Michael Bray

Author of A Time To Kill

Angel Dillard Delivered from the Tyrant’s FACE

9 May, 2016

Hounded by feds with FACE in hands for five years, Mrs. Dillard enjoyed some relief on May 6, 2016.  The jury ruled that her warnings to an abortionist, who had stepped up to take the place of the slain George Tiller, were not true threats. Indeed, Abortionist Tiller has still not been replaced since he was terminated by the honorable Scott Roeder in the Year of our Lord, 2009.

It must have been a dismal day form the likes of Jessica Mason Pieklo, an “adjunct law professor” in Boulder, and writer for the left-wing online Rewire News (https://rewire.news/) Colorado.  Miss Pieklo reported:

It shouldn’t be a difficult conclusion to come to.  Dillard’s letter to Means came when Means was considering performing abortions and just after the assassination of one of the most visible abortion providers in the country. Dillard’s letter also happened in the tinderbox of Wichita, Kansas, the epicenter of radical anti-choice violence.

Indeed, the Raging Bull staff were licking their chops for a hanging.  As the trial began they sounded forth the news on their website: “DOJ Violent Forced Birther Trial Begins.” For those unfamiliar with the hate speech of these pro-aborts.  A “birther” is someone who believes that God gives children to those created in his “image” (this imago Dei resides exclusively in human beings as distinguished from the rest of the animal world, per the long standing Truth of our Christian culture, affording us the basis for things we take from granted like human rights, civil rights, humanitarian enterprises, and contra the newly emerging animal rights phenomenon which is largely a product of this ignorance or abandonment of that foundational ethical principal).  The “birther” would therefore maintain a principled defense of human life consistent with the our history and culture which has was produced by adherence to this Christian doctrine.

Accordingly, “Forced Birther” is a term consistently derived from the afore-explicated principle. If a child exists, as he would following conception and constant growth in his mother’s womb, then the killing of the child would be regarded as murder and therefore, rightfully, be opposed by those with moral cognizance.  Therefore, those recognizing the fact would argue and act in favor of the life of the child and “force” those who would attack the child or prohibit his life from continuing toward birth and life on earth outside the womb to “stand down,”  as it were (were one to employ militant terminology).

So much for great expectations. This jury, thanks be to God, was not buying the bull.

Comments are currently closed.