Courts and Truth?
Michael Bray 30 Jan., 2014
Forget it as Long as they Reject The Law of God and Sanctity of Human Life
Here follows Bray’s Commentary on Kansas Justices’ questioning of Roeder defense attorney, Rachel Pickering.
Scott Roeder is before the Kansas Supremes in his appeal following conviction for the murder of Abortionist George Tiller. At the same time, Phill Kline, the abused former Attorney General of the state, continues to seek relief from the persecution he has suffered at the hands of the pro-abortion lobby.
The truth is repeatedly skirted or suppressed by the courts when they are faced with the humanity of womb children. Both former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline and abortionist terminator Scott Roeder share that experience quite personally. Both are currently involved in court proceedings: Kline has been attacked, apparently under the inspiration of the powers of the abortion lobby, three times. He was vindicated twice and is now undergoing the third round of charges which can only be regarded as an ideologically driven assault. The weapon, of course, is the courts – the same animal which gave us legalized baby killing in the first place. And the courts protect that animal which has carried on the lion’s share of child murder – Planned Parenthood.
World magazine reported:
In 2008 . . . Kline filed 107 criminal charges against Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri for manufacturing client records, failing to keep proper records, and failing to determine the viability of a late-term baby before performing an abortion. To many prolifers, the ethics hearing against Kline looks like an effort to discredit those charges and send a clear message to other prosecutors across the country who might investigate the group: Don’t even think about it . . .
The system has been very good to Planned Parenthood, which collects about $360 million in taxpayer dollars annually. Despite years of reports suggesting that Planned Parenthood workers nationwide routinely violate laws, no affiliate has ever been convicted in a criminal court. Until Kline, none had even been charged. If convicted, Planned Parenthood could lose its federal funding. (Les Sillars,“Vengeance on the Prairie,” World Magazine, May 6, 2011 – http://www.worldmag.com/2011/05/vengeance_on_the_prairie)
And it is not just simply the greedy pursuit of federal dollars by a particular selfish “interest group.” It is a spiritual hatred of a profound truth: the image of God in man; in particular, the image of God in a human being while he is yet in the womb.
Roeder’s defense attorney has been grilled as if she held a secret that everyone knew but no one in authority must publicly utter. One thinks of the propaganda ministers of the former Soviet Union. Truth and freedom were outside the system. The West was free! But that truth was suppressed. News, truth, from outside was kept out! If the Truth were allowed to penetrate the Iron Curtain and seep into the hearts and minds of the people, the system would fail. The people might revolt!
Not for the oppressors to worry. The people were too base to revolt. They had rejected God and he had delivered over to oppressors according to his own disciplinary purposes in the earth. The same condition appears to be ours in this Yankee land. No revolt. A rejection of the likes of Scott Roeder. An embracing of the lies surrounding child slaughter.
So, comes now Scott Roeder again before the court, the Kansas State Supreme Court. He has a defender who is rattling the Kansas Supremes with the truth. It is amusing.
AP reporter John Hanna (“Kansas Supreme Court Expresses Doubt about Defense Offered by Abortion Provider’s Killer,” January 29, 2014) [Uh, why are rapists not “rape providers”? Just askin’.] reports on the fact that all seven justices of the Kansas Supreme Court “had pointed questions for the attorney representing Scott Roeder.”
“Rachel Pickering, an appellate defender, argued that Roeder should get a new trial because jurors weren’t allowed to consider whether they could convict him of voluntary manslaughter, rather than first-degree murder. The lesser crime covers killings that occur when people have a sincere but unreasonable belief that harm to themselves or others is imminent and justifies deadly force. . .”
“During Roeder’s trial, Sedgwick County District Judge Warren Wilbert allowed the confessed killer to testify to his beliefs but ultimately refused to let the jury consider the lesser charge after hearing all the trial evidence. The defense’s tactic outraged Tiller’s colleagues and abortion-rights advocates nationwide, who feared it gave a more-than-tacit approval to further acts of violence,” wrote Mr. Hanna.
Pickering pointed out the fact that Roeder believed not only that Tiller was murdering womb children but that even if the state allowed for abortion, the restrictions that were in law were violated by Tiller. The fact that the trial judge did not allow Roeder to be tried for the lesser crime of voluntary manslaughter rather than murder was grounds for a new trial. “The lesser crime covers killings that occur when people have a sincere but unreasonable belief that harm to themselves or others is imminent and justifies deadly force” and “Roeder also believed the doctor was violating Kansas law,” reported Hanna.
Indeed, said Pickering to the court, “We’re talking about his view that this doctor is performing illegal abortions resulting in the deaths of others.”
The justices attempted to compare Tiller to others involved in death: viz., tobacco merchants or doctors who turn off life support for severely disabled and dying people.
What if someone shoots the checkout clerk at a tobacco store because he knows that those cigar venders kill people by selling them those lethal cigars? So wonders Justice Eric Rosen. And what if someone has grandma on a ventilator and she has been there for years and knows no one and is utterly dependent upon that machine and the nearest of kin decide to take her off and let her die and then some fanatic comes along and shoots the kin folks of grandma so they won’t take her off the machine?
Yeah! That’s what Justice Dan Biles wants to know.
Well, Justices, is there a difference between “actively shrinking and dying” folks in the twilight of their time on earth and those who are “actively growing” and coming into the dawn of their life? Maybe we can simply say that there is a time for dying, and folks ought be allowed to die in peace. Likewise, there is a time for living and folks, alive and growing, ought to be allowed to be born.
Life is precious, but it is not eternal. The rule of sin is that unto every man is appointed to die. We accept that and we preach a Message that presents hope tied to the Resurrection as demonstrated in the power of the Messiah. We allow death to come in due time, but we take no human life other than in in accordance with the precepts of His ordinances. And those do not include the killing of innocents which is murder.
The general policy of legalized slaughtering of innocent children on the grounds that the mother finds the child inconvenient is inexcusable. It is not a complex problem fraught with ethical difficulties. It is nothing but crass pagan rejection of the image of God in mankind.
To compare such wholesale childslaughter with smoking a cigar (or how about living in a city where one subjects one’s family to polluted air?) and suggest a comparison is simple silliness.
Come judges of men! Take your office seriously. You may be remembered for nothing else in history but the way you treated Scott Roeder. For certain, the Creator and Protector of the innocent ones is watching you.