Shedding of Innocent Blood vs Guilty Blood

In California, last year, we had a petition drive at our church to abolish the death penalty in the state.  The people pushing this petition were those of whom I would refer as the “social justice” crowd.  These people, to a large extent, are very anti-death penalty but when it comes to abortion, they don’t even blink, or totally ignore it.  They are also on the very liberal side and vote for liberal or progressive politicians who are very pro-abortion.  This week the state of Arkansas executed two inmates on death row; for the first time in 12 years. As a pro-life person, it is always puzzling to reconcile this situation.  How can someone be against the death penalty and yet ignore abortion.  Let’s look at the statistics.  As of 2014 there have been over 57 million abortions since 1973 in the United States, that’s roughly 1.3 million per year average.  Since 1976 there have been 1,300 executions of death row inmates in the entire United States.

Death row inmates are guilty persons who have committed crimes against humanity and have been adjudicated by a court to be guilty and have been so condemned.  The unborn, on the other hand, are totally innocent and have been killed, not by a court, but by a mother who does not wish to have a baby for reasons such as “I’m not ready to be a mother,” or “it’s too inconvenient and it will interfere with my career.”  The unborn are fully human, as confirmed by science.  Click here for confirmation.    Have you seen drawings or pictures of how unborn children are ripped apart inside the mother?  Abortion doctors count all the limbs after an abortion to make sure they got the entire baby.  In the famous case of Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia, he even killed babies who came out whole in a botched abortion attempt.  The book, Gosnell, details what happened in excruciating details; you must read it to believe it.

The Bible is very specific when it come to shedding innocent blood:  Proverbs 6:16-19

There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.

 

The Vestibule of Hell

In my Bible study class today, our teacher, Dr. Bill Creasy, was teaching on the Gospel of John and on Jesus’ trial by Pontius Pilate.   Pilate tried very hard to save Jesus but he got no cooperation from him.  In the end Pilate gave in to the mob, refused to do the right thing and gave him up to be crucified.   The question often is asked:  what happened to Pilate later?  Dante’s Devine Comedy, Canto 3:49-60 has a helpful hint; as summarized by Creasy:

In the Divine Comedy, Dante places Pontius Pilate not in Hell proper, but in the vestibule of Hell. Rejected by God and not accepted by Satan, he is among those who are “nowhere,” those cowardly souls who refused to make a choice in life or to stand up for what is right.

I could not help but think of those of us who are too cowardly to make the right decision when it comes to the killing of the unborn babies.  Specifically, Vice President Biden, comes to mind when he made the statement that he believes what the Catholic Church believes that life begins at conception but he is not going to “impose his faith on others,” or words to this effect. Click here for verification of this.  This position strikes me as the same as what Pilate did:  In the face of truth, cowardice takes over.

I cannot help but think what will Joe Biden do when he’s face to face with our eternal judge and is asked the same question.  Will he give the same answer?  Joe is not alone in this he has many others who believe as he does.

Planned Parenthood and the Left: An Inconvenient Truth

The recent Planned Parenthood undercover videos have provided a venue for a discussion that the leftist media does not want to have:  The horror of abortion.  The videos brought to our living room the truth about abortion.  Is abortion “a woman’s right to choose”? or “women’s health”?  The inescapable videos bring the truth about abortion in front of our eyes.  The killing, by dismemberment, of a human being.  There are people who do not want to see these images.  Why not?  They do not want to admit an inconvenient truth:  Abortion kills a human being in the most brutal way, by dismemberment, limb by limb.   We are horrified by the beheadings by the ISIS killers in the Middle East.   Abortion does the same thing and we call it “women’s health.”  Who are the barbarians?

Leftist politicians, such as Nancy Pelosi, say that the videos are doctored?  doctored?  have they watched any of them in full?  probably not. Click here to hear Ms. Pelosi verify this statement.  So, let me see if I understand this, you have not watched the videos but you think they’re doctored? Do you have any proof of this?  No.  On September 27, 2015, NBC’s “Meet the Press” host, Chuck Todd had Carly Fiorina on.  He thought he would catch her in a misstatement about her comment about Planned Parenthood in the last debate.  You could see he was salivating.  Carly humiliated him in her sharp, clear and concise response.  This is one for the ages.  Click here to see it.

As I was driving today, I saw a person with a bumper sticker on her car saying:  “I’m Catholic, I vote.”  Now this is a very naive person.  The truth of the matter is that Catholics are no different from the general population when it comes to voting on moral issues.  Democrats would never win an election if all Catholics voted according to church teaching, such as the sanctity of life and the importance of traditional marriage,    The sad fact is that liberal Catholics are no different from liberal atheists. Catholics, like liberal Christians and Jews, have substituted leftism as their number one religion; traditional religion is always secondary. Click here for an incisive analysis by Dennis Prager  on Joe Biden and leftism.

Has This House Become a Den of Robbers?

“Social Justice” is often used in religious circles, as a call to action.  Of course no one ever defines what they mean by the term.  Is there a difference between justice and “social justice”?  if so, how?  It is universally understood that “social justice” refers to a more left-wing interpretation of what Jesus taught, that is, to take care of the vulnerable, the weak, and the poor.  Those who promote “social justice,” more than likely, have an economic interpretation of the term, more akin to, say, income inequality.  The Bible is filled with many calls for justice; it does not qualify the term with an adjective.  In Micah 6:6-8 it states this: “O mortal, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God.”  In Isaiah 1:11-17 it states:  “Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean, remove the evil of your doings from before my eyes, cease to do evil learn to do good; seek justice, rescue the oppressed, defend the orphan, plead for the widow.”

What has this to do with abortion or pro-life?  Plenty.  What does it mean to do justice?  Do we do justice when we kill the unborn and call it “women’s health”?  Are we doing justice when we declare what is just only by what we feel is true and right, rather than what morality, truth and justice say is true?  Do we set ourselves up as our own god when we make these choices?  Again, the Bible here is informative.  In Jeremiah 7:1-15, the Lord says it this way:  “If you truly act justly one with another, if you do not oppress the alien, the orphan and the widow, or shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not go after other gods to your own hurt, then I will dwell with you in this place.”

In our culture, abortion is legal up to birth.  In recent time, Dr. Kermit Gosnell, an abortion doctor in Philadelphia was convicted of murder, not for doing abortions but killing the newborn after delivery.  Here is why he was convicted:  “Jury finds Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell guilty of three counts of first-degree murder for the death of three babies that prosecutors said were delivered alive and subsequently killed. NBC News’ Chris Clackum reports.” This is how is was reported by NBC News.  Click here to read the story.  So it was plain to see that Dr. Gosnell was only convicted because he actually killed a baby after it came out of the womb. Had he killed the baby before extraction he would not have been convicted.  Now you can argue when life begins, but you cannot argue that a baby is not a human being until it comes out of the womb.  To do so, as many do, is intellectually dishonest and plain foolishness.  Are we doing justice when we kill unborn babies?  Are we doing “social justice” when we kill unborn babies?

Jeremiah 7:1-15 has this stern, but unmistakable warning:  “Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, make offerings to Baal ….and then come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, “we are safe!” only to go on doing these abomonations?  Has this house become a den of robbers?”  Verse 15 continues: “And I will cast you out of my sight, just as I cast out all your kinfolk, all the offspring of Ephraim.”

Do What I Say, not What I Do

After the death of Governor Mario Cuomo of New York this past week, the press was reporting on his controversial stand on abortion, even though he claimed to be a faithful Catholic.  His response was that, although he personally opposed abortion, he would not make a law banning it.  This is the position of liberal Catholics and Christians.   This position is also the most senseless, illogical and mind-bending position that shreds any sense of logic.  Cuomo defends his position by claiming that his pro-choice supporters are the same people who do the “social justice” that the Catholic Church promotes.  What?  As long as you do some good, you can do some bad and it’s ok?  By that measure Hitler did some good too.  He revived Germany from a defeated, starving nation to a booming economy; do we forgive him for the evil that he did then?

The magazine, First Things, has a fine piece on Cuomo’s position on abortion. Cuomo is apologetic about his position, stating  “that as a legislator he was not responsible for passing laws to protect those lives. In an address at the University of Notre Dame, he said: “What is ideally desirable isn’t always feasible, that there can be different political approaches to abortion besides unyielding adherence to an absolute prohibition.”  This is pure gobbledygook.  It makes no sense.  By this logic you could say that although murder is wrong, I would not want to legislate against it, because there are people out there who don’t think that murder is wrong, that it’s just “women’s health.”   Legislation is all about making value and moral judgements.  Why do we have a law against drunk driving?  After all, many people enjoy drinking. The piece on First Things debunks this reasoning in detail and is well worth reading.  Click here to read it.

“The War on Women”?

During the last election cycle in the United States, the Democratic Party promoted what they called “the war on women.”  For example, Senator Mark Udall of Colorado, and Wendy Davis, who ran for Texas Governor,  based their entire campaign on this false narrative of “the war on women.”  One of my favorite speakers on the pro-life circuit, Greg Kokul, is fond of what he calls “the Columbo method.”  The Columbo method is based on the old TV character of the 1970s, Columbo, starring the great actor, Peter Falk.  Columbo is famous for always asking the crucial question.  After stumbling thorough questioning  a suspect, he turns to leave, but has “just more thing” – then he asks the crucial question that brings final clarity.

What is the crucial question about the so called “war on women”?  You have to ask for clarity from anyone using this false moniker.  Excuse me, but what do you mean by “war on women”?  Only after you get an explanation can you address the issue.  What the left defines as “a war on women” is shorthand for:  abortion for any reason, contraceptives paid for by someone else, free sex as you want it and no rules barring whatever you want in these areas.

Now, those of us who are for protecting the unborn child, the most vulnerable human being in the world, or if we have objections on religious grounds against paying for contraceptive drugs, we are considered to be waging a “war on women.”  We want to protect unborn children from being ripped apart by abortion, piece by piece from a woman’s womb, because this causes the death of a human being.  In our culture, killing another human person is considered murder and a crime, not a personal option, nor “women’s health,” as the left calls it.  Not giving you free contraceptives is not a “war on women.”  We are not saying we’re against you buying your own, which you can do for no more than $9 per month at Target. The cost is not the issue, the issue is why do I, or anyone else, have to pay for your choice of taking contraceptives, something that is totally elective on your part?  Why should an employer owe this to an employee?  The “war on women” is a false narrative, pure and simple.

A Case for Political Activism Regarding Abortion on Demand

We often hear from liberal Christians that their religious beliefs should not interfere with their political ideology such as the question of abortion, religious freedom, contraception and the like.  Famous politicians such as Vice President Joe Biden will tell you that “he believes” what his church, the Roman Catholic Church, teaches but he is not going to let this interfere with his political positions on this issue.  Listen to Joe Biden and Paul Ryan describe their views on abortion during the 2012 Vice Presidential debate.  So, if we are to believe Joe Biden, his religious beliefs and his political beliefs are two separate and different beliefs.  This is totally illogical and pure nonsense.  Our religious beliefs guide our actions in what we do in private and in public.  If you believe Joe Biden then you would, for instance, say that although you’re against rape, you would not vote for a law against rape for political reasons.  If you follow the logic of your stance then this would have to also follow.

From the late 1800s to around World War II, the United States was very pro-Eugenics, a philosophy which promotes selective breeding of humans to improve desired characteristics.  No less than 31 U.S. states had Eugenics laws in the first half of the 20th century.  These laws allowed the government to sterilize a woman, many times without her knowledge.  In 1927 there was a famous Supreme Court case of Buck vs. Bell, in which the Supreme Court ruled that a woman could be sterilized by force in accordance with the Eugenics laws.  Many American scientists and prominent citizens,  such as President Woodrow Wilson and Ralph Waldo Emerson, supported these laws.  In 2009 I wrote a short history in this blog about Eugenics in America.  Click here to view it.  This is a history you did not learn in school, from elementary to the university.  As discussed in this article, only the Catholic Church and a few Protestant ministers, such as Billy Sunday, railed against Eugenics.  Eugenics is now practically extinct.  The credit for this must go to the Catholic Church and to Protestant preachers as earlier mentioned.  The same is the case today for abortion.  In my Catholic church, you will never hear one word preached about the evil of abortion.  The same holds true for most other Catholic churches, and, for that matter, even Protestant churches.

Joe Biden’s position, which is widely shared among liberal Christians, is an abdication of moral responsibility.  As for Catholics, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Section  2272 says this:

2272 Formal co-operation in an abortion constitutes a grave offence. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. ‘A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae’ (76) ‘by the very commission of the offence’, (77) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law . (78) The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

As you can see, the language is very clear and strong.  Cooperation with an abortion is a grave offense.  What Joe Biden is saying, then, is cooperation with abortion.  If you vote for an abortion law, how can you escape the responsibility of an abortion?  So what am I saying here?  I’m saying that Christians, and especially Catholics can, if they want to, end abortion.  The Democratic Party would fold if all Catholics would say no more.  Either you end abortion on demand or we will not vote for you.  Watch how fast the Democratic Party would fall in line.  Unfortunately, our churches have been conqured by our culture.  Watch how nervous a priest or pastor gets whenever they’re challenged on why they never discuss the subject.