SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE: Abortion and the African American Community

“Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons.” (Acts 10:34)

It is estimated that 10 million black babies have been aborted since the Supreme Court’s infamous Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. This translates into a 35% reduction in the population of today’s African American community. With 1,452 black babies being aborted daily in America, with abortions in some African American communities now outnumbering births 3-to-1, and with 43% of all black pregnancies in America today ending in abortion, there appears to be no end in sight to the dwindling of our country’s black population.

No organization in America has championed abortion rights more than Planned Parenthood. What few people know, however, is that Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, was a racist who advocated abortion for the purpose of reducing the black population. According to Sanger, “Negroes” were “mentally inferior” and “a menace to the [human] race.” Thus, she advocated abortion as a way to reduce the black population. As the above statistics on abortion in the African American community prove, Margaret Sanger’s diabolical plot appears to be coming to pass right before our very eyes.

Instead of continuing to mistakenly see Planned Parenthood as a partner in the reduction of poverty and other problems in the African American community, blacks need to wake up to the fact that nothing is posing a greater threat to their population than Planned Parenthood clinics in inner-city communities.


“…and a little child shall lead them…” (Isaiah 11:6)

The Thomas More Law Center defends pro-life groups who attempt to inform America about the horrors of abortion by dragging larger-than-life banners behind airplanes. These banners, flown up and down crowded tourist areas, show dismembered aborted babies. Many protest that they are offensive and should be outlawed. Even some within the pro-life movement feel that they harden hearts against the cause.

Do pictures of emaciated bodies of Jews stacked up like cord wood displayed at holocaust museums harden people against Jews and turn them into Nazis? How about exhibits of blacks being lynched? Do the membership roles of the KKK swell after people see these pictures? The mini-series Roots, as well as Steven Spielberg’s motion picture Schindler’s List, were designed to show the realities of chattel slavery and extreme prejudice masquerading behind the mask of “duty.” In fact, both Jews and blacks want children to see these stark and horrifying images. Prejudice and hate are bred early, and so are justice and mercy.

Some argue that pictures of aborted babies are too shocking for young children. I disagree. It’s possible that their trauma might shock their pro-abortion parents into reality, as the case of Jean Staker Garton proves.

Mrs. Garton tells a story from her “pro-choice”  days. According to her, she was putting the finishing touches one night on a slide presentation. One of the slides showed a graphic image of an aborted baby. Her body had been dismembered by a curette, the long-handled knife used in a D & C abortion procedure. With the bloody image still on the screen, Jean turned and realized to her horror that she was not alone. Her youngest son, unable to sleep, had entered the room. He asked his mom a simple question: “Who broke the baby?”

This child knew what he had seen. Afterward, his mom became a pro-life advocate and now spends her time trying to end what she once promoted. Maybe it’s time for more children to awaken more Americans with the same question. Let the banners fly!

Devotion taken from an article by Gary DeMar.

SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE: The Hypocritical Oath

“When you make a vow to God, do not delay to fulfill it. He has no pleasure in fools; fulfill your vow. It is better not to make a vow than to make one and not fulfill it.” (Proverbs 5:4-5 NIV)

The New York Times recently reported that judges are putting “up potentially insurmountable roadblocks to the use of lethal injections to execute condemned inmates.” According to the Times, judges are increasingly finding that lethal injections cause condemned criminals to suffer “agonizing executions.” Thus, judges are beginning to insist that medical doctors oversee executions. According to Dr. Jonathan I Groner, a professor of surgery at Ohio State University, the judiciary’s growing insistence that physicians supervise executions by lethal injection will render such executions in the future “difficult, if not impossible to perform.” This, Dr Groner argues, is due to the fact that doctors are prohibited from participating in executions by their Hippocratic Oath and the American Medical Association’s code of ethics.

Can someone explain to me why the Hippocratic Oath and the American Medical Association’s code of ethics prohibit doctors from overseeing the execution of a mass murderer, but not from terminating the lives of unborn children or helping the old and infirm commit suicide? While there is no shortage of doctors willing to perform abortions nor any lack of support for physician assisted suicide in today’s medical profession, doctors willing to oversee the execution of a Zacarias Moussaoui are supposedly as scarce as chicken’s teeth. Why?

How come lethal injections administered in physician assisted suicides produce “peaceful deaths,” but constitute cruel and unusual punishment when administered to a death row inmate? Why do doctors have no problem with the gruesome performance of a partial birth abortion, but balk at putting murderers to sleep and then administering a drug to stop their hearts? I’ll guarantee you that an executed murderer dies a far more humane death than did his victim or victims, not to mention a far more humane death than a partially delivered baby dies when its head is stabbed with scissors so that its brains can be sucked out and its skull collapsed.

Maybe some doctors took a “Hypocritical”  Oath instead of the Hippocratic one. How else can you explain their willingness to participate in infanticide and euthanasia, but refusal to oversee the execution of a criminal whose heinous crime clearly demonstrates a total disregard for the sanctity of human life? Perhaps, it is that disregard for the sanctity of human life that leads pro-choice doctors and Dr. Kevorkian wannabes to empathize with condemned death roll inmates. If such is the case, then it’s not hypocrisy; it’s just down right scary.


“And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.” (Luke 9:51-56)

I’m confused; the United States Supreme Court has ruled that when it comes to physician-assisted suicide, states have the right to regulate the practice of medicine and the licensing of doctors. States can permit doctors to help terminally ill patients commit suicide by prescribing for them lethal doses of medication. Yet, this same Supreme Court denies states the right to regulate medicine and the licensing of doctors when it comes to abortion. Although states can permit doctors to end the lives of the terminally ill, they cannot prevent doctors from taking the lives of the unborn. Why are States’ rights only recognized by the Supreme Court in cases involving the termination of life, but never in cases involving the preservation of life?

When it comes to abortion, we are told by the pro-death crowd that life is shrouded in such mystery that no one knows when it really begins. Thus, all criminality is removed from the taking of an unborn child’s life because of our uncertainty over life’s inception. Yet, when it comes to euthanasia, this same crowd strips away the shroud and sees no mystery to life at all. According to them, life undoubtedly ceases prior to one’s becoming old and infirm; thus, the unconscionable extermination of the old and infirm is a merciful act of a compassionate society. How, one wonders, does the pro-death crowd get away with arguing against itself at both ends of life? At one end it cloaks life in mystery in order to hide the crime of abortion; at the other end it strips the cloak away in order to convince us of the compassion of euthanasia?

When James and John requested permission from Jesus to command fire down from heaven to consume a village of Christ-rejecting Samaritans, our Lord rebuked His hot-tempered disciples by warning them: “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them” (Luke 9:51-56). Perhaps, there is no better indicator of the spirit that has seized our nation than the current culture of death being advocated by our society and adjudicated by our Supreme Court. It is not the Holy Spirit, but the most unholy of spirits, that inspires a culture of death. Whereas Christ came so that men may live, the devil, who has been “a murderer from the beginning,” always comes to “kill and destroy” (John 8:44; 10:10).


“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.” (Deuteronomy 6:4-9)

Did you know that Monday, September 26, 2011 is “Family Day”? Created four years ago by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Family Day is a national effort to promote family dinners. According to research, children who eat dinner with their families are less likely to smoke, drink, or use drugs.

Isn’t it tragic that something as fundamental to the wellbeing of our society as families spending time together now requires a special day of national promotion? What is even more tragic, however, is the fact that the traditional family is disappearing altogether from the American landscape.

According to the 2000 census, households headed by traditional married couples have now dropped below 25% (less than one out of every four) for the first time in our nation’s history. This should come as no surprise to us when we stop to consider that 50% of all marriages in America end in divorce, that 33% of all white births and 70% of all black births in America are to unwed mothers, and that 50% of all Americans have lived with an unmarried partner at one time or another.

It’s not putting the family back at the dinner table, but putting the family back together again that America needs. We can only hope and pray that this crucial task for our nation’s future doesn’t prove to be like Humpty Dumpty—who all the King’s horses and all the King’s men couldn’t put back together again.


“But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (1 Timothy 5:8)

I recently heard on my car radio an advertisement for a DNA home testing kit. Apparently, the kit is designed to determine whether a child is yours or someone else’s. All you have to do is swipe a swab inside your mouth and another inside the child’s, send the swabs off for testing, and wait for the results to arrive in the mail.

Now that almost half of all births in the U.S. are illegitimate and many pregnant women are promiscuous, I suppose we’re reduced to using DNA kits and cotton swabs to identify the fathers of children. What a sad and sorry testimony to the degeneracy of our times. Don’t all children deserve something better than this?

It used to be that the vast majority of children in America were conceived as a result of their parents’  love and welcomed into this world by a doting mom and dad. Today, however, many children are conceived by relative strangers during a momentary sexual tryst. Furthermore, if their moms don’t opt to abort them, their fathers won’t claim them unless forced to do so by the incontrovertible evidence found on cotton swabs.

And we wonder what went wrong with the younger generation.


“This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live.” (Deuteronomy 30:19 NIV)

In January of 2003, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League changed its name to NARAL Pro Choice America. Under this ingenious alias this pro-abortion organization masquerades as a champion of choice. Pretending to be protectors of personal freedoms and self-determination, Pro Choice America, along with liberalism’s legions, decry the church’s voice in the public square as dogmatic and dictatorial. According to the choice championing left, the only way to protect individual choice in America is the expulsion of the church from public discourse and the confining of faith to private lives. In other words, liberals are determined to silence the dissenting voices of conservative Christians under the cloak of championing choice.

Liberals don’t want freedom of choice; they want everyone left with no choice at all. They want to eliminate choice by eradicating all alternatives to their liberal agenda. This is a crucial component in their planned takeover of American culture. Due to the deficiency of their ideas, liberals have no hope of winning public debate or a majority of Americans over to their viewpoint. Thus, in order to gain control of our culture, liberals must eliminate debate by prohibiting all opposing points of view. Unbelievably, they are presently doing so under the guise of guarding the very thing they’re gutting, namely, choice. For attestation of this allegation, consider the battle currently being waged for the soul of pharmacy.

For reasons of conscience or religious conviction, pharmacists all across America are refusing to fill prescriptions for drugs that cause abortions. This personal choice of pro-life pharmacists is being roundly condemned by the choice championing left, one of whom likens it to “the Iranian theocracy” and warns us that the “differences between us and the Taliban” will become “tenuously thin” unless pharmacists are forbidden choice in this matter and forced to violate their consciences. In Illinois, former Governor Rod Blagojevich ordered pharmacists to fill such prescriptions with “No delays. No hassles. No lectures.” Any pharmacist refusing to comply with the Governor’s diktat faced a fine and the revocation of his license to dispense drugs.

For some time now the rabid left’s war cry against conservative Christians has been, “Don’t force your morality on me.” However, the real problem, as the present assault on pro-life pharmacists proves, is the left’s attempt to force their immorality on us. Incapable of coercing us into conformity to their image, liberals enlist the government, the ACLU, and the media to do the coercing. Armed with executive orders, politically correct legislation, judicial fiats, ACLU lawsuits, and a libelous press, today’s left is armed and dangerous. By holding to our heads the triple threat of legal prosecution, financially ruinous litigation, and reputation destroying bad press, liberals hope to force us all into silence and submission.

Don’t be deceived, the only choice “pro-choicers” are in favor of is a woman’s choice to take the life of her unborn child. And even in this, they oppose fathers or the parents of minors having a choice in the matter, pharmacists choosing not to fill prescriptions for “the morning after pill,” hospitals choosing not to provide abortion services, or us choosing whether or not abortion should be legal in our country or state. Whether it’s where your kids go to school (school vouchers), what they’re taught (creationism), what you drive (SUVs), who you rent property to (fair housing), who you hire in your business (affirmative action), or whether or not you own a gun (gun control), liberals are anti-choice and “pro-coerce.” Far from wanting a pro-choice America, liberals dream of a day when Americans are left with no choice at all.

SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE: A Simple Question of Right and Wrong

“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:3)

How many times have you heard someone argue against simple right and wrong by saying, “It’s just not that simple”? Politicians have been snookering the public with the argument of complexity for decades. They argue that those who elect them to office are too imbecilic to understand the complexities of government. If we were only as smart as they were, then, we would understand why they have painstakingly unraveled the fabric of a once moral society and taxed and spent the most prosperous nation on earth into bankruptcy.

Well, one thing for sure, I certainly can’t figure out why our elected representatives seem to be hellbent on destroying our nation. No doubt about it; somebody is stupid, but I’m beginning to suspect that it ain’t me!

Nowhere is the argument of complexity used more masterfully to cloak the simple question of right and wrong than in the abortion debate. Almost no one admits to being in favor of abortion. Those who are, insist upon being called “pro-choice,” not “pro-abortion.” After all, it is indefensible to advocate for the abortion of unborn children. Thus, abortion’s advocates cloak themselves in pro-choice rhetoric. They insist that they are morally opposed, but forced by their toleration to oppose criminalization. In other words, they’re so open-minded that their brains have fallen out.

If you applied the pro-choice argument to any other criminal law in our land, chaos would ensue. I know, we’re told that we can’t legislate morality. Yet, the simple truth is: any criminal law is the legislation of morality. We don’t leave it up to each individual to decide for themselves whether murder, rape or stealing is morally acceptable. If we did, anarchy would ensue.

If our legislators don’t believe that killing unborn children is murder, then, why did they pass the Unborn Victims of Violence Act—better known as Laci and Conner’s Law—in 2004? Thanks to this law, anyone killing a “child in utero” during the perpetration of a violent crime can be charged with homicide. Furthermore, if abortion’s advocates are really pro-choice, not pro-abortion, why did they vehemently oppose the passage of this legislation?

To me, the issue of abortion is not complicated, but quite clear. First, our politicians are hypocrites. They lack the courage to stand up for what is right and opt instead to cowardly shut their eyes to what is wrong. Second, the pro-choice crowd is really pro-abortion, despite their rhetorical ruse. This is unquestionably proven by the fact that they are always in opposition to the unborn child’s right to life, even when it comes to issues other than abortion. Third, abortion is simply wrong, not to mention morally reprehensible. We can try as we may, but there is simply no way for us to get around it.



“For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Matthew 16:26)

Jesus implies in this verse that one soul is worth more than the world. What inestimable wealth has abortion cost our world? Have we aborted the man or woman who would have cured cancer? Have we aborted statesmen who would have brought peace to war-torn places? Have we aborted inventors who would have invented the most ingenuous inventions?

A mother has tuberculosis and her husband syphilis. Together they have had four children. The first child was born blind, the second was stillborn, the third was born deaf & dumb and the fourth child was born with tuberculosis. They’re now pregnant with their fifth child. Would you recommend an abortion? If so, congratulations, you’ve just killed Beethoven.

A woman is engaged to a man some years older than her; she finds out that she is facing an unplanned pregnancy. The child she is carrying is definitely not the son of her fiancé, and he is worried for her sake and for the sake of her reputation in the community. This child could cost them their future, not to mention the woman her life. Abortion or Not? If so, congratulations, you’ve just aborted Jesus of Nazareth!

SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE: Family is Fundamental

“God created man in His own image…male and female created He them.” (Genesis 1:27)

Since the beginning of time, the family has been the fundamental building block for society!

God put man and woman on this earth and told them to “be fruitful and multiply.” The creation of Adam and Eve is the greatest evidence supporting the fact that the Almighty intended the complete family unit to be the basis of human society. Not only is the family a building block for society—but also for procreation, financial security, and even evangelism. Because the family is so foundational for society at large, Satan has done everything in his power to see that the family unit is destroyed. He has attempted anything that demeans the sanctity of the marriage bond or berates the uniqueness of family ties.

Without a family there is no home. Without a positive home life, there is no haven from the strife and pressures of daily living. Satan would love nothing more than for each of us to walk through the valley of death everyday. He attempts to do this by stripping you of the benefits that love and approval of family bring. Satan’s attack against the family manifests itself through a variety of spiritual and societal ills. Abortion, abuse, adultery, covetousness, disunity, divorce, enmity, financial troubles, homosexuality, lesbianism, love of money, murder, strife—all are works of the flesh, tools Satan relentlessly uses to attack the fundamental, God-ordained, building blocks of human relations.

The foundational relationship of the family is the husband and wife. The importance of this divine partnership has been demonstrated through the millennia. After all that is why God created Eve—as a companion suitable for Adam. If Adam could have made it on his own, there would have been no need for Eve. Any student of biography and history can tell you that a man who has achieved great accomplishments has had a strong and mutually supportive wife in his life. Even secular success guru Napoleon Hill, author of one of the great personal goal-achievement books, Think and Grow Rich, wrote that one of the major causes of failure in the business and personal life is due to the wrong selection of a mate in marriage. Think about that.

Devotion taken from Pastor John Hagee’s book Bible Positions on Political Issues