RSS FeedBack to Centennial Institute Home >>

Aborting our children will not save the planet

Sunday, 7 August 2011 10:05 by Mike Norton
('76 Contributor) For decades, the words "family planning" have been a euphemism for "abortion" to abortion proponents. Echoing Humpty Dumpty, when the left "uses a word, it means just what [they] choose it to mean, neither more nor less." So, with twists in language, "homosexual behavior" is called "gay lifestyle," "sex outside of marriage" is termed "freedom," and "killing babies" is called "family planning." Often, it seems, in an effort to add weight to the pro-abortion mantra, the left couples "family planning" with other leftist causes like "carbon footprint" or "saving the planet." A recent Denver Post opinion piece informed readers that "population [is] one of the major contributors to climate change and other environmental crises." And if population is the problem, what did the editorial writer think the solution was? You guessed it: kill more babies…I mean, do more "family planning." Therefore, the title of the op-ed in the Post was literally, "Family planning is a gift to planet." Written by Dottie Lamm, former first lady of Colorado and a member of the U.S. delegation to the U.N. Conference on Population and Development in Cairo in 1994, the op-ed sounds as though it was torn directly from eugenicist Margaret Sanger’s playbook, bemoaning the fact that some women continue to have more than two children apiece. (Lamm writes highly of the fact that women in China average only 1.5 childbirths, although she does not explicitly endorse the forced abortion policy Chinese women endure.) According to Lamm, the prediction that the world’s current population of 7 billion will reach 9 billion by 2045 is of staggering consequence. She warns readers that "the pressures that an expanding population [will] put on global warming are enormous"—her argument being that adding that many people to the planet is equivalent to adding a carbon footprint equal to "two more United States." Lamm quotes a population/climate change researcher, who argues that if we cut the population gain to 8 billion instead of 9 billion by mid-century, we "could account for 16 to 19 percent of the emissions reductions thought necessary to keep global temperatures from causing serious impacts." In all fairness to Lamm, she’s not alone in her views that all things – even the lives of children – should be sacrificed in homage to planet earth. For example, in England, David and Victoria Beckham are currently being described as "selfish" for welcoming their fourth child into the world. There, Simon Ross, "chief executive of the Optimum Population Trust, an organization that campaigns for the ‘gradual decrease of the population to sustainable levels,’ said, ‘The Beckhams…are very bad role models with their large families.’" So, apparently, the groups that are cajoling the Beckhams would be praising them if they’d only availed themselves of "family planning" and killed their child in the womb. That’s how twisted things get when people exchange worshipping the Creator with worshipping the creation instead. Michael J. Norton is senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund (www.telladf.org), a legal alliance employing a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.
Categories:   Abortion
Actions:   E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSSRSS comment feed

Don't weep for Planned Parenthood

Saturday, 16 April 2011 03:02 by Dianne Moyers
('76 Contributor) Lisa Wirthman writes that Planned Parenthood was bullied in the budget battle (Denver Post, April 15).  Why does a billion dollar organization need a subsidy from U.S. taxpayers?  Rather, Washington is using our tax money to assist a favored special interest group, the sex education and abortion industry.  At the same time, Planned Parenthood has been complicit in statutory rape cases and taken donations with offensive racial overtones. American blacks make up twelve percent of the U.S. population, yet thirty-seven percent of all abortions are performed on black women.  With a black-to-white abortion rate of 3-to-1 nationally, abortion remains what Jesse Jackson called it in the 1970s—black genocide. Abortionists continue their work of tearing off the arms and legs and crushing the heads of babies in the womb at the rate of 3,300 per day. These are our most defenseless citizens.  Why should Planned Parenthood be allowed to bully babies and taxpayers?
Tags:  
Categories:   Abortion | Budget
Actions:   E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSSRSS comment feed

Justice Stevens and the shadow of death

Saturday, 17 April 2010 04:20 by Jay Moyers
('76 Contributor) The many ways in which Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has weakened our Constitution were outlined in David Harsanyi's recent Denver Post column.  However, Harsanyi left out the "penumbra," which not only softened the Constitution, but also killed many people, which is far worse than any examples the column detailed. In the fateful Roe v. Wade decision of 1973, Justice Stevens found a "penumbra" or a shadow in the 14th Amendment and constructed an "abortion right" that has killed 50,000,000 babies in the womb.  President Obama said that Justice Steven "applied the Constitution and the laws of the land with fidelity and restraint."   If that is restraint, how many more babies will be killed with the next appointee?

Biblical windows on Manhattan Declaration

Sunday, 7 February 2010 11:59 by John Andrews
('76 Editor) The Manhattan Declaration on sanctity of life, dignity of marriage, and religious liberty was faulted by my colleague Kevin Miller at the Vanguard Forum on Feb. 5 for insufficiently addressing such issues as the divorce culture and the idolatry of the state.   I agree with Kevin that those issues must be honestly confronted, especially since Christians have been passively and actively complicit in the worsening of both for at least a century now.  But I am proud to be a signer of the Manhattan Declaration, imperfections and all, since on balance it does the Republic and the Church far more good than harm. Believers agree, as former Sen. Bruce Cairns quoted from Prov. 14:34 at Vanguard, that "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people."  So isn't a proper balance in rendering to God and to Caesar (Matthew 22:21, the explicit aim of the Manhattan Declaration) one condition for strengthening America's righteousness?  Again, we can agree that it is -- hardly a sufficient condition, as Kevin correctly warns, but surely a necessary one. Americans in general, Christian and otherwise, grossly over-render to Caesar at present.  It's this mistake alone that the manifesto seeks to warn against and begin correcting, as best I can see.  For the many other mistakes and omissions of which we believers are guilty, another manifesto may well be needed -- a Vanguard Declaration, perhaps -- but that is no reason to withhold our support from the worthy and urgent aims of the Manhattan Declaration. Are Manhattan's drafters and signers guilty of the hypocrisy and false pretense which Jesus condemns as like "whited sepulchres" (Matt. 23:27), or the inverted priorities which he likens to overlooking the log in one's own eye while criticizing the sawdust in another's (Matt. 7:3)?  Not at all.  The declaration does express repentance for Christians' complicity with rampant divorce.  In giving relatively more attention to the threat of judicially-imposed same-sex marriage, it merely addresses the proximate danger of Caesar's next arrogant overreach.  Everyone who values the family as society's core institution for stability and health can only applaud. I agree with Kevin Miller's expanded agenda for Christian self-correction and resulting social betterment -- virtue fostered non-coercively by changing hearts, starting with our own -- but I don't see this as an either/or with the Manhattan agenda.  Rather it's a both/and.  Jesus again: "These ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone" (Matt. 23:23). Finally, let's apply the Lord's own "By their fruits ye shall know them" test (Matt. 7:20). Will the ever-widening support and discussion of the Manhattan Declaration (now with 420,000 signers ) tend to trouble and cleanse the conscience of Christians, stir us up to repentance and good works and walking the talk -- or will it only serve as an excuse for smugness, complacency, and pharisaical superiority?  I'm confident of the former result.   Naming the name of Christ, daring to engage with him, starts one on a process of living up to his standard more and more fully.  So with Nicodemus, Zaccheus, Matthew, and Peter, the divorced woman at the well and the weeping woman at the feast.  "Going public" for the faith, even before we may be fully ready or presentable, takes on a positive logic of its own. And as for the concern voiced at Vanguard by a rigorous Reformation Protestant who asked if the Catholic understanding of the gospel (deficient in his view) may not defeat the whole Manhattan Declaration project, I will go with what Jesus told John: "He that is not against us is for us" (Luke 9:50).  Even allowing that he seems to have said the opposite in Luke 11:23, we can take the "by their fruits" test as a tiebreaker -- for to repeat, no one has shown me how the Manhattan Declaration is going to do harm. One way or the other, what matters, said Paul, is that "Christ is preached" (Phil. 1:18).  Amen say I. Have you signed the Manhattan Declaration?  You can do so here.   Want to know more about Kevin Miller, his Vanguard Forum once a month in suburban Denver, and his National Freedom Initiative for "freedom nationally, virtue locally"?  You sign onto all that as well, as I have done, by clicking here.

One million signatures is Manhattan Declaration's next goal

Friday, 15 January 2010 03:59 by John Andrews
('76 Editor) As a signer of the Manhattan Declaration on religious liberty, sanctity of life, and dignity of marriage, issued in November 2009, I received the following update from organizers Robert George, Timothy George, and Charles Colson.  If you have not already signed, I urge you to click the link and do so at once. Dear Colleague: Thank you for your support of the Manhattan Declaration. It is off to an amazing start - over 370,000 signers and growing. And it is indeed historic: Evangelicals, Catholics, Anglicans, and Eastern Orthodox Christians uniting to give common witness to the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage, and religious liberty for all persons. But we need your help: our goal is one million signatures.  The marketing pros tell us we will never get to a million signatures without expensive advertising. But we want to prove them wrong. And we can: just think if each person who has signed the Declaration were to get just two others to sign. That would be one million people standing arm in arm in defense of the most vital moral truths in our society. Remember, too, we are not just collecting signatures; we seek a movement of people defending the truth in the public square. We are already witnessing signs of this: Christians in Mobile, Alabama called us 13 days before Christmas to tell us they were planning a large ecumenical gathering for the 23rd of December. I (Chuck Colson) agreed to speak. At 6:00 AM on December 23, 2,000 citizens, led by clergy from all over the city, gathered in a packed hall in the Convention Center for a rousing rally. Seldom have I seen so much excitement in one room - and all of this was accomplished just by word of mouth with only 11 days to organize! Just ten days ago, Cardinal Rigali of Philadelphia, Archbishop Wuerl of Washington, DC, Archbishop Dolan of New York and Archbishop Kurtz of Louisville reached out to all of their brother Catholic bishops asking them to spread this document throughout their dioceses and encourage their clergy and faithful to study it and join as signatories. The Archbishop of Detroit has planned a grassroots effort throughout his archdiocese. The Bishop of Phoenix has already organized a grassroots effort there. We are also receiving many reports of evangelical gatherings in a number of areas - and many evangelical pastors referring to the Manhattan Declaration in their sermons. This bold and exciting movement needs to reach 100 or 200 cities in America. Why not? Can you help? We are urging you to encourage your pastors and community leaders to do what these other cities are doing. Organize ecumenical meetings organized around the Manhattan Declaration; get other concerned citizens to join the effort. Get on the internet or phone and ask friends to join you. If you let us know you want to organize something we can help link you up with others in your area. As with any grassroots movement, the strength and energy has to come from the people. We have no staff and limited budget. We're people who care passionately and deeply about life, marriage, and liberty. So here's what we are asking you to do. ** Pray fervently. Great movements of faith have always spread on the wings of prayer. ** Know the issues. If you study this Declaration - and a study guide is available on our website - then you can winsomely explain and defend it to your neighbors and friends. The document itself makes a great apologetic defense for these moral truths. ** Look for resources on this website as we're able to post them, and search the websites of the Christian organizations that offer resources in these three areas. You can see the names of the various leaders who have signed the Declaration and then visit their websites. ** Of utmost importance, get your own church involved. As pastors preach, the movement will spread. Prayer meetings and Bible studies on the Declaration are being conducted in many churches, which is a great step. **Make full use of Facebook, Twitter, and all the devices available today for social networking. Or just go to gatherings in your own community and speak out on this issue. Cultures are changed over the backyard fence, the barbeque grill, and in hair salons - always from the bottom up. Do everything you can possibly do to educate others. **Organize local gatherings like the one in Mobile. If you want an audio or video of Chuck Colson's talk at the event, you will be able to see it on the website in the next few days. You can also read a firsthand report on how they did this. **If you are a pastor or ministry leader let us know if you would like to be added to the Additional Signers list on the website. Just think what might happen in our land if one million courageous Christians declared their uncompromising allegiance to Jesus Christ and to biblical faithfulness on some of the most urgent moral issues of our day. May God give us the strength to do what He is so clearly calling us to do. From our perspective, this is a cause worth giving every last ounce of effort and energy we have. Dr. Robert GeorgeDr. Timothy GeorgeChuck Colson

To start 2010 right, sign the Manhattan Declaration

Monday, 28 December 2009 07:01 by David Huntwork
'76 Contributor) "The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience," released last month, impressed me as a profound statement by a large number of Christian leaders taking a stand for the foundations of civilization, the family, and the sanctity of human life. People of faith have to work together to preserve and protect the fundamental principles of morality from those who seek to destroy them. This declaration brings together numerous Catholic bishops, Orthodox clergy, and Evangelical leaders -- and as an evangelical Christian I will gladly partner with other types of Christians on the common concepts that form the backbone of Christianity. Here are the opening lines from ManhattanDeclaration.org: Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family. We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are: 1. the sanctity of human life 2. the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife 3. the rights of conscience and religious liberty. Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and theLife.                                                                                              Even now the whispers of “hate speech,” “ignorance,” “bigotry,” “intolerance,” and “insensitivity” await those who now champion the sanctity of life or who fail to cheerlead homosexuality and sexual deviancy. Some have even gone so far as to label the Manhattan Declaration “hateful” or a call for civil disobedience. They are wrong. The manifesto is not about judging or excusing. If anything, it is in fact a rather benign, formal declaration of what a great many believe. It is also a clear warning shot across the bow of the U.S.S. liberal agenda that Christians will not compromise their fundamental religious beliefs no matter what the state may attempt to dictate. Those seeking to mock, disparage, and even persecute any of us who fail to march lockstep with the agenda of secular humanism need to understand that a line has been drawn in the sand and a wide spectrum of the Christian community is joining together in a common cause to proclaim God’s truth, as they understand it, as outlined in the Bible. These are clear cut and unambiguous issues for Bible-believing people of faith and compromise is not an option when it comes to these basic principles. The suspension of judgment and the concept that there is no true right or wrong is a devious lie and one that often fools even otherwise educated and intelligent people. If you are willing to suspend judgment and the concept of right and wrong, then you will eventually accept anything. The “if-it-feels-good-do-it” mindset produces only heartache and disaster in the end. It is the wise man who rejects such childlike idiocy and expects adults to think and act like adults. With maturity should come responsibility, self-restraint, discernment, and wisdom. It stands in stark contrast to an ideology of dependency, irresponsibility, the inability to practice self-restraint and accept the consequences of one’s actions, and the continued childlike dependency on others to fix one’s own mistakes. Popular culture may sneer at such ideas as morals and values, sexual restraint, and personal responsibility, at patriotism and good citizenship, and at honesty, decency, and respect. Those are the failings of secularists and liberals. They should not be of Christians and conservatives. Part and parcel of both Christianity and conservatism is the simple concept that actions have consequences. The concept of the prohibition of sin was not to somehow squash your “fun” but to warn one about the repercussions of certain actions. It was to protect us, not to be “mean” to us. There may come a time when a declaration like this is labeled “hate speech” or contrary to the public good and banned from dissemination. One may think that is far-fetched but we currently stand at the edge of the abyss when it comes to thought-control, censorship, and even the persecution of those that don’t march lock step with the powers-that-be and the dictates of a corrupt, popular culture. As our society and culture embraces decadence and earnestly seeks to fulfill the Prophet Isaiah’s warning that “good shall be called evil, and evil good” it is increasingly important for people of faith to stand up and be counted. It is time to draw a stark distinction between those who have sold out to situational morality and don’t believe in right or wrong, only “different.” Eleven of the twelve disciples achieved martyrdom by refusing to heed those who sought to silence them. It is incumbent upon Christians to stand up for what is right, no matter the cost. It is an essential element of the faith, and at the core of the teachings of Christ. To not call sin “sin” is to be dishonest and contrary to the teachings of the gospels. The last paragraph of the Declaration reads: ”Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.” There is something noble and honorable about standing for truth, as uncomfortable or inconvenient that may be for some on occasion. You can join the over 300,000 people of faith who have followed the example and lead of the initial 170 leaders of the Christian community who presented the world with the Manhattan Declaration. Dare to take a stand. Join what has gone far beyond a mere statement in defense of faith and principle, and is now becoming a movement of people of conscience taking a stand for the whole world to see. Start the New Year by recommitting yourself to what is right and true. The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience can be read in its entirity at www.ManhattanDeclaration.org. I signed this powerful declaration and so should you. I like the spectrum and caliber of the signers and am proud to join my smallest of voices with theirs.The goal is for one million Christians to sign the declaration. Will you join me in doing so? For more information on the thinking behind the Manhattan Declaration I would suggest the article by Dr. Timothy George, Dean of the Beeson Divinity School of Samford University, senior editor of Christianity Today, and one of the original architects of The Manhattan Declaration: The Manhattan Declaration:  A Growing, Grassroots Movement of the Spirit (http://www.colsoncenter.org/the-center/columns/call-response) David Huntwork is a conservative activist and freelance columnist in Northern Colorado where he lives with his wife and three young daughters. He is the author of the book No Apologies: In Defense of Common Sense and the Conservative Ideology which can be purchased at http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=3576295.Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions at DaveHuntwork@juno.com. You may also view his bio and past columns at:  http://DavidHuntwork.tripod.com.    

Manhattan Declaration: I signed, will you?

Sunday, 29 November 2009 15:41 by John Andrews
('76 Editor) Americans from the major Christian faiths, seeing an imminent move by the civil power against God-given elements of a sustainable and free society, are putting their names to a resistance manifesto known as the Manhattan Declaration.  Catholic, Orthodox, and Evangelical leaders developed the declaration in recent weeks and released it on Nov. 20.  It spells out why the biblically faithful citizen cannot consent to laws and policies that destroy innocent human life, redefine marriage as something other than the union of one man and one woman, or trample religious liberty.  And it envisions the potential need for civil disobedience to such laws.  The Manhattan Declaration in full, some 4700 words, is here.  A summary is here.  The online signature page for adding one's name, as more than 197,000 individuals have already done, is here.  I signed in a gesture of wholehearted agreement and active support.  Will you?

Three examples of moral authority on the wane

Friday, 6 November 2009 07:50 by Drew Goorabian
(CCU Student) In most aspects of our world today, we see the increasing absence of moral authority. Citizens in all venues of vocation are striving for premier results, success, and position, and moral authority has become forgotten and lost all meaning and value. Ethics and principles have been replaced with mendacious and disingenuous acts, most of the time being intentional. An area that I feel has lost its honorability and morality is our current government. This is not a statement made based of feeling, biased, or emotion; rather, on facts and evidence.  Our government has resonated the sound of a progressive movement towards socialism within the past few months, which directly contradicts the foundation set forth by our founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson, a deist and author of the declaration of independence, stated the following about his vision for the people of the United States: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” -(Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence) So there is no doubt that our country was meant to provide citizens with rights and prosperity. Our new governmental administration has decided to contradict the Constitution and take our country in a new direction. Now, change isn’t always a bad thing, where the question lies with, is it morally right to go against the will of the people and foundation of our country? There are three fundamental concepts that compromise moral authority in our nation. Universal healthcare is a current economic and political proposal that brings into question the matter of ethics and fairness. The government has digressed into a position defending and promoting the passing of a bill providing everyone with free healthcare.  Sure, it looks great on paper, but in this economy, it is deemed as further government acquisition of another aspect of our lives. It is essential for the government to be involved to an extent, but where should the line be drawn? The new administration is unbalanced and unchecked, giving democrats the chance to advance any laws they want. But how about morally, is it fair to those that do not wish to see taxes increased to pay off this bill, which will cost twenty percent of our entire economic revenue? Next, we take a look at the separation of church and state. Recently, the government has conveyed their message that they are impelling the separation of the church and state rather then coalescing the two.  The problem is, however, that the separation is a one-sided deal, as the government receives their taxes from churches, while the churches aren’t getting the appropriate rights or privacy. For example, if Proposition 8 in California would have passed, it would have required all churches to wed same and heterosexual couples regardless of denomination or affiliation. So churches are paying these high stipends, complying with federal law, and still aren’t able to obviate themselves from governmental affairs. The church has also attempted to accelerate the process of implementing the teaching of Creationism in schools, only to be thwarted numerous times in congress. In addition, it has been proven that Christian men founded our country on Christian principles and morals. Nine of the original thirteen founding fathers were bible- believing Christians, and this is proven throughout their actions. In 1777. Continental Congress voted to spend $300,000 to purchase Bibles, which were to be distributed throughout the 13 colonies. George Washington is identified today as an anti governmental advocate and once stated: “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” -(George Washington, on Political Parties and Government) Thirdly, there is the issue of abortion. In 1973, a case titled Roe v. Wade voted in favor of the pro-choice movement and abortions became legal. Since then, the government has done little to ratify the law, and has been negligent and deemed Presidents who sought reform as derisory.  It is a controversial topic that has been debated time over time for the past quarter century, while no progress has been made. The government recently is in the process of enacting a law in the universal healthcare bill that would take taxpayer money to assist the federal in funding abortions. One has to question, why weren’t the American citizens involved in the inquiry, or informing of their own tax money going towards funding a cause as influential as abortion? This isn’t just a matter of pointing the finger at a single person; rather, it’s the corruption of government and how they’ve inveigled the media into preaching subliminal messages to its citizens. And to be impartial, government isn’t the only ones abusing this concept of absence of morality; it’s everywhere in our daily lives. As our society as a whole advances towards ideology of socialism and progressive liberalism, the line of moral ethics and values continues to move further and further back. At what point, however, will the line of morality be abolished, and fundamental Constitutional rights become eliminated? Therein lies the salient question, so I believe we should turn to the Bible to follow what God says. In Romans 13:1, God says to obey the government, but lest not forget that he is in charge of the grand scheme. “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except by God’s appointment, and the authorities that exist have been instituted by God.” -(Romans 13:1, Holy Bible)  

Lincoln's warning to the anti-abortion vigilantes

Monday, 1 June 2009 04:42 by Greg Schaller
On Sunday, May 31, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas was killed as he was walking into his church.  Dr. Tiller was perhaps one of the most controversial practitioners of abortion in the United States.  He repeatedly and defiantly performed late term abortions at the Women’s Health Care Services in Wichita, where he worked. Robert George, Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, one of our nation’s strongest and most eloquent opponents of abortion, wrote the following upon learning of Tiller’s killing: Whoever murdered George Tiller has done a gravely wicked thing.  The evil of this action is in no way diminished by the blood George Tiller had on his own hands.  No private individual had the right to execute judgment against him.  We are a nation of laws.  Lawless violence breeds only more lawless violence. The point made by Professor George is identical to the concern expressed by Abraham Lincoln in his Lyceum Address of 1838.  The title of Lincoln’s speech was “The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions.”  Lincoln addressed his concern about a growing attitude of lawlessness as exhibited by increasing instances of public vigilantism.   In what he described as an ill omen, Lincoln explained the circumstance:   I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judgment of Courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the executive ministers of justice. This disposition is awfully fearful in any community; and that it now exists in ours, though grating to our feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth, and an insult to our intelligence, to deny. Lincoln referenced some of the instances of lawlessness: the hanging of gamblers in Vicksburg, Mississippi and the burning to death of a black man in St. Louis who had committed murder.  Lincoln recognized his audience’s skepticism and whether there was in fact any great loss to society, now rid of these people, and what difference it made to the larger matter, the topic of Lincoln’s address: But you are, perhaps, ready to ask, "What has this to do with the perpetuation of our political institutions?" I answer, it has much to do with it. Its direct consequences are, comparatively speaking, but a small evil; and much of its danger consists, in the proneness of our minds, to regard its direct, as its only consequences. So perhaps society was better off having fewer gamblers.  And wouldn’t the man who had committed murder ultimately have been executed had he been put on trial and been found guilty?  Didn’t the mob simply expedite the inevitable? This was not, according to Lincoln, a justification for lawlessness.  For a spirit of lawlessness begets a greater spirit of lawlessness.  For “the lawless in spirit, are encouraged to become lawless in practice; and having been used to no restraint, but dread of punishment, they thus become, absolutely unrestrained.” So what did Lincoln prescribe in order to prevent our degeneracy into lawlessness? Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor; -- let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children's liberty. Many opponents of abortion may be tempted to conclude (like the mob in Vicksburg or the vigilantes in St. Louis) that society is better off with one fewer abortionist.  But our society, based upon the Rule of Law, does not permit citizens seeking individual vengeance.  The temptation to find a good that justifies murder is the same temptation of lawlessness that so worried Lincoln.  The means of ending abortion in the United States are not by murdering abortionists.  They are by winning the minds of the American public through persuasion and prayer, and by legislating through proper means the end of state-sanctioned abortion.  Tiller did indeed have blood on his hands, but the evil of his murder is in no way diminished by that fact.  
Categories:   Citizenship | History | Crime | Abortion | Law
Actions:   E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSSRSS comment feed

Condemning the evil murder of Dr. Tiller

Sunday, 31 May 2009 10:28 by John Andrews
Dr. George Tiller's murder in cold blood at a Wichita church today should shock the conscience and grieve the heart of every thinking person -- especially persons of faith, and above all, those of us who defend the right to life.  This evil and lawless act deserves absolute condemnation.  It is in no way excusable, regardless of the slain man's inexcusable career as an abortionist.    I hope you will join me in praying for Dr. Tiller, for his family and loved ones, for his killer, and for the quelling of passions on all sides that would threaten peace and order in our land. 
Categories:   Faith | Crime | Abortion
Actions:   E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSSRSS comment feed