The Abortionist To Be Killed Next:
Who Will Benefit Most?
to decipher that cryptic statement I will need to compare and contrast two
events: 1. a recent attack on a medical doctor in
1. The "Memphis Appeal," the
Scripps-Howard newspaper in
excerpt of the "TEXT
OF THREATENING LETTERS", published in the Memphis Appeal on
Event 2. At about the same time the story above began to unfold, Planned Parenthood Federation of America mailed a national fund raising appeal letter in the form of a "Survey."
The Planned Parenthood letter defined its purpose: "Most importantly, we want to use the information drawn from this survey to prove to President Bush--and the members of the anti-choice congress--that the majority of Americans support reproductive rights…Your input to this survey can be a major weapon in our battle for reproductive rights…
Then the letter explained why people receiving the letter should respond: "You should have no doubts--freedom of choice is far from secure…In Congress, the White House and in more and more state legislatures, anti-choice political extremists are in power…Every day, our clinics face violence from opponents…Every month more and more doctors retire from their reproductive health practices so they and their families can escape harassment. As a result, more and more women find it difficult to get the health care services they need…The struggle [emphasis theirs] we face is truly life threatening--we cannot afford to lost this battle…"
Section Six of the "survey" was labeled "ANTI-CHOICE VIOLENCE" and it contained the following questions:
1. Which of the following two questions most nearly reflects your opinion:
q Violence against reproductive health centers represents a major threat to reproductive rights in this nation.
q Violence against reproductive health centers is not very prevalent and is not a major threat to reproductive rights.
2. Have you seen much media coverage, either through local or national sources, concerning anti-choice violence?
3. In your opinion, which of the following would be most effective in combating violence against doctors, staff and patients at reproductive health care centers? (Rank from one to five in order of importance, 1 being more important.)
__ Severely prosecuting those convicted of violence against reproductive health centers.
__ Increasing federal law enforcement protections at reproductive health centers.
__ Constructing health care centers with greater security measures and barriers to entry.
__ Training volunteers to defend health care centers against intruders.
__ Conducting intelligence activities to thwart extremist operations.
Section Seven was entitled: INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR STATE.
3. Are you aware of any anti-choice activities in your state?
4. If yes, what types of anti-choice activities are prevalent in your area?
q Anti-choice demonstrations and rallies
q Barricades of health care centers that provide abortions.
q Dissemination of misleading information about abortion and contraception.
q Consistent picketing and/or vigils outside of clinics.
q Violence, including but not limited to bombings, shootings, arson, or burglary.
the two stories and it does not take a genius or PHD social scientist to make
a connection between the
leads logically to the question: who benefits the most when an abortionist is
killed in a political context like the one that has existed in the
though the question might be wordy, you get the point: Planned Parenthood has
erected their entire fund raising apparatus on the slippery blood soaked
surface occupied by slain and battered abortionists. That surface is the slipperiest of slippery
slopes. To make your financial
survival dependent upon the presence of dead and battered abortionists is a
dangerous fund raising strategy, to say the least. If it does not create a temptation within
Planned Parenthood to manufacture more assassinated abortionists should they
be found in short supply, the strategy at least creates a suspicion in the
minds of others that Planned Parenthood might be willing to see dead
abortionists. After all, there are
millions of people in the
Of course few people have actually accused Planned Parenthood of actively recruiting abortionist assassins--although that theory will certainly be presented during the upcoming trial of James Kopp, the accused assassin of Dr. Barnett Slepian.
Were it not for the fact that every time an abortionist is killed it causes all existing abortionists and all potential abortionists to reexamine their respective bottom lines, it might be fairly easy to persuade people that Planned Parenthood is in the abortion assassination business. But that fact does exist. Since no one doubts that Planned Parenthood profits most when the most unborn babies are aborted, the cost/benefit analysis makes it clear Planned Parenthood cannot afford to have all the abortionists quit killing unborn babies. In other words, without abortionists, Planned Parenthood would be out of business. That is why when an abortionist is killed most people look immediately at the abortion abolition movement for the culprit. What people have not done is realized that when an occasional abortionist is killed in such a way that all abortionists are not driven from the nation, it might actually be the key to Planned Parenthood’s long term cash flow needs.
Any analysis of who benefits most when an abortionist is killed is not complete without recognizing that there is a third party most interested in this subject; a party, that is, in addition to the supporters of Planned Parenthood and the supporters of abortion abolition: that third party is the unborn baby scheduled to be aborted.
Speaking for the soon-to-be-aborted person, who in this article, as is so often the case in this world, has no voice other than my own, I can say without fear of being proven wrong that the unborn baby, if it comes to a choice between the life of the abortionist and the unborn baby's own life, would benefit most should all abortionists presently active be killed as soon as possible.
But that is a dangerous thing to say. Even though any person who actually granted the unborn baby their humanity and put their self in the unborn baby's place would agree that any unborn baby--if he/she were allowed to vote--would naturally value their life above the life of the abortionist planning to kill them, it is still dangerous to say anything about the murder of abortionists except those things that have been pre-approved for public consumption.
full well how dangerous a thing it is to become a spokesman for babies
waiting to be aborted in the
As I have
always said, I do not want to see anyone killed. But the fact is we the people are killing,
covered by the color of law created by the Supreme Court of the
The Apostle Paul described in his letter to the Romans precisely the effects I am talking about:
1:18For the wrath of God is
revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and
19Because that which may be
known of God is manifest in them; for God hath
24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even
Reread the effects described above and you will see a horrible irony: some of the evils the Apostle Paul describes as evidence of God turning a people over to their sins are exactly the actions that have been legalized in the USA. It does not take a Biblical scholar to see that when the Apostle refers to "…their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly…" he is talking about homosexuality; and when the Apostle refers to people "… without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful…" he is precisely describing people who kill their own children.
Is it not clear that the effects described by the Apostle have been given full access to the United States of America? Effects like those are inevitably fatal to individuals, and--if history is any guide--equally fatal to nations.
Another irony, one I participate in daily is this: As the United States of America stands up before the world and crows about our vaunted "freedoms," the freedom to speak the hard truth about the evil that has been unleashed in this nation is slowly being taken away from me. Watch what this government is doing to those of us who actually accept responsibility to speak for the unborn and you will see that unless God intervenes and brings the majority to its right mind, the only "freedoms" that will exist in the USA are the "freedoms" to commit horrible abominations against the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Since the USA have already been "turned over" to the consequences of our sins because of our refusal to honor God as God, questions about who will benefit most from the growing carnage and insanity in our midst will tend to disappear because they will become moot questions as we all impotently scramble like brute beasts to survive. But until then, we would be wise to recognize that when abortionists are killed not all things are as they appear to be at first glance.
Part Two: Could Planned Parenthood Have Ordered The Murder of Dr. Barnett Slepian?
You Can Mail A Donation To: Neal Horsley, PO Box 1081, Carrollton, Ga 30116,
Or If You Can't Donate Now, Click Below and Join The We Choose Life Network.
Use Your Internet Connection Fee To Help Deter People From Butchering God's Children