This past Sunday morning abortionist George Tiller was gunned down in his church where he served as an usher (that’s another whole issue). In the wake of this event, the pro-life groups have quickly worked on damage control in an attempt to make it known to the world that they disapprove of Tiller’s murder. So much so, I’m afraid, that it seems to be the overarching theme of all their commentaries and interviews on the issue, overshadowing the legacy of death this wicked man left behind. Resulting in (yet again) all the focus of the abortion debate being diverted to everything but the countless babies victimized by this horrific evil.
While the pro-lifers are busy making every effort to show just how virtuous they are by denouncing Tiller’s death, the pro-abortionists, on the other hand, are gearing up to capitalize on this event by:
* Using it as a distraction from the ever-increasing body count of babies murdered in this country at the hands of Tiller and others like him.
* Exploiting Tiller’s death to help enact legislation for the censorship and even criminalization of any views that oppose this barbaric “right.”
* Gaining the sympathy (and thus changing public opinion) of the masses of lemmings (most of which are eligible to vote) who don’t question what they’re told or know how to think for themselves, but instead prefer to be told what to think via such outlets as the evening news.
So I pose a question for those on the pro-life side and a question for those on the pro-death side:
For the pro-life community who are falling all over each other to denounce this killer’s murder, I have the following question: Would you have been–with equal fervor–so anxious to be the loudest voice denouncing the murder of say . . . Heinrich Himmler, Josef Mengele, Adolf Hitler (or any others directly involved in the Nazi death camps) had they been stopped by a gunman?
And for the pro-abortion community who’s currently lamenting Tiller’s murder, I have this question: How would you feel if George Tiller, instead of being killed in church, had instead been murdered in his mother’s womb by an abortionist?
If man is merely a glorified single-celled organism run amok, he has no inherent worth, value, or dignity; ultimately man is then merely a cosmic accident, and the human community bestows any value he has upon him. It is not difficult to see how this would lead to a radical view on abortion. Peter Singer, a renowned bioethicist at Princeton University, argues that abortion should be legal prior to “personhood.” What makes this shocking is that Singer’s definition of personhood would carry the abortion question not into the second or third trimester of a pregnancy but into the second year after birth. That’s right, by Singer’s definition my thirteen-month-old son (due to the fact that he cannot communicate or sustain his own life without help) has not yet reached personhood, and to take his life now would be no more problematic than a pre-birth abortion. While this is shocking, I must ask a question: What is the difference between my thirteen-month-old son and a six-month-old fetus? The answer is, location. If it is acceptable to kill a child in the womb, it is also acceptable to do so outside the womb. Peter Singer is not being morbid, he is being consistent.
Yet another story of a baby abandoned in a trash can. A couple differences in this story from the others out there: This happened in an airplane and the mother and the child she attempted to kill have been “reunited.” Huh?
This is the face of a cold-blooded murderer of innocent, defenseless children.
Unlike the child that survived an attempted “legal” abortion only to have her life snuffed out in a trash can by a cold-blooded abortion clinic staff member (see 
Posterity will discover the truth — that most Christians of our generation, including Christian leaders, advocated the cutting off of the godly seed and unwittingly embraced the culture of death, by distorting the natural purposes of their bodies and thwarting the blessings of the womb. The result is a generation of males stripped of their manhood and women with empty wombs. The Bible calls debt a curse and children a blessing, but our culture applies for curses and rejects blessings. This will be the tragic legacy of far too many Christians.
“I am opposed to abortion and to government funding of abortions. We should not spend state funds on abortions because so many people believe abortion is wrong.”
“There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of [a] higher order than the right to life … that was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore outside your right to be concerned.
“While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized — the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grown old.
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any lower or more wicked than the 
And the 
Christ Alone Wyoming 