The Mad Abortionist
19 Nov., 2017
Word spread of an abortionist gone mad. The poor wretch felt threatened by the rhetoric of Christians who were calling his deeds “murderous” and himself a “murderer.” Would he be targeted by vengeful Christian fanatics? Might they not act upon the charge that he was truly killing babies? This thought loomed increasingly in his mind driving him to determine to protect himself by attacking those churches who were preaching against abortion – and himself. And he began to rail against these foes.
His rhetoric of condemnation of those who condemned him drifted to the considered option of taking action to suppress or outright obstruct those who threatened him by their contemptuous rhetoric. He determined to drum up his own campaign of denunciation of such churches and their members who were active in leadership of the community: councilmen, mayor, pastors.
The primary target of his disdain was the Bible-believing churches which gave no sway in their affirmation of the humanity of the womb children and the correlative charge against him, charging him with murder as the criminal responsible for their deaths. He felt threatened by their anti-abortion rhetoric. Indeed, he proclaimed it hate speech which ought to be outlawed and he urged the authorities to prosecute his opponents.
Moreover, he believed that in the meantime, he had the right to protect himself from the threat.
The church was well aware of his rising hostile rhetoric and some members began to voice concerns about their safety. Might this mad fellow, miserably blinded by sin indeed, not take up some course of action? Perhaps he would think it necessary to defend himself by attacking the church or doing harm to the people in the building! Church members began discussing the need to shore up their own safety and take measures for the protection of their members. Families were especially concerned for one another and their children.
The cost for protection would be a daunting, an almost incalculable enterprise. Security from burglary by an alarm system was in place, but quite insufficient. Electronic monitors might me needed to measure any weapons that might be carried by persons entering the premises. Cameras might assist to capture anyone approaching entry on occasions for large meetings, particularly Sunday mornings. The arming of members in attendance at all meetings would become a managed necessity.
But in the midst of these calculations, a question came to mind. Why, wondered some parishioners, do we take such pains to defend ourselves when we allow the destruction of those whose murders are daily events of which we know precisely the precise locations where the fouls deeds occur?
They decided, then, to cease defense preparations for themselves until they had devoted themselves more vigorously to the defense of victims of the mad abortionists. They and their elder church members had allowed the deaths of innocents for 45 years. How could they defend themselves when they had refused to defend their neighbors?
Justifiable suicide was the only consistent ethical action to take. And they had failed to act.
But now, in repentance They would allow themselves to be defenseless and do nothing.