Mass Murder?
Mass Murder?
On October 21, 2006 the Peoria Journal Star published a letter to the editor written by State Senate Democratic candidate David Koehler. It was published on page A5. Quoting a portion of that letter:
“Abortion: No one I know is pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. Government interference into such a personal area is not the answer. I will work to ensure that we do a better job of preventing unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing the need for abortion.”
I wrote and sent a letter to the editor in response to his letter. Because of restrictions on letters to the editor, I did not respond fully. I will add additional information not included in the original response. Of course, I don’t know if the Peoria Journal Star will publish my letter or how they will edit it. The letter, as I wrote it, is as follows:
“What nonsense! State Senate candidate David Koehler is not pro-abortion; he’s pro-choice. And what are the two choices? To murder your unborn baby or not to murder your unborn baby.
I have a neighbor whose dog keeps me awake all night. We all know that sleep deprivation is a form of torture. I’m pro-choice. My choice is to murder my neighbor for torturing me. No harm in being pro-choice!
Mr. Koehler! No one has the moral right to murder another human. No one! Not a mother! Not a father! Not you! Not me!
When you are bowed down before GOD, do you really believe HE will accept your asinine distinction between being pro-choice and pro-abortion? Are you or are you not an accessory to mass murder? The murder of innocent unborn children.”
Looking at other aspects of Mr. Koehler’s comments about the murder of unborn babies, he states “I will work to ensure that we do a better job of preventing unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing the need for abortion.” First question: When did the murder of an unborn baby become a need? It may be something that is desired by someone. However, it certainly is not something that is required by most of those who murder an unborn baby. Quite frankly, the murder of an unborn baby is not now nor will it ever be a need!!!
Understandably in a letter to the editor, he does not explain how he “will work to ensure that we do a better job of preventing unintended pregnancies….” However, as far as I know, he has not explained that on the campaign trail either. Shouldn’t we know how he intends to accomplish this since it has not been accomplished in the past? I’ve got another question along this line. If the murdering of one’s unborn baby is a personal area where government should not interfere, why is the personal matter of having sexual intercourse an area where the government can interfere?
Let’s make believe that Mr. Koehler actual does have a magic bullet that will help prevent unintended pregnancies. (I do wish he would have explained what he means by “unintended.” Does he mean that women who have intercourse don’t realize that they might possibly become pregnant because of that intercourse?) Let’s say that because of Mr. Koehler’s efforts, fewer pregnancies occur in central Illinois. Let’s say that ten abortions (either clinical or by pill) occur next year. Does that mean that those ten abortions are not the murder of ten innocent unborn babies? THE ANSWER: NO!!! Ten murders will still occur and ten murders are ten too many.
Is Mr. Koehler still an accessory to mass murders? How many murders are too many murders! My answer is one. I believe GOD’S answer is one! “Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
Mr. Koehler admits through his letter that he knows that an abortion is the murder of an unborn baby. He admits it when he tries to rationalize the perceived difference between being pro-abortion and being pro-choice. If an abortion is not the murder of an unborn baby, it does not matter if he is pro-abortion or pro-choice. Therefore, he knows that every abortion is the murder of an unborn baby.
According to Microsoft’s Encarta, this is the definition of murder. “Murder, in criminal law, intentionally causing the death (homicide) of any person. (“Murder”, Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. [DVD]. Redmond, Wa: Microsoft Corporation, 2006.) Notice that murder is the intentional death of a person. Every woman that walks into an abortion clinic demanding an abortion or takes an abortion pill is intentional causing the death of a person—that woman’s unborn baby.
According to Microsoft’s Encarta, this is the definition of accessory in a legal sense. “Accessory (law), in criminal law, accomplice in the commission of an offense as distinguished from the chief offender. An accessory before the fact is one who deliberately encourages others to commit an offense, but who does not take a direct part in the offense. …The tendency of modern legislation has been to convert accessories before the fact into principals, and an accessory before the fact is often subject to a punishment as severe as that imposed upon a principal.” (“Accessory” (law), Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007 [DVD]. Redmond, Wa: Microsoft Corporation, 2006.) In other words, if an abortion is murder and it is, then encouraging a woman to have an abortion by supporting the legalization of that murder is also encouraging an individual who is committing a crime against society. If humans know this, you can be sure that GOD knows this. Mr. Koehler seems to be guilty of being an accessory before the fact in the murder of unborn babies. Yet, he tries to defend and justify his indefensible position.
Note how little Mr. Koehler understands the function and purpose of government. He declares “Government interference into such a personal area is not the answer.” INTERFERENCE? PERSONAL AREA? When did it become personal to murder a human? When did it become interference to STOP the murder of a human? The truth is that the basic, fundamental function of government is to
PROTECT the life of its citizens. All of its citizens! This is not the interference of government. It is the fulfillment of its basic mandate. What is more relevant than to PROTECT the lives of the government’s most innocent citizens? Citizens who have done absolutely nothing wrong.
If David Koehler does not understand this basic principle, he should NOT be running for public office! If David Koehler does not understand this basic principle, does he deserve your vote?
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
On October 21, 2006 the Peoria Journal Star published a letter to the editor written by State Senate Democratic candidate David Koehler. It was published on page A5. Quoting a portion of that letter:
“Abortion: No one I know is pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. Government interference into such a personal area is not the answer. I will work to ensure that we do a better job of preventing unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing the need for abortion.”
I wrote and sent a letter to the editor in response to his letter. Because of restrictions on letters to the editor, I did not respond fully. I will add additional information not included in the original response. Of course, I don’t know if the Peoria Journal Star will publish my letter or how they will edit it. The letter, as I wrote it, is as follows:
“What nonsense! State Senate candidate David Koehler is not pro-abortion; he’s pro-choice. And what are the two choices? To murder your unborn baby or not to murder your unborn baby.
I have a neighbor whose dog keeps me awake all night. We all know that sleep deprivation is a form of torture. I’m pro-choice. My choice is to murder my neighbor for torturing me. No harm in being pro-choice!
Mr. Koehler! No one has the moral right to murder another human. No one! Not a mother! Not a father! Not you! Not me!
When you are bowed down before GOD, do you really believe HE will accept your asinine distinction between being pro-choice and pro-abortion? Are you or are you not an accessory to mass murder? The murder of innocent unborn children.”
Looking at other aspects of Mr. Koehler’s comments about the murder of unborn babies, he states “I will work to ensure that we do a better job of preventing unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing the need for abortion.” First question: When did the murder of an unborn baby become a need? It may be something that is desired by someone. However, it certainly is not something that is required by most of those who murder an unborn baby. Quite frankly, the murder of an unborn baby is not now nor will it ever be a need!!!
Understandably in a letter to the editor, he does not explain how he “will work to ensure that we do a better job of preventing unintended pregnancies….” However, as far as I know, he has not explained that on the campaign trail either. Shouldn’t we know how he intends to accomplish this since it has not been accomplished in the past? I’ve got another question along this line. If the murdering of one’s unborn baby is a personal area where government should not interfere, why is the personal matter of having sexual intercourse an area where the government can interfere?
Let’s make believe that Mr. Koehler actual does have a magic bullet that will help prevent unintended pregnancies. (I do wish he would have explained what he means by “unintended.” Does he mean that women who have intercourse don’t realize that they might possibly become pregnant because of that intercourse?) Let’s say that because of Mr. Koehler’s efforts, fewer pregnancies occur in central Illinois. Let’s say that ten abortions (either clinical or by pill) occur next year. Does that mean that those ten abortions are not the murder of ten innocent unborn babies? THE ANSWER: NO!!! Ten murders will still occur and ten murders are ten too many.
Is Mr. Koehler still an accessory to mass murders? How many murders are too many murders! My answer is one. I believe GOD’S answer is one! “Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
Mr. Koehler admits through his letter that he knows that an abortion is the murder of an unborn baby. He admits it when he tries to rationalize the perceived difference between being pro-abortion and being pro-choice. If an abortion is not the murder of an unborn baby, it does not matter if he is pro-abortion or pro-choice. Therefore, he knows that every abortion is the murder of an unborn baby.
According to Microsoft’s Encarta, this is the definition of murder. “Murder, in criminal law, intentionally causing the death (homicide) of any person. (“Murder”, Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. [DVD]. Redmond, Wa: Microsoft Corporation, 2006.) Notice that murder is the intentional death of a person. Every woman that walks into an abortion clinic demanding an abortion or takes an abortion pill is intentional causing the death of a person—that woman’s unborn baby.
According to Microsoft’s Encarta, this is the definition of accessory in a legal sense. “Accessory (law), in criminal law, accomplice in the commission of an offense as distinguished from the chief offender. An accessory before the fact is one who deliberately encourages others to commit an offense, but who does not take a direct part in the offense. …The tendency of modern legislation has been to convert accessories before the fact into principals, and an accessory before the fact is often subject to a punishment as severe as that imposed upon a principal.” (“Accessory” (law), Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007 [DVD]. Redmond, Wa: Microsoft Corporation, 2006.) In other words, if an abortion is murder and it is, then encouraging a woman to have an abortion by supporting the legalization of that murder is also encouraging an individual who is committing a crime against society. If humans know this, you can be sure that GOD knows this. Mr. Koehler seems to be guilty of being an accessory before the fact in the murder of unborn babies. Yet, he tries to defend and justify his indefensible position.
Note how little Mr. Koehler understands the function and purpose of government. He declares “Government interference into such a personal area is not the answer.” INTERFERENCE? PERSONAL AREA? When did it become personal to murder a human? When did it become interference to STOP the murder of a human? The truth is that the basic, fundamental function of government is to
PROTECT the life of its citizens. All of its citizens! This is not the interference of government. It is the fulfillment of its basic mandate. What is more relevant than to PROTECT the lives of the government’s most innocent citizens? Citizens who have done absolutely nothing wrong.
If David Koehler does not understand this basic principle, he should NOT be running for public office! If David Koehler does not understand this basic principle, does he deserve your vote?
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 11:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home