtain the yummy Big Mac would not have been available, and the Big Mac eater could well starve.Not only do the leaders of the pro-life movement refuse to respond to the death of unborn babies as people ordinarily respond to the unjust slaughter of human beings, they actually make their living from the legalized slaughter of the very people they claim to want to protect.  But this is not true only of the leaders of the pro-life movement, it is true of every person who lives in the United States of American today.

The Lawlessness Today

What follows presents irrefutable evidence proving that we the people--all of us, Christian pro lifers as well as every other inhabitant of this nation--are actually making our money because of the stability (the law and order) provided for us by the federal government of the USA.  The price we the people pay for that stability, for that prosperity, is primarily the dead bodies of thousands of unborn babies weekly in this nation.  Secondarily we the people tolerate a whole range of greivous sins--the Bible calls them crimes--like homosexuality and the entire range of sexual sins that have been effectively legalized in this nation.  Even though most of us are not actually directly engaged in the crimes against God like abortion and homosexuality and adultery and fornication, we have a vicarious and contributory liability for those crimes because we tolerate their existence by refusing to do what is required to arrest them.  In other words, we are aiding and abetting those crimes simply by tolerating their existence.  In the case of legalized abortion, that means we are feeding off the bodies of the dead babies by receiving our daily wages rather than doing what is required to abolish it.

Instead of defending the unborn, the leaders and followers in the pro-life movement have literally been feeding

off the bodies of the babies they claim to defend in exactly the same way the abortion industry feeds off them.

Don't believe it?  Then follow the money trail.  Any moron can see where it leads.

Following the Money Trail

While the flow chart above might appear to be cluttered, it is fairly easy to undestand the flow of money described there.  Arrows 1 and 2 point out the cash flow from the American people to the federal government and back again.  That cash flow is the very engine that runs this society.  We the people send billions of dollars to the federal government (arrow 1) and the federal government returns that money to we the people (arrow 2) in the form of, well, everything we get from the federal government (the list is long and getting longer each day so that it is beyond the scope of this article to enumerate all the ways the federal government provides for the American people).

It is arrow 3 and arrow 4 that most people either do not or will not actually get in focus today.  This refusal to understand the reality symbolized by arrows 3 and 4 is enormously significant because it is that refusal to acknowledge the horrible facts symbolized by arrows 3 and 4 that goes a long way to explaining the strange phenomenon of a nation predominantly composed of Christians, most of whom claim to be opposed to legalized abortion, where that nation tolerates the existence of legalized abortion for 33 years and counting.

ARROW 3--We the People Give Money To the Federal Government and the federal government then gives some of that money to the Abortion Industry

In its 2002-2003 Annual Report, Planned Parenthood reported committing 227,375 abortions of babies in 2002. PP reported total income of $766.6 million, of which $288.2 million was from Clinic Operation; $254.4 million was from taxpayer dollars; and $228.1 million was from donations.  Planned Parenthood is only the tip of a huge and deadly spear of "family planning" organizations across this nation that reap, depending on how you measure it, well over one billion dollars a year in blood money from we the people via the federal government.

The fact that our tax dollars have been funding, in one way or another, millions of abortions over the last thirty odd years is no secret.  That deadly fact, like our conditioned political quietism, has become part of the "consensus" that President George W. Bush says he depends on to govern this nation.   No one's conscience is pricked by this ongoing phenomenon of Christian dollars paying for activities Christians define as sin--at least not pricked enough to do something with the power to stop it.

The main reason the consciences of Christians are not pricked is because Christians have managed to ignore the fact that we are personally feeding on the bodies of the aborted babies in exactly the same way the abortion industry feeds on them.  Arrow 4 points to this reality so clearly that anyone who actually looks must see what has until now been hidden.

ARROW 4--The Abortion Clinics Indirectly Give Money To Everybody in America

To see how the abortion industry provides you with money, you must understand the meaning of paradox.  Some things can be true even if everything you believed up until now assumed they were false: that is paradox.

Paradoxically, it is our willingness to tolerate legalized abortion and our refusal to act like human beings are literally being torn limb from limb in abortion clinics that provides the present basis for peace and prosperity in this nation.  That is the point being made by Arrow 4: the abortion industry provides a financial return to we the people and thereby buys our continuing tolerance of legalized abortion.

If you undestand this then you can see that legalized abortion is the glue that holds this society together.  This is what the "Encyclopedia of Animal Ethics" tells us about glue: "People have used animals for glue since prehistoric times. Hunter-gatherers fixed arrow heads and feathers onto their arrow shafts with the gluey substance they extracted from animal tendons and sinews. Turning animals into glue developed into a big industry since the 17th century. Most animal glue today is made from hide and bone, but also from horns, hooves and connective tissue, collected from meat packing and tanning plants."

How has our mutual decision to tolerate the slaughter of unborn babies created the glue that holds this nation together today? The answer is obvious but no one wants to see it. Has the time come when the Holy Spirit will give us the grace to see that which every fiber of the flesh wants to ignore?

LEGALIZED ABORTION COULD LEAD THIS NATION TO WAR IN MORE THAN NAME ONLY

We tolerate legalized abortion because the power required to abolish it could easily tear this nation apart, could literally destroy this nation from within.  By avoiding this destruction, we use the bodies of dead babies to provide each and every one of us with economic and social security.  Paradoxically, it is the dead bodies given to us by the abortion industry that provides the basis for the prosperity--the cash flow--each and every one of us now enjoy.

Analyze this nation for yourself and you will see that either of two groups of people have the power to destroy this nation from within.  Should either those opposed to legalized abortion or those in favor of legalized abortion begin to act like their way of life was threatened, either of the two groups have enough corporate strength to put this society in danger of economic meltdown, if not outright Civil War.

To see the point, in 2005, a million people came to Washington D.C. to march to show their determination to defend the right to what they called "safe and legal" abortion.  Those million people represented many millions more who stayed at home but shared the fervor of the people crying out in favor of legalized abortion. 

On the other side, tens of millions of Christians say they are opposed to legalized abortion.  If even a significant minority of people actually refused to tolerate legalized abortion, their resistance could have the power to bring economic meltdown, if not war itself, to this entire society.

How would this happen?  A serious minority of people, organized in determined resistance to the abortion decrees of the federal government, would force the federal government to draconian extremes that would demonstrate the federal government is a totalitarian beast, a baby butchering regime ruthless in maintaining even the most heinous sins.  In other words, the federal government's action to force people to comply with legalized abortion could create social tumult sufficient to jeapordize the money economy upon which each and every citizen in this nation depends.
 
The pro-life movement's refusal to create resistance that has the power to threaten this nation's economy is exactly how the pro-life movement feeds off the bodies of the dead babies.  Our ongoing tolerance of their slaughter means we continue to receive the prosperity provided by the federal government, the federal government that literally creates the slaughter we say we are opposed to.
 

OUR MUTUAL DEPENDENCE ON MONEY

Obviously the pro-life movement has never seen the things being exposed in this article.  It is not easy to see that the pro life movement is feeding off the bodies of dead babies or the pro-life movement would not have gone 33 years without seeing it.  Part of what makes it difficult to see how we are all feeding off the dead babies is our inadaquate understanding of the role that money plays in this nation today.  If we can get that in focus, all the rest will become clear.

Following is a short overview of money as described in the Encyclopædia Britannica, "In preindustrial societies, goods and services were exchanged directly, without money, in a process called barter...Money is a commodity accepted by general consent as a medium of economic exchange...At bottom money is, then, a social convention, but a convention of uncommon strength that people will abide by even under extreme provocation...But it is not indestructible. When great increases occur in the quantity of these pieces of paper—as they have during and after wars—money may be seen to be, after all, no more than pieces of paper. If the social arrangement that sustains money as a medium of exchange breaks down, people will then seek substitutes—like the cigarettes and cognac that for a time served as the medium of exchange in Germany after World War II," the article concluded.

It might seem to people who have not thought much about the history of our species that money is self-evidently the central tool of individual survival and always has been.  But, as Encyclopedia Britannica points out, this is not true.  Until the industrial revolution, most people did not require money to survive.  From the beginning of time until sometime around the 18th century, the vast majority of people had been either subsistence farmers or hunters and gatherers who lived off the produce of the land.  If they had economic interactions with other people, those interactions were usually based on barter of goods and services, and the transfer of money was not required, or even essential to their survival.

Today all that has changed: we live in a society where the availability of money is absolutely essential to individual survival.  Remove money from this society and try to use "cognac and cigarettes" as they did in post WW II Germany and we will watch a social meltdown of unprecedented historic proportions, a meltdown that the chaos after Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf Coast in 2005 only vaguely foreshadows.

MONEY AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

It is impossible to overstate the role the federal government plays in our access to money. It literally prints every piece of money available in this nation.  Not only does it print it; the federal government is the principle one who doles money out.  For example, the federal government doles hundreds of billions of dollars out in direct payment of social programs and government contracts.  Those programs and contracts provide money directly to well over 100 million people each year in this nation.  And the government indirectly doles the money that ends up in the hands of people by providing private businesses with laws and legal protection mechanisms that allow those private businesses to employ every worker who does not directly work for the federal government.  By providing either direct or indirect payments of money, the federal government is the source of virtually all money available to American citizens today. 

Now what would happen to people's access to money if people literally began to refuse to tolerate legalized abortion?  The answer is obvious: they would lose access to money. 

At the level of the individual, it is easy to prove this. Think about the people who have decided to literally refuse to tolerate legalized abortion in the past three decades.  They are all either in prison or dead.  In either case, they no longer have access to money.

This result occurred because real refusal to tolerate legalized abortion requires some action be taken that literally jeapordizes one's ability to continue to abide with the federal government of the United States.  To fail to jeapordize one's relationship with the federal government means there is some kind of real acquiescience to legalized abortion. 

To date, there has been no significant corporate refusal to tolerate legalized abortion because the example of the individuals crushed by the federal government have literally frightened the corporate response into those channels approved by the federal government. The problem with those government approved channels is they do nothing to presently respond to the slaughter of unborn babies in an appropriate manner, and they offer the prospect of future defense of unborn babies only to self-deceived political Pollyannas hired to pander to self-deceived Pollyannas. It is this corporate acquiescence, this toleration of legalized abortion, by the pro-life movement that is required if the cash flow to the individual members of the pro-life movement is to continue. And it is through receiving this blood money that the pro-life movement feeds off the bodies of the aborted babies in exactly the same way the abortion industry feeds off them.

WHY DO WE CHOOSE TO FEED ON THE DEAD BABIES?

We don't choose to do it, that's why. People have the ability to act without conscious thought explaining why they do what they do: we simply do it. In other words, like most activities that comprise the most grievous sins we simply do it and think about it as little as possible. When sin becomes perceived to be a matter of survival like heroin to a heroin addict, it is irrelevant to think about anything except that which feeds the addiction. Right now, we the people of the USA are slaves to an addiction of truly historic proportions.

And we are doing everything in our power to avoid seeing the things spotlighted in this article because the truth about our present day to day activities is simply too horrible to allow into consciousness.

Who can blame people who've never had it so good for being willing to ignore they are eating dead baby meat when the only alternative to that diet is to risk becoming dead meat themselves?

And it is not paranoia to be afraid of the federal government. Deep in our hearts the American people know that the federal government of the United States of America is presently prepared to literally destroy--in the most humane way possible of course--any American citizen who seriously considers refusing to tolerate legalized abortion.

It's easy to understand why the federal government will ruthlessly crush any movement that actually begins to abolish legalized abortion: legalized abortion is the federal government's baby.  Anything that actually threatens the federal government's ability to conduct legalized abortion requires the federal government to finally destroy that ability or else stand by and watch its baby--legalized abortion--be destroyed.

The federal government has shown it's willingness to see babies destroyed by the millions, so what makes the legalized abortion baby worth protecting at all costs?

To the federal government, and the autocrats who presently control it, legalized abortion is not just any baby, legalized abortion is the baby spawned by the federal government that is going to be used to literally destroy people's ability to believe in the God described in all those God books that, from the point of view of the present nobility who controls the federal government, have held people in thrall from time immemorial. Without legalized abortion the true federal agenda that requires the destruction of people's ability to believe in the God defined in the Holy Books would be impossible to implement.

While it is not surprising that people who do not believe in the God of the Holy Books would bow to the federal government committed to such an ungodly agenda, it is surprising that Christians would do so. Since the understanding of what has happened to Christians requires a detailed explanation, before we focus exclusively on Christians, let's make sure we see clearly how our tolerance of legalized abortion is required to avoid social meltdown capable of destroying our access to money. A clear grasp of this reality is necessary before each and every one of us will see why we all are collaborating with the federal government's plan to destroy people's ability to believe in the God of the Holy Books.

So let's review the facts: Any person can easily see the impossiblity of avoiding social meltdown should money be removed from circulation today. If it can be proven that legalized abortion has the power to destroy the peace and prosperity of this society--in other words, our access to money--then our willingness to tolerate legalized abortion can be seen to be a private security matter with absolutely nothing to do with the Will of God or the needs of other human beings outside the perimeter of our private family compound.

To see more clearly why our willingness to tolerate legalized abortion makes us feed off the bodies of the dead babies, examine the following.

LEGALIZED ABORTION COULD SHUTDOWN--OR EVEN DESTROY--THIS SOCIETY BECAUSE THE DOOMSDAY DEVICE WAS PUT IN PLACE BY THE FOUNDERS OF THE USA

From the beginning the United States of America was created with a Doomsday Device in place. The Declaration of Independence described the duty of the people who live on this land:    
A secession movement is the Doomsday Device created and left in place for future generations by the Founders of the government of the USA.

A Doomsday Device is a weapon so powerful that it can destroy an entire country, or, in its broadest application, an entire world.  Reread the words above and you will see that the founders of the USA literally planted a bomb that could be primed by any generation of Americans following them.  The founders of this nation created it with a doomsday device in place because they understood the deadly power of a central government that believed it could not be controlled by any power on earth.  The founders knew that a doomsday device was the only thing that had a fighting chance to force such a central government to its senses.   The founders of the USA understood the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction long before nuclear weapons were thinkable.

As long as people pretend they are not feeding off the bodies of dead, sacrificed babies, they will never consider arming the doomsday device.  But that day is past in this nation.  Too many babies have been consumed by too many people.  Too many people have heard the accusations being made in this article.  The defiled consciences of hundreds of millions of Americans are beginning to engage in the horribly perverted actions taken in response to a defiled conscience.  The train of events is rolling downhill now. Either we the people will realize there are some things we must be willing to fight and die for other than our own personal lives or our private family compounds, or the doomsday device will explode and destroy the United States of America.

Time is definitely not on the pro-life movement's side.  As will be seen, the only real question remaining is how much longer will the pro-life movement go on feeding off the bodies of dead aborted babies?

TIME HAS PROVEN THE pro-life MOVEMENT IS SELF-SERVING RATHER THAN BABY-SERVING OR GOD- SERVING

Time is the critical factor in distinguishing between a movement that is actually attempting to stop something and a movement that pretends to be trying to stop something but is, in fact, profiting from the perpetuation of the thing it claims to be trying to stop.  To say the same thing another way, after a certain point in time, failure to accomplish a goal while continuing to follow the failed strategy is evidence that the movement has become an end in itself rather than a means to an end.  Time is the critical factor because time allows the opportunity for all available tactics to be tried that will stop the thing the movement is designed to stop.  If, after a period of time, the tactics applied by the movement have not stopped it, and no new strategy is adopted, then irrefutable evidence exists to prove that the movement has become an end in itself with no intention whatsoever of stopping the thing the movement was designed to stop.

An article Paul deParrie wrote about the pro life movement's response to partial birth abortion helps demonstrate the importance of time in correctly analyzing a social movement.

Paul deParrie wrote, "Back in 1993, I was the editor-in-chief for Life Advocate magazine. One of our reporters had been secreted a copy of a medical paper by Martin Haskell which he presented at the annual meeting of the National Abortion Federation (NAF) in September of 1992. In it was described, in very clinical terms, Haskell’s newly-developed Dilation and Extraction or D&X abortion procedure – now popularly called “partial-birth abortion.”

deParrie continued, " It was a block-buster article. We were the only news organ that we were aware of with the information...[and] we eventually chose to run the story in the February 1993 issue of the Life Advocate. The dreaded results were not long in coming. National Right to Life (NRTL) contacted us and wanted to use our story and our four-panel artist’s rendering of the procedure – the one you have all, no doubt, seen...

Then it was off to the races. NRTL and its state affiliates, along with many other “pro-life” organizations, began hyping the story and telling their mailing lists that they (for a price, of course) could help stop this gruesome procedure – “partial-birth abortion,” they dubbed it."

"Ah, yes! It was the fundraisers’ dream – for both sides of the war. The “pro-life” forces crafted utterly useless laws banning the procedure and pled for money to promote and defend in court these purposeless statutes. 'We can save lives and curb this cruel practice,' they bleated. However, none of the laws would stop a single abortion because there were already several other procedures – some more truly cruel and torturous than D&X – available to be used by the child killers...In addition, the shrill shriek of the pro-aborts was heard throughout the land. 'This is just the beginning of losing our abortion rights,' they cried disingenuously while raking in the cash...Both sides knew precisely what they were doing. 'Pro-life' leaders knew that the ban wouldn’t stop any abortions. The opposition leaders knew that banning a single procedure would not end 'abortion rights.' The money, though, was good for both," Paul deParrie concluded.

Yes, the money is "good" for both.  Without the money, the abortion industry would have to close its doors; without the money, the pro-life movement would too.  And without the money the people who man both the abortion industry and the pro-life industry would not be able to buy Big Macs that are purchased directly with the proceeds of the sale of body parts taken from the dead babies who make up the Body of Christ in the USA today.

For over 33 years now the pro-life movement has relied on tactics like the one designed to "end" partial birth abortion because literally everything else had been tried and failed to abolish legalized abortion.  The only other tactics that remained were tactics that literally could cost grown people their fortunes and their very lives.

Should people begin to respond to legalized abortion as if human beings were actually being butchered alive, that response could threaten the very survival of this nation.

Today this possibility might presently seem preposterous given the abject refusal of the pro-life movement to do anything even remotely illegal, and its refusal to tolerate the few who have tried to disentagle themselves from the chains of legalized abortion.

And that is the point of this article.  The pro-life movement's refusal to act like innocent people are being legally butchered in this nation means there is presently no force in this nation capable of arresting the slaughter of the least of God's children. 

MEET THE LEADERS OF THE pro-life MOVEMENT

To be certain there is no question about who we are discussing, let's review the facts about the pro-life movement.  While the pro-life movement has never been a monolithic whole (that is, until recently--but more about that later) by far the largest group of pro-lifers (call it Camp One) identify the people below as their leaders. 

CAMP ONE: Defend unborn babies by trusting politicians and "legal" actions

 


James Dobson
Focus on the Family


Pat Robertson
Television Evangelist


Roman Catholic Pope


Jerry Falwell
Media Personality


Chuck Colson
Political Consultant


James Kennedy
Television Evangelist

Camp One is composed of the vast majority of pro-life Christians leaders in the USA and those who follow them.  Camp One is the tens of millions of Christians who say they are opposed to legalized abortion but confine their opposition to the ordinary political procedures they use to alter tax laws or other ordinary political decisions.

Examine their actions over the last 33 years and you will see that Camp One pro-life leaders teach people to be calm in their response to legalized abortion.  They teach their followers to trust the ordinary political system in this nation to arrest legalized abortion.  Camp One leaders James Dobson and Pat Robertson and James Kennedy and Chuck Colson and Jerry Falwell and their followers were never arrested for their pro-life activities, nor do they presently have any intention of doing so.  While some of them granted that non-violent civil disobedience might be employed to deter people from committing abortion, they never used that power themselves, nor advocated that their followers do so.  While Camp One pro-life movement leaders talk about activism, they have never deviated from what amounts to a neo-quietistic strategy of political incrementalism to overturn Roe v. Wade.

For an example of what I mean by the neo-quietist example and teaching, examine how pro-life leaders reacted this year to the 33rd Anniversary of Roe.

 

The picture shows the United States Senate Caucus Room in the Capitol Building in Washington, DC.  With its forty foot ceiling and its marble walls, it is both a symbol of American power and a venue of historic importance.  In this room legendary events such as the Watergate Hearings were held.  It was also where prominant pro-life leaders gathered on the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the day abortion was legalized in this nation.

The Christian Newswire told us about the meeting, "The 12th annual National Memorial for the Pre-born and their mothers and fathers, the premier indoor pro-life event on Capitol Hill, drew an overflow crowd today in the prestigious US Senate Russell Building Caucus Room...The tone of this year's Memorial Service was upbeat. Co-founder of the event Rev. Rob Schenck of the National Clergy Council along with other speakers emphasized the shifting of the social and political tide in favor of Life. Steven Paroutka of the National Pro-Life Action Center said the change signals the beginning of the end of Roe v. Wade, sparking a thunderous standing ovation...More than 50 clergy representing numerous denominations lead in prayers and the reading of scripture. A 25-voice Baptist youth choir sang, while Father Frank Pavone, president of the National Clergy Council, ended his sermon by chanting in Latin a prayer he had sung to brain injury victim Terri Schiavo during her last hours of life..." the report concluded.

In harmony with the theme of imminent victory that sparked "a thunderous standing ovation" in the Senate Caucus Room, Operation Rescue's Troy Newman had this to say about 33 years of the pro-life movement in this nation, "Today, those who believe that abortion takes the life of an innocent baby have effectively shed the false media image of the past and have become more politically influential. The hard work is paying off. The pro-life movement has increasingly been winning tactical skirmishes and is now poised for decisive victory. We can see the day ahead when the protections of legal personhood will once again be restored to the pre-born, and that makes us more determined than ever to work unwaveringly toward our goal."

So that's the way pro-life leaders acted after 33 years of what they contend is legalized child slaughter.

THE pro-life MOVEMENT HAS MERGED INTO A MONOLITHIC WHOLE, TRUSTING ONE STRATEGY

If you paid attention to the reports I cited above about the activities in 2006 around the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, you saw evidence of a new thing in the pro-life movement.  Where once the pro-life movment was fragmented into various camps, each of which represented a different strategy to arrest legalized abortion, today the pro-life movement is united, speaking with one voice and attempting to implement one strategy. 

Troy Newman's statement quoted above demonstrates this point.  Troy Newman speaks today for "Operation Rescue."  Whereas a few years ago "Operation Rescue" was synonymous with illegal, non-violent disobedience actions taken to prevent people access to abortion "services,"  today, as Troy Newman demonstrates, "Operation Rescue" has merged into the main pro-life groups that intend to become "politically influential" through legal political means so they can win the "decisive victory...when the protections of legal personhood will once again be restored to the preborn..."

To see how this happened, it is necessary to review the divisions that once existed in the pro-life movement.

As we saw earlier, by far the largest component of the pro-life movement (what we called Camp One) has always advocated nothing more than a reliance on the usual legal methods of change provided within the political system of this nation.

CAMP TWO:  Use illegal means if in so doing babies can be protected. Camp Two is divided into two subgroups which are:

CAMP TWO A:  Use only non violent civil disobedience

During the mid eighties and early nineties, non-violent civil disobedience was used to deter people from killing their babies.  Thousands of pro-lifers participated and went to jail in the process.  With the passage of FACE (Federal Access to Clinic Entrances Act) which provided lengthy prison sentences for obstructing access to abortion mills, the non-violent disobedience phase of the pro-life ceased.

 


Randall Terry
Founder "Operation Rescue"


Joseph Scheidler
Early Blockade Advocate


Thousands of People Were Arrested For Blocking Clinics

Flip Benham--one of the current Operation Rescue Claimants

Frank Pavone--Catholic Priests for Life

Other lesser known figures like Randall Terry and Joseph Scheidler and their followers--followers who numbered in the thousands during the early 1990's--were arrested for non-violently blocking access to abortion clinics.   These activities ended in the mid-1990's after the passage of FACE (Federal Acess to Clinic Entrances Act).  Many, if not most of those people now participate in the activities of the Constitution Party, which relies on electing a President of the United States of America who will issue an Executive Order nullifying the train of Supreme Court decisions legalizing abortion.

CAMP TWO B: Use force--lethal or non-lethal--to protect babies being slaughtered

 


Paul Hill
Executed 9/3/2003 for Assassinating Abortionists


James Kopp
Life For Assassinating Abortionist


Erik Rudolph
Life For Abortion Bombing


Clayton Waagner
Life For Anthrax Terrorism


Pictured Above Are People Who Were Incarcerated For Crimes Against Abortion Clinics Or Abortionists But Are Not In Prison Today
From left to right: Joe Grace, Dennis Malvasi, Michael Bray, Marjorie Reed, John Broekhoft, Joshua Graff

Among those willing to engage in illegal activities to deter abortion was a small subgroup of people who became the assassins and the bombers and the arsonists who killed and torched and maimed people and buildings in an attempt to deter abortion.  This is a sub group of Camp Two because, like the others in Camp Two, they were willing to engage in illegal activities to deter those prone to commit abortion, but, unlike the others in Camp Two, they were willing to use force, even lethal force, to deter people from having access to abortion "services."  Because their actions were defined as reprehensible by the "non-violent disobedience" wing of Camp Two, Camp Two B occupied a group apart; that is, until recently.

Today all those divisions have effectively disappeared.  Today the pro-life movment is a virtual monolithic whole with no discernible group willing to engage in illegal activities to impede or deter people from committing abortion.  Today literally every portion of the pro-life movement is implementing exactly the same strategy to abolish legalized abortion.

THE "TRUST THE PRESIDENT" STRATEGY

Today the entire pro-life movement, if it has a strategy at all, is implementing another "trust the President" strategy that relies on President George W. Bush to appoint people to the Supreme Court who will overturn Roe v. Wade.   (It is appropriate to say "another" trust the President strategy because the current strategy is exactly same as the original strategy advocated by Camp One of the pro-life movement during the 1980's when Ronald Reagan was President and it was taken as a central article of pro-life faith that Ronald Reagan would appoint justices to the Supreme Court who would overturn Roe v. Wade.)  From the mid 1980's to today, the pro-life movement has come full circle.  Today all the pro-life camps--Camps One and Camp Two and the survivors of Sub-group Camp Two--have committed themselves to implement the same "Trust the President" strategy.

In addition to the most obvious problem with this strategy (it has been tried before and failed) there is a less obvious but infinitely more disastrous consequence inherent in this strategy.  As history reveals to anyone with eyes to see, the "Trust the President" strategy has never done anything except grease the slippery slope upon which unborn babies of the USA have been sliding to their legalized doom.  In other words, when pro-lifers have trusted the trust the President strategy in the past and it failed, it opened the door to at least another decade of continuing legalized abortion and cost the lives of millions of legally butchered babies in the United States of America.

But the pro-life movement is not only relying on the "Trust the President" strategy to arrest legalized abortion, it is already proclaiming victory!

Troy Newman, one of the alledged leaders of "Operation Rescue" wrote entitled "What a Difference a Decade Can Make" on Jan 20, 2006, just a few days before the 33rd year of legalized abortion began.  Referring to the failure to arrest legalized abortion, Newman said, "Although discouraged, a core of pro-lifers never gave up. We improved our rhetoric and methodology. Hard work and grassroots activism began to pay off. The numbers of pro-life pregnancy centers skyrocketed while new activist tactics yielded dividends in closed mills and fewer abortionists. Slowly, conservatives began to infiltrate seats of power...Looking back, the 90’s decade may have handed us some setbacks, but it was also the decade where the seeds of victory were sown by the sacrifices of those involved in the Rescue movement. The 90’s recorded a dramatic decrease in the rate of abortions as well as a huge popular shift toward the pro-life position. Rebuilding and retooling our movement, pro-lifers emerged from the 90’s as clear winners in the 2000 Presidential election. We were becoming powerful “players” in the body politic that political candidates ignored at their risk...."

Newman continued, "Then last year, a major shift in the nation’s highest court began as Judge John Roberts, who once argued on behalf of Operation Rescue, was easily confirmed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Later, when President Bush nominated the unproven Harriet Miers, right-to-lifers flexed their biceps once again and vociferously forced her withdrawal...Within days President Bush nominated Judge Samuel Alito to the resounding cheer of his conservative base. This month, pro-life Justice Samuel Alito will be added to the Supreme Court, joining the Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas Team — another vote closer to and end to the national calamity of decriminalized abortion on demand..."

There is little doubt that Troy Newman has expressed the deepest desires of the pro-life leaders of this nation.  Nobody doubts that virtually all of them want legalized abortion to end.  

Given their obvious sincerity, how could such ostensibly intelligent people fail to see the obvious problems in the Trust the President strategy?  Before we try to answer that question, we will enumerate the problems in the Trust the President strategy.

THE OBVIOUS PROBLEMS WITH THE TRUST THE PRESIDENT STRATEGY

Thirty three years of wishful thinking have programmed pro-lifers to read victory in every shadow or motion visible on the horizon.  And thirty three years of failure should have taught them to know better.  The fact that they haven't learned proves they are no longer reasoning or communicating in good faith, but are people determined to spend the rest of their lives deluding themselves rather than admit that they have invested themselves in a strategy with no hope of success.

Read the last paragraph quoted above from Troy Newman and you will see that even according to his own arithmatic, if both George W. Bush's appointees to the Supreme Court, Roberts and Alito, vote to make abortion illegal, there will still be a 5-4 majority supporting the continuation of legalized abortion in this nation.

But what makes Newman's analysis most strange is his clearly stated assumption that, once seated on the Supreme Court, both Roberts and Alito can be trusted to vote against legalized abortion.  History shows us that appointees made by Republican Presidents since legalized abortion began--think Souter and O'Connor--have mostly voted to perpetuate legalized abortion.  To expect that to change is an exercise in wishful thinking with no foundation in history. 

But there are some even more obvious defects in the "Trust the President" strategy, defects that the entire pro-life movement are ignoring.

For instance:

PRESIDENT BUSH COULD HAVE DESTROYED LEGALIZED ABORTION THE FIRST DAY HE BECAME PRESIDENT

 

George W. Bush, if he actually cared about the lives of unborn babies like he cares about his own life and the lives of his children, could have arrested legalized abortion by defying the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in the way Andrew Jackson defied the ORDERS of the Supreme Court. President Jackson implicitly allowed Georgia to ignore the ORDERS of the Supreme Court by refusing to allow the Supreme Court ORDERS to be enforced. Even if President Jackson never uttered the famous quote, "John Marshall [the Supreme Court Chief Justice] has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" Georgia nevertheless acted like he had said it because Georgia knew the President would never enforce the Supreme Court decision. 

Other Presidents in the history of this nation have been willing to risk major Constitution crises.  George W. Bush could have done the same.  His own words would have justified such a radical action.

George W. Bush said when he signed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban of 2203, "This right to life cannot be granted or denied by government, because it does not come from government, it comes from the Creator of life."

If President George W. Bush believed what he said about God, all he had to do to prove it was issue an Executive Order telling the State governments that the federal government would not enforce the Supreme Court's decisions that legalized abortion. Every State in the union that wanted to abolish legalized abortion could have immediately shut the doors of every abortion location in that State.

But George W. Bush did not issue that Executive Order. Instead he mouthed words that justifed his inaction in defense of the unborn babies by saying,''I don't think the culture has changed to the extent that the AMERICAN PEOPLE or the Congress would totally ban abortions,''

In that statement George W. Bush demonstrates the sophistry of the consummate liar. He pretends that Congress or the American People must agree with the actions of a President before a President has the power to act in defense of those he claims in numerous times and places deserve to be defended.

All the President of the United States has to do is tell the States that he will not enforce the ORDERS of the Supreme Court of the United States of America and there would be some States that would almost immediately shut down legalized abortion and begin to prosecute anyone in that State who commits abortion. The fact is it is not the "American people" or "the Congress" that once outlawed abortion in every State in these presently United States of America: it was the States themselves. It was the States that would "totally ban abortions." And some, at least, of those States are prepared to outlaw abortion the minute they understand they do not have to go to war with the federal government to do it.

If George W. Bush actually believed that the Word of God required him to defend unborn babies like they were the Body of Christ itself, then he could have exercised the executive power he possesses, exercised it in exactly the way Abraham Lincoln exercised executive power in issuing the Emancipation Proclamation that immediately overturned the Supreme Court ORDERS that legalized slavery in the States of the United States. And that is not the only precedent of a President unilaterally overruling the ORDERS of the Supreme Court.

The precedents remain showing that at least two Presidents have given States permission to ignore the Supreme Court ORDERS and the States acted on that permission.

George W. Bush could have done what Abraham Lincoln did, what Andrew Jackson did, the day he took office nearly seven years ago and he would have been responsible for staunching the rivers of blood flowing from the body of the Lord Jesus Christ as thousands of the least of His brothers and sisters are legally butchered each day in this nation. But he did not. In fact he never even hinted that such an action was a remote possibility. He never even bothered to send up a trial balloon to see what the American people's response would be.

A question should leap out at us: if all the President had to do to arrest legalized abortion is issue an Executive Order, why has the pro-life movment not been working to force him to exercise that power?  In the answer to that question, we will see what has been the first priority of the pro-life movement for the last 33 years.  The evidence will demonstrate that the actions required to abolish legalized abortion could literally threaten the peace and prosperity of everyone in this nation. To avoid fundamental instability, the pro-life movement has acquiesced in the slaughter of unborn babies.

THE END IS COMING

This article is evidence that God does not intend to rely on the means the pro-life movement has used up to the present to persuade the American people to reach a "consensus."   This article is evidence that God is raising up another means of persuasion, a deadly means.  Regardless of what you think about the unborn babies and regardless of what you think about God, you will see that the God Paul talked about has ways to punish people who refuse to let His people be born when and where God chooses. 

 

 Since the blindness, the selective disregard, to the actual humanity of unborn babies is the foundational material fact upon which the peace and prosperity of the society called the United States of America is currently erected and maintained, God intends to destroy that peace and prosperity unless this nation repents and stops killing His children. 

LEGALIZED ABORTION IS A DEADLY BUSINESS, NOT ONLY TO UNBORN BABIES, BUT TO THIS NATION

It does not take much imagination to see what would happen if people actually began to react to legalized abortion as if real human beings were being butchered.  A few individuals have already demonstrated the kind of deadly actions that would begin to occur in this nation.

Paul Hill is Exhibit One.  If you look closely at the Reverend Paul Hill, you will see a person who literally embodies the logical consequences that begin to occur to people who decide to act like babies are being butchered.  Since Paul Hill believed unborn babies were being butchered and turned into glue to hold this nation together, he abandoned any and every personal and corporate consideration and narrowed his entire mental energy to answering one question: what could he do today to stop babies from being butchered?  The picture below shows Paul Hill in action.

 

"Now it's time to defend the unborn in the same way we should defend slaves about to be murdered." Paul Hill yelled to the crowd as he was led from the jail immediately after killing an abortionist and his bodyguard by shooting them numerous times with a twelve guage shotgun loaded with double ought buckshot.

Paul Hill did not want his attack on abortionists to be an isolated event but he wanted to set an example that would be followed by so many people that abortionists and the abortion industry would be terrorized into disappearing from the United  States of America.  Paul Hill made this known on many occasions after he was put on death row.

 

"There's no question that an example is the best teacher.  And there's no question that I hoped others would act similar to the way I acted."  Paul Hill, shown shortly before he was executed, explaining why he killed the abortionist. 

Paul Hill makes it easy to see the deadly influence that legalized abortion can have on the life of an individual and those that individual decides to hold accountable for legalized abortion.  In light of his example it should be easy to see how deadly things get when people begin to act like they believe babies are in imminent danger of unjust death every time an abortion occurs in this nation.

And the pro-life movement saw the danger posed by the example of Paul Hill.  The pro-life movement responded to the actions of Paul Hill and the other vigilantes like him by totally censuring their actions.  Flip Benham, one of the endless string of leaders of Operation Rescue, embodied the near monolithic consensus within the pro-life community to reject the example of Paul Hill when Benham offered to pull the switch for the lethal injection of poison that killed Paul Hill in 2003 in Florida's Death Chamber.

While Paul Hill's example was rejected, nobody in the nation could deny the importance of his example.  Newsweek magazine deployed two of their writers to write a book about the vigilantes operating within the pro-life movement.  They reached the following conclusion about Paul Hill's example, "Hill's crime provided the coup de grace to anti-abortion activism—though the issue itself remained politically potent. Operation Rescue was perceived as little more than a violence-prone cult. America's tolerance for clinic blockades and other antiabortion civil disobedience abruptly ended." "Wrath of Angels: The American Abortion War," by James Risen and Judy L. Thomas, 1998. 

The conclusion of the Newsweek writers was about as wrong as could be. They explained that the end of "anti-abortion activism" was a result of "the end of America's tolerance for clinic blockades and other antiabortion civil disobedience."  To those secular Newsweek writers, "America's tolerance" had sustained "anti-abortion activism."

Preposterous.  "America's tolerance" had nothing to do with "anti-abortion activism."  Anyone who opens their eyes and looks will see that what sustained "anti-abortion activism" was the actions of individual American Christian pro-lifers who were willing to try to respond to what was happening in the abortion clinics with something approaching a reaction that fit the event. Where everyone knows that justice demands the punishment fit the crime, justice also demands that the reaction to injustice fit the injustice.  Before Paul Hill, "anti-abortion activism" had literally been willing to engage in illegal actions if those actions could deter people from butchering their babies.  Before Paul Hill, a crescendo of actions had been taken by "anti-abortion activism," actions that were designed to show that, even if no one else understood it, anti-abortion activists knew for a fact that little babies were being butchered inside abortion clinics.  But with the advent of Paul Hill's self-conscious and forthright advocacy of vigilante homicide against the abortion industry, coupled with the ever growing determination of the federal government to deal harshly with terrorists of any and all denominations, "anti-abortion activism" began to look seriously for another strategy to believe in.  To say the same thing another way, what put an end to "anti-abortion activism" was the realization within the pro-life movement that acting like little babies were actually being butchered in abortion clinics might not only get abortionists and other employees of the abortion industry killed but might also put "pro-life activists" either in prison for life or in the grave like Paul Hill.  "American tolerance" had nothing to do with ending "anti-abortion activism."

Even though a few men tried to follow Paul Hill's example (think Jim Kopp, Eric Rudolph, Clay Waagner, John Salvi) it has now become clear that the example of Paul Hill, instead of raising up a vigilante force capable of destroying legalized abortion, actually resulted in proving the total inability to stop legalized abortion of the strategy embodied by Paul Hill.  Today, in the post 9/11 USA, the vigilante spirt personified by Paul Hill has gone so far underground that it has totally disappeared from the pro-life movement in this nation.

It is the awareness on the part of all the American people of the serious threat to the social stability of this nation should people begin to respond to legalized abortion as if real people were being savagely butchered so their bodies could be used as food and glue that causes virtually every person in this nation, including pro-lifers, to do what is necessary to sustain the abortion industry, all protests to the contrary notwithstanding.

PAUL HILL'S STRATEGY IS NOT THE ONLY "DEADLY" STRATEGY AVAILABLE TO THE pro-life MOVEMENT

The pro-life movement's rejection of Paul Hill does not prove the pro-life movement is feeding off the bodies of the babies they are ostensibly trying to defend.  The word "unreasonable" could well be defined in terms of actions whose outcome can only be the destruction of the actor with no measureable positive benefits.  When faced with the full story of the example of Paul Hill, even the most committed advocates of "justifiable homicide" of "direct action" of "armed deterrance" began to shrink back from Paul Hill's example.  The few who followed him--Jim Kopp, Eric Rudolph, Clay Waagner, John Salvi--are either dead now or in prison for life.  Even Muslim suicide bombers can be seen to instill fear in their enemies.  If Paul Hill's example instilled fear in his enemies, it demonstrably can be proven to have instilled more fear into the pro-life movement.  In time there was no one in the pro-life movement to follow in his footsteps.  If Paul Hill's example was the only deadly strategy available to the pro-life movement, then there would be no basis for accusing pro-life Christians of feeding off the bodies of the babies they claimed to want to protect.

But Paul Hill's example is not the only strategy  that the pro-life movement has rejected.  There was another strategy designed to prove to the world that unborn babies were being legally butchered in this nation, a strategy that depended not on assassination and terrorism but depended upon following the clearly defined, God-sanctioned instructions the founding fathers of the United States gave to be used when the central government had become an instrument of death rather than an instrument of life.  Over the past few years, this strategy has been clearly presented to the prolife movement.

Succinctly stated, the strategy required the Christian pro-life community being methodically organized into a minority prepared to either reestablish God's law in this nation or destroy the nation in the process.

While this generation has been conditioned to gasp in shock at such a strategy, history clearly reveals that the founding fathers of this nation designed a strategy to be used in moments of grave danger, in times when the central government of this land had committed itself to deadly and murderous actions that required correction.  That strategy is no secret, nor is it hard to understand.  In fact it is so easy to understand that it has been used on two separate occasions in this nation by ordinary people, many of whom could neither read or write but who could understand the strategy well enough to play critical roles in its implementation. 

The founding fathers defined the strategy for those determined to escape from being enslaved by an evil federal government in Federalist Paper #28.  To understand the significance of the words written in Federalist Paper #28 it is necessary to grasp the role the Federalist Papers played in the formative stage of this nation.  The Federalist Papers provided the questions and the points of discussion that were required to convince the American people through their Representatives to ratify the Constitution that was to become the framework for the federal government of the United States of America.  A question that had to be clearly answered before anyone would seriously consider surrendering authority to a federal government was this: what happens if the federal government becomes a tyrant like king George of England?   Shelby Foote, the historian who narrated much of the PBS documentary Ken Burns made on The Civil War stated, "If the founders had thought there was no way to get out of the union, they would never have ratified the Constitution..." Foote's implication is clear: None of the founding fathers was so dense as to think swapping slavery to a king and Parliament for slavery to a federal government was worth fighting and dying in a revolutionary war.  How could such slavery be avoided?  Federalist Paper #28 was designed to answer that question.

This is the answer given: "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state...The obstacles to usurpation and the facilities of resistance increase with the increased extent of the state, provided the citizens understand their rights and are disposed to defend them...[I]n a confederacy the people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress. How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which it can never be too highly prized!"

The Paper continued, "It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different states, and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty," the Paper concluded.

What is defined in Federalist Paper #28 is a secession strategy exactly like the secession strategy that had been implemented by the American colonists prior to the American Revolutionary War.  Since the mechanics of such a secession strategy were well known to the people charged with the original ratification of the American Constitution (after all, it was they who had created the secession movement through which they won the right to organize their own government) the argument presented in Federalist #28 simply seemed to convey the common sense of the matter.  It is exactly that secession strategy that has been presented to this generation of Christian pro lifers.

In the aftermath of Paul Hill's example, there was a reasonable expectation that sincere Christians would be willing to lend themselves to the implementation of that strategy since literally everything else except outright surrender had been tried and failed to arrest legalized abortion in this nation.  It was reasonable to expect that more than a few people in the pro-life movement were prepared to do what was required to act like unborn babies were truly human beings because pro-life Christians presented themselves as people who actually cared for unborn babies like Paul Hill cared for unborn babies.

But that strategy has been rejected out of hand by every Camp within the pro-life movement. It is the rejection of that strategy that proves conclusively that the vast majority of the pro-life movement are willing to feed off the dead bodies of babies indefinitely rather than risk anything that might upset the peace and prosperity of the American society that they presently feed on.

 

 

THE CREATOR'S RIGHTS PARTY WAS FOUNDED FOR SUCH A MOMENT IN TIME

For anyone who has studied American history, especially those portions of American history where a minority was forced to contend with a murderous central government, it was possible decades ago to see that the pro life movement would end up where it is today: incapable of reaching the goal it was created to reach, sustained only by the self-deluded wishful thinking of people who have invested their lives in a defective strategy that was always incapable of taking them to their chosen goal.  From its beginning, it was possible to see that the pro-life movement was going to be like a naive boy, brave one moment and cowering the next.  And when the real face of the enemy was seen, finally just cowering.

The pro-life movement was destined to end up here because it was never willing to admit the kind of sacrifice that is required before a murderous central government sustained and powered by a murderous majority of citizens can be arrested and brought under control of the law of God.  Certainly it could be anticipated that there would be heroes in the pro-life movement, men like Paul Hill who were determined to arrest legalized abortion or die trying.  But only a cursory glance at the rank and file of the pro-life movement showed it was composed mostly of naive boys and girls and naive men and women, people who had never seriously realized that to arrest legalized abortion they might be called upon to pay the last farthing, to surrender themselves even unto death.  When men like Paul Hill stood up to show the kind of extreme actions and extreme sacrifice that was required to abolish legalized abortion in this nation, it took no prophet to see that the rank and file of pro-lifers would head for the exits looking for people to lead them, people who were the opposite of Paul Hill, people who would allow them to continue to believe they were pro-lifers even if they spent the rest of their lives feeding off the bodies of the dead babies they claimed to love with the love of God.

In short, it was possible decades ago to see that the majority of pro-lifers would end up choosing to merge themselves with the majority of American citizens rather than do what history demonstrated would be required to abolish legalized abortion.

Because these facts were obvious decades ago, about twenty years ago a political party was founded that did not require access to a majority to create a way to arrest legalized abortion in this nation.  The party was named The Creator's Rights party because the strategy it was created to implement was summarized in the slogan of the party: "Organizing To Fight For The Creator's Rights."

From its inception, The Creator's Rights party was conceived to be the last ditch response of the people of God in the United States of America who were called by God to demonstrate that God's first priority insofar as human beings was concerned involved defending the lives of the least of God's children who were in danger of being unjustly deprived of life.  Because it was conceived to be the last ditch response, The Creator's Rights party never presumed to demand support from people who claimed to be God's people until all strategies and tactics that were less dangerous and less painful and less potentially destructive had been tried and failed.

The way you tell when all the tactics and strategies have been tried and failed is when people start to do again strategies and tactics that have already been tried and failed.  This return to failed tactics and strategies is incontrovertible evidence of a people who are bankrupt in vision.  Since they do not have a clue how to do something new, they by default return to doing what they have done in the past even though their actions have already proven themselves to be incapable of bringing success.

The pro-life movement reached this point when George W. Bush was elected President in 2000. At that time the pro-life leaders returned to the same strategy it had trusted in the mid 1980's when it trusted Ronald Reagan to appoint Supreme Court Justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade.  At that moment in time, it became obvious that the pro-life movement, instead of being seriously determined to abolish legalized abortion, was in fact, a self-serving business determined to perpetuate the jobs of the professional pro-life bureaucrats and salve the consciences of the millions of Christian supporters who had been providing the cash flow that sustained the pro life organizations run by the professional pro-life bureaucrats.

For years The Creator's Rights party had been reaching out to the most well known leaders of the pro-life movement attempting to give them a heads up on the eventual necessity to support, if not the party itself, at least the strategy embodied by The Creator's Rights party.  In 1993, Chuck Colson, after hearing the details of the strategy and tactics advocated by The Creator's Rights party, declared them to be "extreme" and made it clear he would not be a part of such actions.  During the 1990's all the national pro-life leaders either through commission or omission made similar responses clear.

While it was obvious that the majority of pro-lifers were willing to merge themselves with the majority of citizens in this nation who were willingly feeding off the bodies of the aborted babies, there was a basis for assuming that at least the more radical elements within the existing pro life movement would rally to the banner of The Creator's Rights party when it became apparent that the only alternative was effective surrender to the evil people who were willingly feeding off the bodies of the least of God's children.  It was those "radical" elements that The Creator's Rights party courted and entered into fellowship with.

Inevitably the fellowship took the form of attempting to persuade people to embrace the strategy embodied by The Creator's Rights party.  Paul Hill's response to those overtures was reflective of the relationships developed during the 1990's and the early 00's. 

When The Creator's Rights Party approached the Reverend Paul Hill and asked him to join the party (this happened months before he carried out the death warrant he said he had received from God against the abortionists) Reverend Hill told us that he did not believe people would support the agenda of The Creator's Rights party until the "rivers of this land run red with blood."  Since Paul Hill did not believe the people would support The Creator's Rights party until vast amounts of blood was shed, he believed he was obligated to show abortionists and the American people what the blood he was talking about looked like.  So he blasted the abortionist and his bodyguard with a 12 guage shotgun loaded with double ought buckshot.  And he truly revealed blood.  The pattern of bloodshed continued through the end of the 90's.

As this context of growing bloodshed became ever more apparent, and as it became equally apparent that the federal government of the USA had more than ample means to ruthlessly devour anyone engaged in terrorism against the abortion industry, The Creator's Rights party knew its time was moving ever closer to arrival.

After George W. Bush's election in 2000, and after it became apparent that the leaders of the pro-life movement were going to implement another iteration of the same "Trust the President" strategy that had failed with Ronald Reagan, The Creator's Rights party began formal organizational meetings designed to show people why The Creator's Rights party was the only alternative to effectively surrendering to evil and becoming Cannibals of Christ in the USA.

The central message of The Creator's Rights party was a message about the federal government and the majority that supported it.  As clearly and as politely as possible, The Creator's Rights party began to teach pro-lifers that the real enemy that must be dealt with before legalized abortion was arrested was the federal government of the United States of America and the majority that presently sustains it.

The message was not hard to understand.  After all, it was the federal government that literally created the abortion industry in this nation; it was the federal government that protected the abortion industry by incarcerating or killing anyone and everyone who actually implemented ways to deter--rather than persuade--people from killing unborn babies.  It was equally obvious that the federal government could not do what it was doing without the support of the majority of people in the USA.

Before 9/11/2001 we were making much progress in reaching a serious minority from the few vital remnants of the old pro life movement and The Creator's Rights party was growing.  Then in the aftermath of 9/11 things began to change.  The very people who once were seen to be the most radical elements within the pro-life movement began to merge themselves with the old pro-life movement.  Instead of embracing the secession movement and transforming the old failed pro-life movement into a new secession movement with the potential to arrest legalized abortion in our lifetime, the extremists within the old pro-life movement abandoned their extremism and embraced the Trust the President strategy.

THE ARMY OF GOD BECOMES AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

In 2005 The Creator's Rights party initiated a series of American flag burning ceremonies around the nation designed to show the American people a sign and a warning about the fires that were coming to this nation and to implore them to return this nation to allegiance to The Creator's Rights.  The response of the pro-life movement proves once and for all that all the divisions within the old pro-life movement have disappeared and that the pro-life movement has merged into a unified whole.

While it would be expected that the main line pro-life leaders and followers who have invested their entire lives in some variation of the "Trust the President" strategy to abolish legalized abortion would reject The Creator's Rights party, it is the reaction of the most radical elements within the old pro-life movement that proves the pro-life movement has become a monolithic whole, a whole that feeds off the bodies of aborted babies.

To prove the point, take the response of the Army of God.   The Army of God has been the subject of federal Grand Jury investigations and has been accused by the FBI in a Complaint filed in federal court on November 12, 2003 of being composed of  "an underground network of persons who believe that the use of violence is appropriate and acceptable as a means to end abortion

The Reverend Michael Bray has long been identified in the national media as one of the most radical people in the pro-life movement.  This is the National Abortion Federation's [NAF] thumbnail sketch of Michael Bray:  "Bray has been called the Chaplain of the Army of God. He is the host of the annual White Rose Banquet. Bray is the author of a book called A Time to Kill, which attempts to give a biblical justification for the use of force against abortion providers. Bray frequently and publicly applauds the use of violence to stop abortion and has been jailed for bombing abortion clinics," the NAF concluded.

 

Michael Bray is the one with the clerical collar in this picture taken at the White Rose Banquet of people all of whom had served time for attacking, or conspiring to attack, abortion clinic property.  In the aftermath of the Flag Burning Ceremony and the national secession movement strategy advocated by The Creator's Rights party, Reverend Bray offered this alternative strategy, "The fact that the states of our United States have tolerated the usurpations of the federal government is in itself an indictment. We, as citizens of our own smaller governments, have submitted to the lawless decrees of an imperial government. And we need to focus our energies on recovering self-government at first the county and then the state levels. Reform will have to come from the bottom up...And before you bang on President Bush for failing to do enough about abortion and sodomy, ask yourself what you have done to establish justice for the sodomites and baby killers in your own county.

Think about what he said.  At a time when a huge body of evidence can be marshaled proving that everyone who cooperates with the federal government is literally feeding off the bodies of aborted babies, Michael Bray counsels people to take their eyes off the federal government entirely and begin to hold their county--COUNTY!--government accountable to God's law.

And Michael Bray is not the only person identified with the Army of God who has decided to take the heat off the federal government.  The National Abortion Federation described Donald Spitz this way: "Spitz hosts the Army of God website (www.armyofgod.com), which mocks the murder of Dr. Slepian. Spitz also posted correspondence from Clayton Waagner that threatened abortion clinic staff on his website while Waagner was on the run from law enforcement officials. He was the "spiritual advisor" to convicted murderer Paul Hill in the weeks before Hill's September 2003 execution," the NAF concluded.

And how did Donald Spitz respond to The Creator's Rights party?   When informed about the Flag Burning Ceremony to be conducted to warn the federal government and its supporters, Spitz said, "I will not participate except maybe to assault [the representatives of The Creator's Rights party] or anyone else who tries to burn an American flag when I'm around."

A badge carrying FBI agent could not have said it more clearly or more succinctly.

Another person in the picture above is John Brockhoeft.  When informed about The Creator's Rights party's Flag Burning Ceremony, John Broeckoft said that those participating would likely lose every friend they had.  Since John Broeckoft had few friends in the old pro-life movement, his meaning was clear: members of The Creator's Rights party who participated in the Flag Burning Ceremony would lose their friends in the most radical elements of the old pro life movement.

Joshua Graff, another person from the picture above, tried to find a way to maintain fellowship with the members of The Creator's Rights party even though he personally had rejected participating in the flag burning offensive.  His attempt to remain in fellowship with the members of The Creator's Rights party while at the same time remaining loyal to the federal government is most illustrative.  In a phone call to the founder of The Creator's Rights party, Joshua said, "Well, I still think we are friends."  I responded by telling him that Jesus said the time comes when some things are so important that you're either with Him or against Him.  I said to him, "At this time, the refusal to support the strategy of The Creator's Rights party means you  are against us and on the side of the federal government who is the actual agent killing the babies you claim to want to defend.  Your support of the federal government makes you literally an agent of the federal govenment."  Joshua replied, "I'm not an agent of the federal government."  I then said, "Joshua, you literally get your pay check each week from the federal government.  If that doesn't make you an agent of the federal government, what does?"

DEPENDENCE UPON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS THE TIE THAT BINDS US TO UNREMITTING SIN

Joshua Graff has a wife and two beautiful children.  John Brockhoeft has a wife and six beautiful children. Michael Bray has a wife and eleven beautiful children.  These most radical members of the old pro-life movement have mouths to feed that,  in one way or another, the federal government of the USA is presently feeding.  Joshua Graff literally makes his living as a subcontractor with a company fulfilling a military job order;  John Brockhoeft drives an eighteen wheeler with a federal license; and Michael Bray heads a household full of kids, one of whom just graduated from the United States Air Force Academy.   These most radical of all pro lifers are so deep in bed with the federal government that it is literally impossible for them to see how the federal government has got them literally feeding off the dead bodies of the very babies they have paid a horrible price trying to defend.

And there you see in microcosm the deception that Satan has brought over the Christians in the United States of America.  We cannot see the evil that we do because to see it would mean we would end up having to bite the hand that feeds not only ourselves but our children as well.

And the Muslim terrorists have made our dependence upon the federal government appear to be almost absolute.  We now live in a time of unending, universal war where the federal government of the United States of America appears to be the only force on earth capable of protecting us from the forces of death that are growing around us.

The problem is this federal government is itself the author of unjust death to the least of God's children.  Every moment that we support the federal government is another moment when we feed off the dead bodies of the aborted babies rather than create the social instability that could well cause the federal government to lose its ability to control anything without revealing itself as the Beast of beasts, the Snake of snakes, the endtime manifestation of that man of evil foretold in the letter to the Thessalonnians.

THE CONCLUSION: WHO WILL DELIVER US FROM THIS BODY OF DEATH? 

 

One thing must be clearly stated: there is no doubt that the leaders and followers of the pro-life movement in this nation are people who, for the most part, sincerely want to see the end of legalized abortion in this nation.

In light of the evidence being presented here, the question jumps out: How can people who sincerely want to see the end of legalized abortion not only refuse to do what is required to protect them, but actually begin to profit from their deaths?  Why would such people continue to commit themselves to strategies that had been tried and failed in the past to accomplish what they ostensibly wanted to accomplish?  What could explain such obvious self-defeating responses to life and death problems?

The answer to that question is found in the 7th chapter of the letter to the Romans where the Apostle Paul uttered some of the most terrible words ever to come out the mouth of a man, "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. 19For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do."

The words are terrible because they describe a situation where the will of man is bound to do evil even when the man does not want to do evil. 

Millennia have passed with Christians working as hard as people can work to parse those words so they mean something other than what they sound like they mean.  No wonder.  Who wants to hear that people, left unattended, can only do evil things no matter what they want?

If people will only look at the evidence accumulated here, evidence that shows what we the people in the pro-life movement have been doing for the last 33 years, they will see that we the people have been spending the last 33 years demonstrating the terrible truth of the Apostle's words.  Truly we have not done what we wanted to do.  Instead, the evil that we did not want to do, that is what we have done.

The Apostle Paul concludes his analysis of the horrible predictament of people with the question every person in this nation should be asking, "Who will rescue me from this body of death?"

It is only when Christians in this generation realize the horrible bondage to sin that has overtaken us that we will sincerely ask that question.  Until then, we will continue to go around acting like we are doing the will of God even as we feed off the bodies of the least of God's children, even as we use the very bodies of the least of these as the glue that holds this evil society together.

So the evidence presented here can be the beginning of our deliverance from this body of death.  If people reading it will decide to refuse to participate in the horrible bondage to death that we have been participating it, they will begin to hear the rest of the vision that The Creator's Rights party brings to this nation of people who call themselves children of the One, True Creator of the universe.

Or the evidence presented here can, conversely, be the time when you finally sell your inheritance of eternal life in return for the present peace and prosperity provided for you by the federal government of the United States of America. 

You decide.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the One who will deliver us from this body of death.  And He is waiting at the door to do that.  But He will not deliver us if all we do is pretend to serve Him while we actually make our living feeding off the bodies of those He considers to be members of His Body.  We will not serve the Lord Jesus Christ by leading people to believe in Him, then teaching them it is His Will that they collaborate with baby butcherers and other sinful people who serve Satan instead of the Lord.  The way we will be delivered from this body of death is by implementing the priorities defined by the Lord Jesus Christ in exactly the order He defined them.  First, we love the Lord our God with all our heart, mind and soul, then we love our neighbor as ourself.   Jesus Christ defined our neighbor, not as the dictionary defines it where neighbor refers to anyone living nearby, but Jesus Christ defined our neighbor as any person we saw in the ditch who would die if we did not stop and help them.  Today the unborn babies are dying in the ditch.  Unless we make it our next priority to stop and deliver those people from unjust death, we will not be delivered from this body of death in which we are presently trapped.  Instead of being delivered, we will see the carnage grow around us until finally we, each of us, are individually devoured by the body of death that presently envelopes us.   But that is not the end of the bad news.  The Lord Jesus Christ described our duty to love our neighbor as the prerequisite to obtaining our inheritance of eternal life.  "What shall we do to obtain eternal life," the man inquired of Jesus.  The Lord's answer unequivocably explained that obtaining our inheritance of eternal life was predicated on our loving, first God, then our neighbor.  Whether you believe it or not, if the Lord Jesus Christ told the truth, what you decide about who you will feed on in the United States of America is a decision that will determine not only whether you are delivered from this body of death in this world but in the world to come as well.

So go ahead.  Decide.

January 31, 2006.  Neal Horsley

How Christians Become Immune to Murder

Horsley for Governor Is What Comes Next

How To Take A Delayed Enlistment In The NEW Army Of God, USA

Return to Christian Gallery News Service