An open letter to [Abolish Human Abortion]

CC: Pro-Lifers Everywhere

First of all, for all of you involved, your greater Biblical and moral accuracy, your obedience, your bravery, and your suffering is a rebuke and encouragement to the rest of us. Your message is a huge improvement over the less-than-effective efforts of the so-called Pro-Life efforts of the recent umpteen years. You have already taken enough contradiction of sinners against yourselves, hopefully, you will not be offended by my recommendation to phrase your appeals in even more Biblical terminology.

For consider Him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.

²⁵ ‘Cursed is he who accepts a bribe to strike down an innocent person.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’

1. As in Money, Biblical reform will require recovering control of the language. Words are important, as you already know by the way you are plugging in the word “murder” where it is needed. “Abortion” is not really the best term to be using in your appeal. Using “Abortion” for the murder of the most innocent and most helpless humans, is kind of like using “gay” for one of the most perverse, dishonoring, and most-likely-to-incur-national-judgment types of homosexual behavior. Abortion technically refers to the instances where there is a premature end of gestation. This may be harmful or not, and it may be accidental or not. We only have one verse on this and it does strengthen your position in that – even for accidents – penalty should be “life for life”. Feticide is the more technical term for when humans intentionally murder their unborn neighbor-in-the-womb. This properly brings it into the realm of murder and capital punishment and from there we are to be governed by “even from My altar” and “Thine eye shall not pity” (the guilty).
2. Can’t stop or abolish: Other ideas are corollary to the reality that feticide is a type of homicide. The use of the term “Abolition” is healthy as far as it references the immediacy of the need to give witness and take action lest national judgment descend. But 'abolish' is a misnomer just like ‘abortion’ is a misnomer of what you are against. We don’t want stillbirths or abortions to happen, even when there is minimal harm to the baby who comes out before he is “done”. But we can’t stop them, and if we put energy to get the government to “stop them”, we could only cause much worse things to happen in several areas (privacy, economy, bloating of government agencies, plundering the taxpayer on many counts). We don’t want the murder of feticide to happen either, but there is no way to get directly at that goal either - without all the same violence done to innocent persons.

 This “can’t stop” idea addresses the truth that our duty and direct goal is not to abolish anything but to fulfill a human obligation under the new covenant since Noah’s family. You are trying to re-establish the public submission to God’s law in the area of which class of people are subject to capital punishment. You cannot totally prevent the innocent  preborn from being executed as capital criminals for the crime of inconveniencing the Family and State. This will happen because men are sinful and you will not be able to “stop” them by your own wisdom without committing worse sin and crime. God certainly could stop it by Himself if He so chose. Remember He allowed the Righteous Abel to be executed by his brother, but preserved countless people from likely death (David & his ‘mighty men’, Hitler, battlefield veterans throughout history)

But after the Covenant made with Noah, God chose to require Men to participate with Him in communicating His wrath upon those who smash at His image by murder, kidnapping/coercion, and theft of property. Now our responsibility is focused on exerting ourselves toward executing the guilty instead of silence or inaction concerning the execution of the innocent and helpless. We should be well-instructed by the irrational contradiction that Leftists and Communists everywhere -- including the current Jesuit Pope -- are dedicated to stopping any execution of post-partum humans who are guilty of God’s defined capital crimes. Yet this zeal to scale back “cruel and unusual punishment” is coming from the same political class who is enthused about murdering millions of the most helpless and most innocent to this very hour. Not only that, but the same group-ownership philosophies are responsible for the murder of countless non-innocent and non-helpless humans during the persecutions and wars of the Protestant Reformation, and the wars of the last several centuries. Who starved the Ukrainians? Who handed over the Eastern European countries to the Gulag and the genocide of Russian Communism? What ideology extinguished tens of millions in China, Vietnam, and Cambodia? That’s right, the same players who decry the more Biblical capital executions still within the cultural memory of the West. Our goal is to persuade people that God requires us to execute the criminals He defines as capital.

More on this and other negative and positive reform options for the Neighbor to pursue are found in my article (this is not just for Christians, we are all under the cursings or blessings which flow from the Noahic Covenant):

How to Stop Feticide before Next January

I have a story which illustrates that Americans did understand this at an earlier time. Not long after the wagon trains began bringing settlers out to Oregon, the Cayuse Indians in the Oregon Territory murdered Dr. Whitman and others at their new mission station. It started a minor war, since the Cayuse counted the murderers justified and tried to get other tribes to join with them against the immigrants to the area. They suspected (some think they had outside influence) Dr. Whitman was deliberately poisoning them with his medicine or giving them deadly disease. Robert Newell, one of the charter Oregon statesmen from Champoeg, was called upon to travel to the area (1848) and try to persuade the Nez Perce tribes not to participate in the war on the side of the Cayuse against the US soldiers who were trying to bring the murderers to justice. Mr. Newell is reputed to have been most proud of two books: The Bible and Shakespeare. Even though he was a Mason, I was astonished to read how he preached a Biblical truth already lost to most Christians. He explained to the Nez Perce that the Great Spirit required bystanders to put murderers to death, and if the blood of the innocent on the soil wasn’t expiated by the blood of the guilty, God would visit His judgments on the population of the area in general and everyone would suffer.

^{Num 35:33} So you shall not pollute the land in which you are; for blood pollutes the land and no expiation can be made for the land for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.

By this, he showed an awareness of the other two principles of Genesis 9:5,6 which seem to be totally lost to our generation. Thinking something is a crime, or “there oughta’ be a law’ is not enough. There has to be an alertness to what the punishment for the crime should be and a sense of what the righteous, omnipotent God will do to a culture who refuses to punish that crime in the right way.

Newell threatened the tribe, like a prophet of God, of what God would do to them if they became partners with the murderers by taking up common cause with their native-American “brothers” against the “Christian”, Anglo-Saxon Newcomers to the area. He was highlighting God’s “I will Require….” From Gen. 9:5. So instead of joining the Cayuse, he was appealing to them (and threatening) to wait this one out, or join with the US forces to pressure the Cayuse tribe to “throw their heads over the wall”, to give up the men most responsible for the murders so that God’s wrath could be appeased. Several of the Cayuse eventually did consent to come to Oregon City and stand trial. They were convicted and hanged. Hopefully, justice was done.

Point being – we can’t stop crime by others by the genius of our own ideas and wisdom. Human efforts tend to steer clear of submission to God’s law with its incomparably wise and gracious procedures for dealing with sin and crime in this fallen world. If we are willing to follow God’s laws in handling feticide, we actually will see the consequences of fewer instances than we thought possible. If we just try to stop a behavior with what we think are good ideas, it will get worse or cause other unintentional, collateral damage.

Sin or Crime? Under your “Abortion and the Gospel” page you are using the noun: ‘sin’ - for the crime of feticide….

“This is why we say not only that abortion is sin, but that the Gospel is the answer to sin.”

Though it is certainly true that feticide is a sin, the reason we are obligated to take action about it, is because it is a crime. Crimes are sins which God requires Bystanders to punish in the way He defines. The sword of the civil magistrate is not authorized to bring God’s wrath down on any sin which is not a crime. (Nothing in this to encourage what we think of as vigilante justice. That would be a large area of discussion outside the current focus.) What I am pointing to is accuracy in the language within a culture which erroneously thinks there exists such a thing as ‘religious freedom’, pluralism, or the separation of religion from law enforcement. “Sin”, in the American System, is an optional matter of private judgment, since there is broad tolerance for all religions as long as you don’t attempt to approach the moral issues of crime and punishment (i.e. Economy and Civil Government). What your religion says is sin may not be true for my religion, and I have to give you freedom to practice your religion – as long as you don’t trespass into the areas mentioned above. Your accusation of sin will not and should not harsh my mellow because it doesn’t apply to me unless we share the same religion. Besides, in Christianity, isn’t the whole point – that we are forgiven? You can see why the church tends not to say very much about economy and law – and finds it pretty safe to stick with just referring to crimes like homosexual acts as being just sins.

In my historical study I stumbled on the trace of this and how it came about from the influence of the humanistic Enlightenment. Natural Law might be the key phrase here, for its utility of being interpreted in opposite ways by the 6-day creationists and humanists. Since “natural” just refers to what is and God created all things, Natural and Divine law could mean the same thing. God’s laws are fully coordinated with all the natural creation. But to the Humanist/Materialist worldview “natural” can mean anything they want to arbitrarily think is “natural” (material vs. Supernatural). Somehow, they irrationally make a jump from “what is” to “what ought to be”, but it is arbitrary because they have no personal reference point to bring in the concept of good and evil. Appealing to Natural Law will just be trying to argue inside the enemy’s worldview which I try to demonstrate here:

https://www.keepandshare.com/discuss/22558/natural-law-the-wolf-in-sheep-s-clothing?i=148077

In our system, the concept of sin is only relevant in the context of whichever religious cult the culture thinks you are free to indulge in. The attitude is: In religion what’s “true” for one individual may not be true for another. Consequently, the logical thinkers will not be abashed by your accusations of ‘sin’, since that is only true for you and not true for them. It is only when you attempt to reference an authority beyond Man regarding crime that you discover the real American Civil Religion that brooks no treason. I am extremely suspicious that if the Church fails to proclaim the Biblical standards for crime, they will not be able to hold the line on Biblical standards for sin either. Yesterday homosexual actions were crime. Today they are just sin. Connect the dots. Tomorrow, it is not likely the Church will even be calling homosexual acts sin. And so it goes with other things.

Acknowledging feticide as murder, we must treat with Father, Mother, Doctor, and Nurse. All these are connected to the murder-guilt like the driver of the get-away car in a bank robbery. The father’s culpability may be lessened to the degree that the Family or the Civil Government prevents him from attempts to save the life of the offspring he is responsible for siring. One of the ways to stimulate the sense of responsibility in the male would be to train the society that it is a capital crime for even the mother to act against the life of the child in the womb. That way, both “lovers” would instantly know that if the father (or anyone) suggests feticide as a solution, he is suggesting in the same breath that the mother be executed for murder. Fewer women would stay deceived that such a counselor loved

4. Primary Offense in the whole feticide issue is against God, not Man. When we show gory pictures of dismembered bodies, or the cute babies who will never be or would never have been if parents hadn’t declined the opportunity to murder – we need to remember that the offense of the crime is not that Man is so great or important, but that God has been smashed at through His Picture. The reason it is wrong -- the reason bystanders are required to act -- is not because Man is at the Top of the Food Chain, whether by creation or evolution. It is because the murderer is striking at God in the only way it is possible.

For in the image of God
He made man.

6. The father is more responsible than the mother. It may be that the eternal regret and torment may end up later and greater for the father than the more visible emotional pain of mothers. We should talk primarily about the responsibility of the father just as David was held more responsible in the Biblical stories than Bathsheba.
7. If you don’t dig out the root of idolatry in taxes and money and education – your efforts to strengthen the punishments for feticide will ultimately fail. Because people tolerate the taxes that pay for education – there is the delusion that the government has the ability to provide kindergarten through college. Because they are the responsible providers of the education, they must control it and through discipleship they influence the student’s thinking to approve of the taxes, the dishonest money, and to celebrate the criminal, sex perversions. Media plus Education plus Civil Government easily overpowers the influence of the Church in America who doesn’t even want to talk about law or economy or military. Until Christians across the landscape are willing to conform their teaching about taxes to the Scriptures, taxes will continue to be the primary “contagion” of the apostasy from Christ’s ownership. Taxes provide for the education, for the dominance of welfare, for the warfare. Taxes control what form of money the economy is going to be using, and money controls the laws. Until Christians are willing to contribute time and effort to seeing that God’s crimes are punished God’s way, the population will increasingly come under the coercion of unwilling taxation which supports punishing the innocent and rewarding the guilty.

LeperWatchman@yahoo.com