The Camden County Jail . . .

3 January, 2012
Michael Bray
The New Jersey Camden County Jail . . .

Has an inmate who does business out of a mailing address: 1 Alpha Avenue, Suite 27, Voorhees, NJ 08043. Advertising for his American Women Services at that address lists sites for the “service” of abortion in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia as well as other New Jersey locations. He has 16 sites where he “performs the service” of aborting children from their mothers’ wombs. What is not listed in the advertisements is his office at American Family Planning, 6770 N. Ninth Ave., Pensacola, Florida.

The abortionist has been in trouble many times before, losing his license in not only those four states in which he currently advertises, but also the state of Florida. Vicky Saporta, the decades-old president of the National Abortion Federation in Washington, D.C., assures abortion fans and observers that inmate abortionist Steven Brigham’s practices “are not representative of abortion care throughout the country.”

A year before he was jailed, in a September 2010 blog post that addressed an investigation into Brigham’s practices by the Maryland Board of Physicians, Saporta said Brigham “has come under fire from state licensing boards and health departments throughout his career and has had his medical license temporarily suspended, relinquished or revoked in five states.” (http://www.pnj.com/article/20120103/NEWS01/201030321, Pensacola News Journal, January 3, 2012 originally published in he Courier-Post of New Jersey).

He came “under fire” when, a year later (August 13, 2011), his hireling, Dr. Nicola Riley performed a “botched abortion” in Elkton, Maryland on an 18-year-old woman, perforating her uterus and cutting her bowel. Associated Press writer Kasey Jones, reported as follows on Sep 4, 2011:

The 18-year-old woman initially went to an American Women’s Services office in New Jersey and met with Brigham on Aug. 12, according to the order. She returned the next day and was given pills to induce contractions, and told to drive 60 miles to the Elkton facility where the abortion would be performed.

Several days later, the Elkton police department, acting on a warrant for the woman’s medical record, found a freezer with about 35 late-term fetuses. Elkton police didn’t immediately return a telephone message Friday night.

It took a few months, but on 28 December under the direction of a grand jury both Brigham and Riley were rounded up and ushered into that place where all abortionists belong. Authorities arrested Dr. Nicola Riley in Salt Lake City and jailed her there. Brigham was placed in the Camden County jail in New Jersey and awaits an extradition hearing for a trip to Maryland and prosecution there. The two abortionists are charged with “multiple counts of murder” (Fox News, 30 December, 2011).

It was an excellent way to conclude anno Domini 2011, and the prosecution of these two for murdering womb children is a move in the direction of restoring protection for those still wholly dependent upon their mothers.

Especially interesting is the concomitant news regarding the burning of an abortuary in Pensacola, Florida on the first day of the new year. Brigham, it turns out, was the one who was running the abortion business in that historic town of anti-abortion activity. He had quietly taken over the practice of Pensacola abortionist John Britton after the latter was terminated by St. Paul Hill in 1994. Although Brigham’s license was subsequently suspended in Florida, he had managed to continue his practice there, apparently hiring other abortionists if not covertly delivering the service himself illegally. (The mailing address for the burned Florida abortuary was 1 Alpha Avenue, Suite 27, Voorhees, NJ 08043.)

Hmm. Consider the desperate way in which the accused abides: discovery of the crime (35 bodies in late August), nervous awaiting of results of the grand jury investigation for four months, arrest on 27 December and accusation of multiple murders. And then comes the burning of one’s own abortuary four days later. It is a curious thing, actually. There have been no abortuary demolitions in many years and only two abortuary arsons in the past six years. Was it really a baby-saving revival of sorts or is there another cause to consider?

I have been disgusted over the years by those “right-to-lifers” who respond to abortuary demolitions with great indignation and who – as if to preserve their blessed reputations of “non-violence” – suggest every imaginable self-serving explanation for the cause of the conflagration : 1) foolish, impatient people who aren’t really prolife, 2) opponents trying to make prolifers look bad, 3) abortionists trying to get sympathy or collect insurance.

However, I must say that number three above has a certain appeal, here. Brigham has got to be in financial woe. It is prosecution time. He sits in jail. And he needs a good lawyer. Moreover, jailed, he is not out there to manage his “business,” and one of his main money-making employees is locked up in Utah on the same murder charges. Indeed, she is probably ready to spill some information that won’t do him too much juridical good. He needs to keep her happy and maybe take care of her legal defense as well. Fire insurance money might have been the only way to get some fast cash.

Normally I take great encouragement in the work of God’s Spirit in those who defend the innocent. And I am loathe to give it up here and put the “blame” on some less noble causes for the glorious burning of an abortuary. But the facts urge consideration here of Brigham’s hand in this deed.

If I were advising all those federal agents from FBI, ATF, FEMA, CIA or any other post-911 “terrorist” hunting federal agency which might be involved in pursuing anti-abortion extremists, I would suggest checking all communication Brigham has had with anyone in recent months. It may well be that our G-men are considering all such options. But if not, I am happy to have served my country and helped them out.

The Impending Execution of Paul Hill

[cir. July, 1997]
Michael Bray
Reformation Press

The Impending Execution of Paul Hill

It has been a fairly uneventful summer. There was a brief flurry of abortuary destruction in the early part of the year (bringing joy to the hearts of those who pray for spiritual revival). But things are relatively calm on the streets where ex-utero people live and move and have their being. And D.C., the murder capital of the country, has seen a decrease in crime. “May’s statistics are 45 percent lower than May of last year and crime has been consistently lower for the past 14 months by an average of 20-25 percent” (Washington Times, 9 July, 1997).

This kind of peace is good for those of us who are actively pursuing our vacation time. We don’t want folks performing drive-by shootings as we tour the Capital City or any other blood soaked American town. Indeed, as I take my children to swim team or wrestling practice or to a friend’s house to play, I am glad that the judgment of God is, for some reason, held in abeyance. There is no blood-letting in the streets yet, like, say, Jerusalem or Ulster or any number towns in Rwanda or Liberia. And aren’t we glad?

But it is bothersome to be reminded of the call God has placed upon the lives of others. Paul Hill has been sentenced to death. Apparently he was “called” (as by God) to the sacrificial, public witness he made. And we are reminded that the hand of God sometimes falls hard upon us; He is, indeed, both good and severe (Rom. 11:22). How good He was to the innocents whom He moved Paul to defend and to us who have been encouraged by his courage and obedience. And yet, how severe He is toward the Hill family – depriving children and wife of a father and husband. Yes, we are reminded that God doesn’t mess around. He is serious; he is severe. And these truths about our God are not happily recalled. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of an awesome and holy and everliving God.

Paul’s public witness was one which not only testified to the humanity of the child in the womb and to the love we are to show our neighbors who are being delivered over to death; his deed was also a testimony against the judges of the land. Yes, he displayed the judgment which every prosecutor and judge ought to be processing against all the childkillers from Atlantic to Pacific.

Paul Hill was called to abort the abortionist, and his wife and children were called to suffer the loss of husband and father for righteousness sake. Most of us have other callings, theoretically. And each is to employ his gift and answer his divine vocation in obedience to Christ and His word before all powers and authorities.

Presumably, the Almighty has given some of us the less glorious task (as it may viewed from enlightened historians some time in the future) of lobbying for the welfare of those martyrs who have put their immediate comfort, yea their very lives, in jeopardy for mercy sake. But if that be our task, we must be about it. We must demand; we must warn; we must exhort; we must importune; we must plead with the powers that are. A righteous man, our brother in the Faith, has been sentenced to die for doing justice and showing mercy. He is to be executed for obedience to our Lord who calls us to defend the orphan; who calls us to do no murder, but to defend the innocent. And his blood will be upon those authorities which participate in this unjust execution.

It is our duty at this hour to write to the Florida State Office of Executive Clemency. Here is a summary of Paul Hill’s post-sentence subjudice history:

31 May, 1996 Oral arguments before the Florida Supreme Court
27 Nov., 1996 Florida Supreme Court affirms Paul’s convictions and death sentences
6 Mar., 1997 Florida Supreme Court denies motion for rehearing of decision
March, 1997 Paul officially waives his right to participate in post-conviction proceedings
15 May, 1997 Paul’s case enters into final stage: clemency proceedings

Governor Lawton Chiles and his Cabinet compose the Clemency Board. The Office of Executive Clemency was created to help carry out this executive power. An attorney is appointed to file a petition for clemency on Paul’s behalf by mid-August.

Letters from interested citizens must be filed by 9 August. To do this eight (8) copies must be sent to:

Janet H. Keels, Coordinator
Office of Executive Clemency
2601 Blairstone Road
Building C, Room 229
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2450

Letters must refer to “Paul Jennings Hill”; case #94-3510; inmate #459364. The eight copies will be distributed to the members of the Clemency Board. Any member of the eight-man Board can request a hearing on Paul’s case so that the Board can consider extending clemency to Paul.

The very idea of clemency for Paul may be offensive to some of you; we think of clemency as mercy given to a wrongdoer. And as we acknowledge no wrong in Paul’s service, clemency is an inaccurate word to describe the relief that we seek. (It is for these reasons, I am confident, that Paul has had no zeal to pursue pardons. To seek pardon is – even if only implicitly – to admit wrongdoing. He will have nothing to do with such falsehood.)

But it is Paul Hill who has made of himself and excellent sacrifice. We can sully ourselves by asking rulers to extend mercy as they understand it even when we know we ought to ask as well that they repent and award him honors. We can humbly plead for his life. We can implore the powers to show mercy, even if they are confused and exchange the truth for a lie. Speak to them in their own language. They think Paul a sinner and a murderer. Bid them to extend mercy to the poor benighted wretch who still thinks children are created by God in His image.

Finally, brothers and sisters, if you could do us the kindness of sending a ninth copy of your letter to us, we would be grateful.

May our Lord, who is rich in mercy, grant you time and zeal to write requests for our brother’s life.

Manslayers I Have Known

Michael Bray

7 December 2011

 

Well, I got my name in the paper!  – for doing something “cool”!

It’s true!  I wasn’t contending for those despised and rejected little ones.  I was doing other, more regular good works.  Nevertheless, it brings up the subject of manslaughter.

Here in Wilmington, Ohio, we had our first murder in 20 years eight months ago.  Roger Curtis stabbed a local bar owner about 50 times and took a little cash on March 29.  He went to court on 26 October, confessed, and was sentenced to life without parole.

The story is here: WNJ article.  But the link doesn’t supply all that appeared in the print version, which comes to us locals six days per week.  (Pretty good for a small town.)  The report from 27 October said:

“Curtis also mentioned ‘two kind men’ he had never met before being incarcerated who, he said, have helped me accept what he’s going through.  Seated in the gallery were Allen Willoughby of Sugartree Ministries and Michael Bray who has a jail ministry.”

He was jailed in the place where I have been visiting weekly since February, a month before Curtis was jailed.   At our regular weekly hour of visiting and teaching we baptized Roger Curtis along with another inmate, Eddie, five days before trial. Roger had brought Eddie to salvation in Jesus, preaching to him and urging him to trust in the promises made by the Anointed One who was sent down to mankind to die so that the sins of the world could be punished in him.

As best a human can tell, Roger is a new man.  Allen, who had visited Roger one-on-one two or three times per week for eight months, is particularly impressed with the change in this man.   He said to Roger at our visit with him a few hours after trial, “You are a friend.  You have changed my life.”

I am not sure what Allen meant, but I know that he is quite dedicated to continuing his visits with this disciple.  He will spend time with this “brother” and care for him like his own son.

My meditations concerning the taking of a human life were stirred. And five other manslayers came to mind.  I thought, of course, of my good friend Paul Hill.  The two other men who killed abortionists are James Kopp and Scott Roeder, both of whom I came to know after they performed their deeds.   A fifth man is Jim Von Brunn – fellow inmate at Ray Brook FCI near Lake Placid, New York, and the sixth is another inmate at Ray Brook, Marc Vlasic.

The three who killed abortionists did so with the intention of preventing them from murdering any more children.  I knew Paul Hill and what he believed.  I knew his family and visited him in his home before he terminated an abortionist and his bodyguard.  We stood together in public support of Michael Griffin who preceded Hill by sixteen months with his own slaying of another abortionist.  Justification for Hill’s actions were presented by himself.  They were the same principles which he used in proclaiming the innocence of Griffin.   I attended the execution of Paul Hill and witnessed the uncanny timing of the thunder and lightning that struck the prison at the moment of execution as if Heaven itself were signifying a warning for the execution of a righteous deliverer.

I have come to know James Kopp through correspondence after he terminated an abortionist in Canada.  I visited him once in jail in New York.  Jim has been an anti-abortion activist whom my wife met along with many other Operation Rescue door blockers.  They were in jail together in New York and Atlanta for short stays along with dozens of others (in the case of New York) and hundreds (in Atlanta).  Jim was dedicated to applying his wits to developing all kinds of methods to extend the blockade time that numbers of abortion opponents might use to keep the abortion business closed.  When the congress passed the ant-anti-abortion FACE bill Jim was left, it seemed, with no way to save a child other than direct action.  And even at that, his intention was the wound the abortionist, one Bernard Slepian, whom he killed by accident on October 23, 1998 in New York.  Going to trial he did not wish to emphasize his intent to wound Slepian and thus to denigrate the work of others as if his choice were better than those who chose to assuredly stop any more shedding of innocent blood by intentionally killing the (true) murderers and thus stopping them from continuing their evil actions.

Scott Roeder also shot an abortionist, and quite intentionally as had Paul Hill.   He was willing to wait until Abortionist Tiller, who aborted children late in gestation from around the country, had been prosecuted for various statutory violations.  When the efforts initiated by Phill Kline were foiled (see a report on Kansas abortion politics here: http://www.worldmag.com/articles/18013), Roeder found no reason to refrain from carrying out his intentions to stop Tiller from continuing his child-murdering profession.   Plenty of opportunity had been given the man to stop murdering children.  Roeder’s sense of duty to stop the innocent blood shed outweighed concerns for Tiller’s personal well-being and reformation.  I visited Scott before attending his trial and again in the fall of 2011.  I have sent him books and we correspond regularly.

The fifth man, Jim Von Brunn, was at Ray Brook F.C.I. when I arrived in 1985.  He was imprisoned from 1983 to 1989 after he had attempted to arrest Paul Volcker, then-head of the Federal Reserve Board, with plans to force him to tell the truth about American’s corrupt monetary system.  Two decades after his release from prison, he walked into U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and shot a black guard, Stephen T. Johns, to death.

He had committed no murder other than in his heart when I met him at Ray Brook. Christianity quickly became the focal point of a conversation that I had with him – perhaps the only lengthy one.  He expressed essential agreement with the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche and affirmed a belief in the essential superiority of certain ethnic strands of the human race over others (there was the über- and unter-mensch; super- and sub-human).   He believed in that the evolutionary progress of humanity was best achieved by maintaining purity of these superior ethnic strands, viz. the Aryan or European “race.” This goal was subverted by intermixing of the races.  And, to the point, he viewed Christianity as adversarial in its doctrine of targeting the poor for uplifting benevolence and in the doctrine of equality of all the ethnic groups by their common possession of the “image of God.” This doctrine permitted the inter-marriage of ethnic groups, diluting the strength of the European strand.  He commended the bravery of my own alleged involvement in anti-abortion activity, but he said it was misguided.  Von Brunn approved of abortion as a means of ridding the race of defective people.  And the inferior strands of humanity were welcome to curb their natural reproductive course by aborting their offspring and ought not to be discouraged from that intention.  These views he expressed quite politely and directly to me.

The sixth man, Mark Vlasic, was a plane hijacker.   On September 10, 1976 Trans World Airlines Flight 355 took off from LaGuardia Airport for Chicago. On board the Boeing 727 aircraft were seven crew members and 85 passengers.  Vlasic and four others in pursuit of Croatian independence hijacked the plane.  They arranged for the pilot, Captain Carey, to open an envelope and read the following note: “One, this airplane is hijacked. Two, we are in possession of five gelignite bombs, four of which are set up in cast iron pans giving them the same kind of force as a giant grenade.”  The hijackers went one with the rest of their six demands which advised that they had an identical bomb for the authorities to inspect in a locker number 5713 across from the Commodore Hotel on 42nd Street (specific instructions were given) and that the plane will be heading toward London, England. The goal was to drop propaganda fliers from the air over London and Paris to arouse support from a free Croatia.  The bomb in the plane was fake and the real bomb in the subway was made available for experts to examine and thereby take the “bomb” in the plane seriously along with the hijackers’ demands.

Instructions found by authorities in the locker included a cast iron stew pot with two wires running out.  Advertisements regarding Croatia were to be placed in the New York Times; the Los Angeles Times; Chicago Tribune; International Herald Tribune; and the Washington Post.  The penalty for failure to meet the demands would be activation of another timed explosive device in busy location.

The pot was subsequently transported in a bomb truck to the city’s police pistol range in the Bronx.   Explosives specialists decided to attempt a risky dismantling operation to gain information about the device.   The bomb blew up, killing one officer almost instantly and seriously injuring another.

The leader did 32 years and was deported upon release.  Vlasic did 12 years.  He was arguably unaware of the existence of the real bomb.  Just went along for Croatia and wanted to scare folks into dropping some fliers.  No harm intended.

Hill, Kopp, and Roeder are, of course, wrongly prosecuted by and ought to be rewarded for their deeds rather than punished.  They are the victims of a government gone Godless which punishes those who do good and rewards evildoers.  I gave known them and have heard their personal confession of trust in the work of Christ for their own sin-ridden souls.  These men are secure in the salvation which the Lord of Life has provided by His own death.

Roger Curtis is one with them.  And though he was rightly prosecuted for murder, his sins are forgiven and he joins these three in the expectation of resurrection unto joy and life eternal.

I have no knowledge of Vlasic’s life since he departed from Ray Brook, but I know that while he was there, he had nothing to do with the community of saints, the followers of Jesus, who maintained fellowship together and corporately displayed a witness to Him and his Church.

The same is the case with Von Brunn, for whom I am left with the least personal hope as he was near death when he was shot by police as they exchanged fire with him during his commission of hate-filled and murderous deeds.

The good news is that the blood of Jesus is sufficient to cleanse us – as singular persons – from all sin.  And He calls us to join with His church, the “Community of Saints” to be the Messiah, to manifest God to the neighborhood, the city, the state, and nation in which it is located.

The Death of a Tiller Judge

17 Oct., 2011

The AP reported in November of 2007 on the demise of retired federal Judge Patrick Kelly.  Whatever good he might have done in his life is eclipsed by the fact that he ordered anti-abortion protesters to cease interfering with Tiller’s murders.

Cancer consumed him as he finished his time in Lakeview Funeral Home.

The particular ignominy of his legal proceeded from the 1991 “Summer of Mercy” abortion protests in Wichita. Thousands of abortion resisters were arrested during the 45-day event, which was organized by the anti-abortion Operation Rescue.

Randall Terry dubbed Kelly a “Nazi judge” when Kelly ordered protesters to stop blocking the entrance of the clinic of abortionist George Tiller.  The appellation was not inappropriate.  Nazi-like, he did not stop at simply issuing an order and threatening prosecution; he ordered special protection from U.S. marshals.  The U.S. marshals were to provide security.  Kelly turned the marshals into Nazi-like criminals indeed. (Witness the recent prosecutions of the likes of John Demjanjuk at age 91 in 2011, 70 years after the crime.  It took seven decades to make that “marshal” a criminal.  It may take that long belong before the deeds of these agents of the court are damned for their deed of submission to such an edict.)

The  Court of Appeals struck down Kelly’s ruling on abortion protesters. But Congress sullied itself with the same criminal action that Kelly perpetrated by passing FACE.

FACE is the very law (which includes civil statutes as well we criminal) by which your author has been sued by Planned Parenthood and saddled with a $1 million debt for writing A Time to Kill and making it available for purchase at a public meeting of anti-abortion activists.

Kelly, to conclude, is gone from this world.  But his end is not yet.  Judgment Day will come for all.

 

Prosecuting Old Nazi Guards and Young Clinic Workers

October, 2011

“Josias Kumpf participated in a 1943 Nazi operation that resulted in the murder of thousands of innocent victims. His culpability in this atrocity does not diminish with the passage of time,” said acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew Friedrich in June of 2008 when the decision was first announced to deport him. A press release from the U.S. Justice Department for March 19, 2009 announced that then-86-year-old was sent to Austria from Racine, Wisconsin to answer for his participation in the 1943 Massacre of 8,000 Jews while serving as a former armed SS guard at the Sachsenhausen Concentration Camp in Germany and another labor camp in Poland.

The Austrian justice ministry said the former guard could not be put on trial because the statute of limitations had expired and set him free.

Hmm. With the passage of time do crimes become less punishable? It may seem a bit late to punish an accomplice to murder seven decades after the crime. Moreover, in this case, the culprit was simply carrying out government policy. The Rasse und Siedlungshauptamt (Race and Resettlement Office), commonly known by the German acronym RuSHA, was first run by the infamous Heinrich Himmler. Otto Hofmann headed up RuSHA from July 1940 to April 1943. It was he along with Reinhard Heydrich, Adolf Eichmann, and a dozen others who made the decision at the Wannsee Conference House to carry out the mass extermination of Jews and others. The little guys were just caught up in the everyday plainness of mass murder. What is the big deal?

Justice eventually prevails and maybe some need a good damning more than others. We take consolation in the fact that Judgment Day comes for everyone – in this life, at death (with various foretastes occurring during the short time when the living walk around in shameful disbelief) and at the resurrection of the dead. All souls will be raised up bodily and stand before His Honor, the Most High of all judges, and be charged with their own indictments. Some will be personally acquitted by the Mediator; others will be personally damned.

It is in this period of human history when judgments are not plain to the understanding, that we, like birds craning their necks to perceive their situation, look to discover what God is doing amidst His creatures. What sort of intermittent judgments does He execute in history? When is a disaster a “judgment”? What is the meaning of a particular calamity?

When can we say with confidence: “That disease was sent by God”?
“That war was God’s punishment upon a nation”?
“That hurricane was God’s judgment upon that wicked city”?

Was the Civil War in the United States a divine punishment for the national sin of slavery as Lincoln surmised?

We need not answer with absolute precision in order to affirm the general principle: a sovereign God rules the world and judges it both in history and at the Last Day. We need not fully understand all the particular events and the divine purposes involved with them to maintain the doctrine of His sovereign rule. And it is this doctrine which inspires optimism as we look at the world and contemplate the state of our nation in particular.

We imagine that happy day when abortionists and their accomplices will be tried and punished. Such hope is fanned by the current prosecution of another almost forgotten Nazi.

The conviction of retired U.S. autoworker John Demjanjuk is a curious event.
At 91 years of age, he was not too old to be put on trial. Murder and related offenses are not subject to a statute of limitations in Germany. (http://www.mahalo.com/john-demjanjuk/)

The big bad guys are mostly dead and gone but this little guy is given no quarter.

“Better late than never,” seems to be the mindset of most modern folks. “Almost forgotten” isn’t good enough to get a pass from the hounds hunting for justice. Indeed, the report said: “It was the first time prosecutors were able to convict someone in a Nazi-era case without direct evidence that the suspect participated in a specific killing” (“Hundreds of Nazi Cases Reopened,” AP, October 5, 2011).

The Door is Opening

The report said that “prosecutors have reopened hundreds of dormant investigations of former Nazi death camp guards and others who might now be charged under a new precedent.” The sentence of five years in prison seems like an incongruous punishment for a man convicted of 28,060 counts of accessory to murder. But justice delayed is often not justice.

So what did he do? He was serving simply as a lowly guard at the Sobibor prison in Nazi-occupied Poland. But Munich prosecutors argued that if they could prove that he was nothing more than a guard at a camp like Sobibor it was enough to convict him of accessory to murder as part of the Nazi process of eliminating of unwanted Jews. The sole purpose of the camp was the extermination of Jews, argued the prosecution. Anyone associated with such an institution was guilty of the deaths of those imprisoned there.

The door is open to prosecute persons who were involved with the process at the lowest levels. Near death as they might be 70 years after the crimes were committed, they are still vulnerable to prosecution. And there are prosecutors eager to spend the time and money.

Why?

Nations, shamed by their ancestors’ behavior, seek to have their reputations cleaned up, perhaps. Or relatives of the victims continue to pressure governments to deliver justice. Or righteous citizens simply want justice to prevail and to cleanse their consciences of the guilt their countrymen brought upon an entire people.

The strangest thing about this prosecution is the actors in this play. The United States plays the role of the cooperating good guy helping with the sanctification of the semper reformanda Germany. Which one is the black kettle?

Demjanjuk was deported to stand trial in Germany by the abortion-blood-soaked U.S. in 2009. But who are we to send this Nazi to stand trial? Here the warning of Jesus is appropriate: “Judge not, lest you be judged.” Do not imagine yourself to judge in a way where you, yourself, are guilty.

Nazis and Abortion

So what, beside the killing of Jews, did those benighted Nazis do?

Well, they killed Gypsies and East Europeans for purity purposes as well. And they aborted children from these ethnic groups.

Allied prosecutors argued that voluntary and involuntary abortions were war crimes and crimes against humanity. Voluntary abortion was punishable because it was a crime against the unborn child. “The prosecution proceeded on the theory that Germany had a duty to afford protection of law to unborn children and that the deliberate failure of high-level officials to do so constituted crimes against humanity and genocide by acts of omission” (Jeffrey C. Tuomala, “Nuremberg and the Crime of Abortion,” University of Toledo Law Review, Winter 2011, vol. 42).

The prosecution focused attention upon the Nazis’ removal of the protection of law from unborn children in occupied Poland and from the unborn children workers in Germany from Eastern Europe. The Soviet prosecution detailed crimes committed against children and they “portrayed the abortion policy as the height of depravity in the Nazi treatment of children” referencing a directive from the Administration of Food and Agriculture, entitled “Treatment of Pregnant Women of Non-Germanic Origin.” The Soviet prosecutor stated that “in their hatred of the Slav race, the German fascist criminals even attempted to murder babes in the womb” (Tuomala).

The prosecution’s assumption in trying the Nazis was that abortion was a crime. The fact that the Nazis advocated for the aborting of children of particular ethnic groups is beside the salient point, which is that “by the close of World War II, most countries still criminalized abortion. German and Polish law treated abortion as a crime. Undoubtedly, the prosecutors simply assumed that the unborn children of Slavs and Jews were human beings just as their mothers were. Unjustified killing of a human being is criminal homicide.” Indeed, “The prosecution did expressly identify abortion as one of the biological devices that the Nazi’s used to commit genocide” (Tuomala).

Tuomala observes the fact that “The Nuremberg trials established the principle that abortion is a crime against humanity and that state officials are criminally liable for failing, as a matter of state policy, to extend the protection of law to unborn children.” Moreover, “in the decades following Nuremberg, the doctrine that high-ranking government officials are liable for massive human rights violations committed against their own nationals during peacetime has become widely accepted” (See Theodor Meron, International Criminalization of Internal Atrocities, 89, American Journal of International Law, 554, 569 [1995] in which he discusses the United Nation Security Council’s Statutes for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda).

What are the implications of this development for the United States and other nations? What specifically might we expect following a great epiphany regarding the harm population reduction has brought upon generations which have had tax payers, workers, homebuyers, consumers depleted by a veritable abortion holocaust?

Tuomala concludes as follows:

The legal theory of the Nuremberg prosecutors that the German government unlawfully encouraged abortion by providing or funding abortion services directly applies to the U.S. government’s practice of providing abortion services in federal facilities and providing funding for abortions. The prosecution’s theory that the German government committed crimes against humanity by prohibiting Polish courts from punishing abortion is analogous to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade, which effectively prohibited states from protecting unborn children.

Germany: Slow Poke of the West in Liberalizing Abortion Laws

Germany was slow to follow the rest of the West in the women’s liberation, pro-abortion revolution of the 60s. Great Britain “provided” the Abortion Act of 1967, which allowed abortions of children up to 28 weeks. Canada and the United States, lacking popular support, “legalized” it by the will of the Supreme Courts instead in 1969 and 1973 respectively. Tunisia followed quicky (1973), then France (1975), Austria (1975), New Zealand (1977), Italy (1978), the Netherlands (1980) and Belgium (1990). Germany did not “legalize” abortion until 1995.

It was not that the German people were morally elevated above their fellow Christ-abandoning Europeans. The “liberated” (communist) East Germany legalized abortion in 1972. And many of West Germany wanted to follow the popular “liberation” from the restraints of pregnancy, especially with the reunification of the East and West Germany following the fall of the wall in 1989. But West Germany remained bound by the post-Nazi Constitution which had been penitently ratified in the wake of the Holocaust. That Constitution (Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, formally approved on 8 May 1949) contained specific sections on the crime of abortion – Paragraph 218 of the Criminal Code.

Legislative efforts of the Bundestag to conform West Germany with the rest of the western world as well as East Germany involved an investigative Commission in 1970, extensive hearings, parliamentary debates, and public demonstrations resulting in the decriminalization of abortion in the first trimester. The Constitutional Court, however, intervened and struck down the law because it clearly violated the Constitution, which protected fetal life. Following the reunification of East and West Germany in 1989, the pressure to discard Constitutional protections for fetal life were resumed with vigor. The ensuing debate ended with a 1992 law legalizing abortion in the first trimester with mandatory counseling. Again, the Court declared the law unconstitutional in May 1993, declaring:

The termination of pregnancy must be regarded fundamentally as wrong throughout the entire period of the pregnancy and thereby must be considered illegal. The right to life of the unborn may not be placed, even if just for a limited period of time, in the hands of a free, not-legally-bound decision of a third person, even the mother herself. (Andrea Wuerth, Whitman College, “Re-Unification and Reproductive Rights: Abortion in the German Public Sphere, 1989-1990, Center for European Studies University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, July 1997).

Once again, the legislature attempted to craft a new law. The result was the passage of the current German federal law in 1995 which, while it affirmed that abortion was illegal according to Paragraph 218, it stipulated that neither the woman nor the doctor will be prosecuted if certain conditions are met.

While it took an extra couple of decades – the effect of the guilt from the Holocaust was so strong – for Germany to catch up to the rest of the West, the Fatherland arrived and joined the post-Christian world in the festival of Godless and decadent blood shedding.

Ramifications for abortions world-wide

When justice for the womb child is restored, it will not only be the abortionist who goes on trial. It will be his accomplices: the workers in the “clinics” who assist with the process, the off duty policemen who guard the facilities against the threat of protestors and “vandals,” the “escorts” who accompany the women into facilities where protestors stand outside pleading for the lives of the innocent womb child. Certainly the list of accomplices must include those judges who removed legal protection from the womb children and politicians who continued to defend and advocate such rulings.

Yearning for justice, we can look to a day when judges will be prosecuted for their crimes against the womb child. Legislators who refused to pass a “human life amendment” and presidents who refused to issue executive orders in response to renegade Supreme Court edicts will be charged and prosecuted – whether in the flesh or zealously en absentia; police who arrested those who blocked doors and directors of law enforcement who conducted prosecutions of anti-abortion activists will be tried and punished.

It may not be so clean and easy, however. Perhaps the bringer of wrath will be some conqueror or an exogenous terrorist cell, which is planted amidst our own land and grows in power amidst a failed economy and social chaos. But imagine a conqueror, nevertheless, marching political leaders through a crowd of disdainful and indignant citizens who have been fully informed of the holocaust their leaders approved and led them into.

Oh, but our problem goes beyond the hearts of a few miscreant, immoral politicians. It is a disease, which has permeated the whole citizenry. The nation is ripe. Best to “come out of her” and form new governments. Let communities bind together in Truth and under the Law. Let states withdraw from the union. Let them find a way to secede and re-establish the Law of God. Reform must begin with the Churches as they advocate for the Law of God, for Justice, in the land.

Women in the Military

Reformation Lutheran Church
Anno Domini 2001

Position Statement: Women in the Military

Statement

The recent trend in our society to put women in combat roles in the name of equal rights is more of the same buffoonery that brought us child slaughter under the same principle. There is no benefit for the national defense in having women in combat. And it has been rightly said that a nation which sends its women to defend its citizens in war is not worth defending.

Explanation

There is no justification in sending women into battle or in danger of capture when the presence such does harm to the cohesiveness of the warring unit, threatens the general effectiveness of the unit, and jeopardizes the general success of military operations. Military men, even in training, are demoralized by the fact that the overall strength of the unit is diminished by the knowledge that effectiveness is reduced by the relative physical weakness of the female sex. Not only are they unable to perform to the same standard as males the arduous tasks required by military actions, but this diminution of military effectiveness increases the risk of lost lives and national safety.

The fact is that a woman taken prisoner is much more vulnerable to the pressures of torture than males. Both the mental and physical torture of rape, impregnation, threats of harm to the offspring, etc. are conditions and means of coercion to which females are distinctively susceptible.

These truths have been obvious to all generation of the past. It is only the present vogue of sexual liberation and radical egalitarianism which has blinded contemporary minds to these truths. Modern buffoonery has chosen the personal ambitions, “rights” and personal thrills for women over national security.

The Tenth Amendment

Reformation Lutheran Church
Anno Domini 2001

Position Statement: The Tenth Amendment

Statement

Article Ten of the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States very succinctly says: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The “States” refers to each of the states collectively or individually. They are sovereign states which cede only particular authorities to the federal government, known as the United States.

The federal magistrates have violated the Constitution and unlawfully usurped powers
which belong to the people. Accordingly, we declare that this federal government rules not by right but by force. The states have the right not only to disobey the edicts of the federal government, but to assert their own laws contrary to such decrees. We urge governors of states to act independently as sovereigns of their own states or in concert with other governors as united states in resistance to the tyranny of the United States.

Furthermore, we advise the church members under our care that 1) they may seek to avoid the payment of personal federal taxes, 2) that they may work for “lesser magistrates” (sheriffs, governors, etc.) which would rebel against the federal regime, and 3) that they may Lawfully work for the overthrow of the present regime by means of military service with the national guard (militia under the authority of a governor), or other locally organized militia under the authority of a lesser magistrate.

Explanation

The particular acts of tyranny have not been inconsequential. On the contrary, the tyrant has struck at ancient laws which had served to protect the weakest of humanity. The assault upon anti-abortion laws has resulted in an historically unprecedented genocide – a living-red-color illustration of the federal government’s placement of itself outside the bounds of legitimacy.

The disestablishment of state churches among our united States which rapidly occurred in the nineteenth century led erroneously to the grievous disestablishment of Christian law and religion in the twentieth century. This was not the intent of disestablishmentarianism; neither was it the intent of federalists who lobbied for the establishment of the federal government that states should lose their ability to legislate laws out of and on the basis of “religion.” Specifically, the Tenth Amendment restricts the federal government from usurping powers which are not specifically delegated to it by the states. As the powers of the weakened states have diminished since the Civil War, the usurpations by the federal government have increased to the point that the people can no longer govern themselves. We have witnessed a long train of abuses on the part of the federal government since it first legalized this crime under the malignant title “reproductive freedom.” Over the last three decades, laws which would prohibit or restrict the spreading of this crime of abortion have been passed by the various would-be self-governing, sovereign states, only to be nullified by the federal government through its usurpative judiciary. We repeat that statutes passed lawfully by state legislatures and signed by governors have been impiously nullified by a lawless federal judiciary. This federal government with one lawless decision decriminalized abortion and made into criminals of those who protect the weak and innocent. Federal magistrates have thus rebelled against the constitution and violated their oaths to uphold it.

The federal government’s current violations of justice exceed those of that world power which was inveighed against by the American colonies. In other words, the present states of the United States have greater cause now to throw off the tyranny of the federal government than did those who signed the Declaration of Independence in their rejection of British rule. It is a small thing to ask governors, then, to simply recognize their own right and duty to honor their own constitutions and statutes, enforce their own laws, and disobey unlawful federal edicts. While we do not speak as lesser magistrates, we do speak with the authority of the church of God and His word to address Christian citizens, including magistrates, with their scriptural and civil liberties and obligations.

States’ Right to Execute Abortionists

Reformation Lutheran Church
Anno Domini 2001

States’ Right to Execute Abortionists

Statement:

Whereas:

The ongoing slaughter of innocent womb children by both surgical and chemical means is the product of an opinion written by an ephemeral judicial tribunal; opinions of the Supreme Court are not law and ought not be respected as edicts from a dictator issued to abject subjects; our system of balance of powers bids the three to fulfill their respective roles as separate powers; all authority does not reside in one branch; in Roe, the Court usurped the power of the Legislature, and the Executive branch bowed to this arrogant act of tyranny.

Furthermore, whereas our federal system, as enunciated summarily in the Tenth Amendment, provides for the sovereignty of the states and the integrity of their respective law codes; the Amendment forbids the federal government from trespassing against the States’ provinces of authority, viz. all matters which are not specifically delegated to the federal government; the federal government, even with all three branches in concert, has no power to overrule the statutes of the States regarding abortion;

And whereas:

All governments are ordained by the God in whom our money says we trust; the same command which enjoins Christians to submit to civil authorities, bids those authorities to do justice (Romans 13:3-4; 1Peter 2:13,14); justice is not derived from the whimsical imaginings of justices, but from the Law of God. (We are to be guided by Moses, not Harry Blackmun.)

The following resolution is published:

We exhort the governors, legislatures, and civil authorities in all states in the name of the Lord of the nations to ignore the illegal pronouncements of the United States and govern with justice as you have been commissioned by God to do. Specifically, we call upon you to:

1. Free those prisoners in your prisons who have been prosecuted for defending the innocent.
2. Enforce your own laws which prohibit abortion, and close down the facilities of childslaughter.
3. Perfect your laws with the recognition that the killing of children in the womb is murder, a capital crime punishable by death; execute abortionists.

Sodomites and Civil Rights

Reformation Lutheran Church
Anno Domini 2001

Position Paper: Sodomites and Civil Rights

Statement:

We are defining sodomy as sexual relations between persons of the same sex. Such action is an abomination for individuals (Rom. 1; Lev. 18:22,23; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Thes. 4:3). This action is not to be regarded as a matter of privacy, outside the bounds of legislation. Homosexual actions have always been criminal in common law as well as the codes of the various states of the union. It is only in this finis de siecle when longstanding Christian standards were dumped into a cultural abyss to make way for the advancement of freedom without the restraint imposed by that out-of-date Hebrew god (albeit the same god followed by the founders of the colonies and the federal government) – that figment of Moses’s imagination; it was only at the turn of the century that a few states like Georgia and Maryland followed the standard already set by the federal courts and de-criminalized homosexual perversity.

We call upon states to assert their rights as sovereign governments answerable to the One True God, who reigns above those tyrants who rule from the federal courts, who subvert the people’s laws and who suborn the people’s morals. We call upon the states to strengthen their sodomy laws (as defined above) and require the death penalty for those who are found guilty of sodomy.

Explanation:

The advancement of sodomite rights has succeeded because it has been packaged as a civil rights issue. Fair-minded Americans don’t like nice “gay” boys to starve for lack of a job. Don’t we all have a right to work? (“Why surely we can’t starve someone to death for something he can’t help! We must be compassionate and fair-minded.”) Moreover, the argument goes, they say they are born incorrigibly as they are. In fact, homo-orthodoxy would have it that this alleged perversion of sexuality is actually quite a good thing, and not a bit abnormal. After all, who is to say what is normal and right, since there is no Law, no divine Standard. Everyman has his own private god. Surely there is no God whose laws apply universally; surely there are no laws which can define sexual behavior as good or evil. And what does it matter what two consenting adults (or an adult and a willing adolescent) do with one another? Who can say? There is no God. There are only lots of gods; “To each his own! – god.”

We reply to this anarchistic gibberish that it is precisely the God issue that cannot go unresolved. The laws of society – if the government which enforces them wishes to be honored for more than a week or two – must be predicated upon more than the whims of a fickle, polytheistic electorate or than the passing petards of justices! All stable societies, which have lasted for more than a century or two, have grounded their laws in what they averred to be the revealed law of a deity.

(The unbeliever may wish to consider throwing in with the Christian God of the states and his con. If he cannot stomach the society which was produced upon the assumption of that Revelator and His –Sorry, Feminists– Laws and of the same, perhaps he can embrace the “establishment” on pure philosophical pragmatism grounds.)

There is a more salient reason for Christians to lobby for upholding the laws against sodomy. It is quite a selfish reason (and therefore understandable to the modern, hedonist mind). The fact is that the standard privacy argument for de-criminalizing sodomy (as also for abortion) fails from the outset. The claim that there are no victims (we will concede for argument’s sake that the child really is only “a potential life” and no a living, sentient person with a brain, heart, and soul) in the private acts of abortion and sodomy is false. The God which Christians worship has revealed that He judges not just his covenant nation Israel for violating his covenant but that He also judges other nations for particular transgressions. The pagan countries which did not have the law of Moses were, nevertheless, destroyed for practicing incest, sodomy, bestiality, child-sacrifice, and witchcraft (Lev. 18:6-28; 20:2-23). They were held accountable (because they knew in their very hearts that it was abominable) and destroyed; no excuse.

The reason, then, that we want people to refrain from sodomy is simply that we do not want to suffer the judgment of God. (“It’s for the children,” to quote the oft-confused former First Lady.) We do not want our children along with the rest of the nation to suffer the awesome judgment of a Holy and Almighty God. We are part of the nation that this angered God will destroy because of our toleration of this disgusting and odious perversion.

We reply to this anarchistic gibberish that it is precisely the God issue that cannot go unresolved. The laws of society – if the government which executes them wishes to be honored for more than a week or two – must be predicated upon more than the whims of a fickle, polytheistic electorate, and more than the passing petards of justices. All stable societies, which have lasted for more than a century, have grounded their laws in what they averred to be the revealed law of a deity.

(The unbeliever may wish to consider throwing in with the Christian God of the states and his con. If he cannot stomach the society which was produced upon the assumption of that Revelator and His –Sorry, Feminists– Laws and of the same, perhaps he can embrace the “establishment” on pure philosophical pragmatism grounds.)

There is a more salient reason for Christians to lobby for upholding the laws against sodomy. It is quite a selfish reason (and therefore understandable to the modern, hedonist mind). The fact is that the standard privacy argument for de-criminalizing sodomy (as also for abortion) fails from the outset. The claim that there are no victims (we will concede for argument’s sake that the child really is only “a potential life” and no a living, sentient person with a brain, heart, and soul) in the private acts of abortion and sodomy is false. The God which Christians worship has revealed that He judges not just his covenant nation Israel for violating his covenant but that He also judges other nations for particular transgressions. The pagan countries which did not have the law of Moses were, nevertheless, destroyed for practicing incest, sodomy, bestiality, child-sacrifice, and witchcraft (Lev. 18:6-28; 20:2-23). They were held accountable (because they knew in their very hearts that it was abominable) and destroyed; no excuse.

The reason, then, that we want people to refrain from sodomy is simply that we do not want to suffer the judgment of God. (“It’s for the children,” to quote the oft-confused former First Lady.) We do not want our children along with the rest of the nation to suffer the awesome judgment of a Holy and Almighty God. We are part of the nation that this angered God will destroy because of our toleration of this disgusting and odious perversion.

Public Education

Reformation Lutheran Church
Anno Domini 2001

Position Paper: Public Education

Statement

The various political issues surrounding the education of children involve a fundamental question of authority. Who has authority and therefore responsibility for the education of children?

The answer guides conclusions to questions concerning vouchers, home schooling regulation, compulsory education, participation of home schooled or private schooled children in government school-sponsored extra-curricular activity.

We aver that parents have been given the authority by God to rear their children in the manner they deem fit. This does not mean they have absolute authority (none has such authority – not even the currently aspiring world emperor, the United Nations). Parents may not sovereignly kill their children. Execution of incorrigible delinquents can only occur after parents bring their case before local authorities (Deut. 21:20).

The state has no authority to regulate home schooling nor compel school attendance generally.

Since the state (the county authority) taxes its citizens, forcing some citizens to pay for schools they well deem to be counterproductive vis-à-vis a Christian upbringing, the provision of vouchers is a just remedy,

Explanation

As children are a gift to parents from God and not the state (Ps. 127:3), it remains the right and duty of parents to bring up children (“in the admonition of the Lord”) in the way they deem fit (Deut. 6:5-9).

General compulsory public education was established in Europe in the midst of the Reformation on the assumption that a Christian society is best preserved and the citizens best served by compelling the children to be literate and able to read the Scriptures. Whatever strength those arguments had in the Christian past is lost in the present atheistic government school system. The atheistic state has no authority to compel its citizens to learn how to think without acknowledgment of the God who grants brains. The atheistic state has no authority to deny parents the right to rear their children in home schools; neither has it the authority to regulate home schooling.

Since the state improperly taxes its citizens for purposes of providing elementary and secondary education, it ought to provide relief by voucher for those who would opt out of the government schools.