Forty-One Years of Roe v. Wade

Today marks the 41st year since Roe v. Wade decision, which said that women not only have a right to abortion, but it it’s protected by the Constitution.

Since that decision, it is estimated that over 57 million babies in America have been put to death.

Abortion has had a devastating effect on the nation both morally and culturally, but the idea of having a “choice” to end (kill) a preborn baby’s life has had a devastatingly disproportionate impact on the black community.

The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.’s position was, according to his father: “The Negro cannot win as long as he is willing to sacrifice the lives of his children for comfort and safety.”  I believe that.

It is estimated by the Guttmacher Institute that black women account for 30 percent of abortions performed. The Centers for Disease Control has estimated that 40 percent of all black pregnancies end in abortion, and it is also reported that abortion is responsible for more black deaths than heart disease, cancer, respiratory disease, accidents, homicides, suicide, HIV and cancer combined.

The so-called “choice” or “right” of an abortion is said to have claimed over 17 million black babies since 1973.  It’s estimated that roughly 1200 babies are aborted each day.  With these ungodly statistics, one may come to the conclusion that – through abortion – blacks are willingly participating in killing their own people.  This was underscored by the Census Bureau report that said the black population “grew at a slower rate than most other major race and ethnic groups in the country.”  Blacks are, in the process of accomplishing what the KKK could have only dreamed of achieving.

Blacks are only 13.1% of the population with black women obviously comprising much less.

To make matters worse, a black so-called civil rights organization- the NAACP, with help from the ACLU– has actively sought to overturn an Arizona state law that prohibits race and sex-based abortions.  Calling the law- among other things, “discriminatory,” the NAACP claims that the law violates “women’s rights” under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by “stigmatizing their decision” to kill their preborn babies.

Even after their initial suit was thrown out, the NAACP is appealing the case to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which means they just might win this time around.

Again a so-called civil rights organization that purports to represent the best interests of its constituents is suing to overturn a law that would increase the numbers of abortions, which is already decimating the black community.

The so-called leader of the Maricopa County chapter of the NAACP is Rev. Oscar Tillman, who’s also a member of the NAACP National Board.


And this is after what baby-butcher Kermit Gosnell was accused and found guilty of doing- particularly to poor, black women- in his abortion practice in May, 2013.

Worse still, America’s first black president has whole-heartedly endorsed this practice up to and including abortions performed during the third trimester.

Not only does this paint a sad picture of reality, but it’s unjust as well.  The notion that abortion is a “choice” is purposely misleading.  The aborted baby didn’t choose to be killed.  Furthermore, what about the rights of the preborn children who are murdered by abortion?  All of the politically progressive talk of “justice” and “rights” is nothing more than a charade when it’s not also applied to the preborn – for they are the most defenseless amongst us.

For those of us who are pro-life, it’s best that we forget about arguing about the legalities of abortion.  Instead, we should be concerned with discussing the immorality of abortion and the resulting consequences on the lives of the mothers who have them, the families in which these women belong, the communities where these women live and the nation as a whole.  The immorality of abortion, arbitrarily choosing when life ends- particularly when that decision is based on the convenience of the mother at the expense of the father, the preborn child, and the respective families- disrupts and destroys the cooperative act between God and man in creating new life in God’s image.

Even if one doesn’t believe in God, the immorality of abortion can still be sincerely and intelligently debated and defended from an ethical and moral position.  Most Americans view abortion as morally wrong.  Most of these same Americans believe that life begins at conception, which basic biology teaches.  Again, all the incessant talk about “rights” and “protections” ring extremely hollow if they’re not extended to those who need them the most. It’s impossible  to- with any sincerity or intellectual credibility- literally create “rights” out of thin air that redefines marriage on emotional qualifications, or that guarantees a constitutional protection for abortion, while ignoring the fact that a preborn child containing forty-six chromosomes is somehow immune from protection.

The moral disintegration that accompanies abortion enables men like Kermit Gosnell, Douglas Karpen, Leroy Carhart, Warren Hern, and women like Shelley Sella, and Susan Robinson to continue their gruesome barbarity against preborn children.

Jeremiah 1:5 says: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart…” Additionally, Psalm 139:13-14 reads: “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.  I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.  Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well.”

We should all remember this every time we hear the euphemisms “choice,” “woman’s right” and “a woman’s body” used in conjunctions with abortion.


Black Conservatives Discuss Guilty Verdict in the Gosnell Abortion Murders Case

My contribution to the National Center For Public Policy Research’s blog regarding the verdict in the Gosnell case-

Abortionist Kermit Gosnell was found guilty of first-degree murder today in the cases of three children who were born alive and later put to death during illegal late-term abortions that were conducted in his West Philadelphia clinic.

In a practice said to be routine when such botched abortions occurred at his below-standards clinic, Gosnell was convicted of cutting the spinal cords of babies with a pair of scissors to cause their deaths.

Gosnell was also found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death by drug overdose of an adult patient.  Further, eight other employees at Gosnell’s clinic already pleaded guilty to murder and lesser charges… Continue reading…

UPDATE- Today, Kermit Gosnell waived his right to appeal yesterday’s verdict and has escaped the death penalty.  As a result, he has agreed to two life sentences without the possibility of parole.  Gosnell will be sentenced tomorrow. More from…

Mercy For Gosnell?


In a Sunday article on First Thing’s website , Robert P. George argued that pro-lifers should join him in requesting that Gosnell’s life be spared from the death penalty if the jury decides as much.  George, who is overly optimistic, argues that no one- regardless of the moral depravity evidenced in the actions s/he has committed- is beyond spiritual conversion, repentance and reform. As such, Gosnell shouldn’t be condemned to death through capital punishment, but should be given an opportunity of spiritual reformation and rehabilitation.

(To those who aren’t familiar or not up-to-date on the Gosnell case, I would encourage you to read the grand jury investigation to see what Gosnell is accused of.)

First, unfortunately there are some people who are simply beyond spiritual repair. History is replete with examples of people who committed atrocities against others, small and large, who never repented of their evil deeds.

Furthermore, history also demonstrates that many people who were sentenced to prison, be it for a determined length of time up to  life, didn’t experience a spiritual reformation or personal rehabilitation.

Therefore George is arguing that Gosnell’s life be spared based upon the potential of him changing his ways.  He even admits as much when he says, ”  But whether it produces that effect or not, we will have shown all who have eyes to see and ears to hear that our pro-life witness is truly a witness of love—love even of our enemies, even of those whose appalling crimes against innocent human beings we must oppose with all our hearts, minds, and strength. In a profoundly compelling way, we will have given testimony to our belief in the sanctity of all human life.”

I understand what George is trying to communicate, but I think it’s a  profoundly naive position to hold.  It’s up to God to have mercy on Gosnell; we on the other hand, have to do what’s right and necessary for the preservation of civil society by protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty.  Sparing Gosnell doesn’t do that and it sends exactly the wrong message about life’s sanctity to other Gosnell’s that have yet to be brought to justice.

George says, “Kermit Gosnell, like every human being, no matter how self-degraded, depraved, and sunk in wickedness, is our brother—a precious human being made in the very image and likeness of God. Our objective should not be his destruction, but the conversion of his heart. Is that impossible for a man who has corrupted his character so thoroughly by his unspeakably evil actions? If there is a God in heaven, then the answer to that question is “no.” There is no one who is beyond repentance and reform; there is no one beyond hope. We should give up on no one.”

Using this logic, no one guilty of murder would qualify for capital punishment. So according to him the accused should simply be imprisoned so their hearts can potentially be changed.

Also, George uses the very fact that man is made in God’s image as a reason to be against the death penalty even though the Bible says that it’s for that very reason, that man is the imago Dei, that murderers should be sentenced to death. George never squares that reality.

George’s position also rules out Gosnell’s (potential) spiritual change prior to his state-sponsored execution, which George apparently doesn’t or refuses to consider.

As for being created in God’s image, I couldn’t disagree with George more. Being created in the image of God doesn’t absolve us from receiving punishment (capital or otherwise) if we’re deserving of it.  Being created in God’s image actually bestows upon us the responsibility to not only NOT take a life arbitrarily as Cain did Abel (1) and as Gosnell is accused of doing countless times over, but to punish those who do (Gen 9:6).  This divine imperative is the only one repeated in each of the first five books of the Bible, which is an indicator of how God viewed the severity of murder.  

In addition, any man who has the capability or internal disposition to deliver live babies with the express purpose to kill them- engaging in this sort of depraved evil across several decades- is beyond spiritual reparation, period. Gosnell literally killed the most innocent and defenseless among us and for that he should be punished with something much more stringent than the “mercy” of life in prison, predicated on the potentiality that he may change and display remorse.

George also says, “If our plea for mercy moves the heart of a man who cruelly murdered innocent babies, the angels in heaven will rejoice. But whether it produces that effect or not, we will have shown all who have eyes to see and ears to hear that our pro-life witness is truly a witness of love—love even of our enemies, even of those whose appalling crimes against innocent human beings we must oppose with all our hearts, minds, and strength. In a profoundly compelling way, we will have given testimony to our belief in the sanctity of all human life.”

Sorry. A pro-life witness is one that supports (personal witness/political support) or punishes (as an agent of the government) with death those who cavalierly take the lives of their fellow citizens (2). Sparing the life of the murderer in no way demonstrates the sanctity of life; it shows the devaluation of it.(3) It also shows preferential treatment to the murderer (mercy) at the expense of those he murdered. But more to the point, if Gosnell’s heart wasn’t moved to repent as he was severing the spines of infants for as long as he did, the mercy George encourages pro-lifers to offer Gosnell will has no chance. None.

George continues, “But even if the death penalty is justified in a case like Gosnell’s, mercy is nevertheless a legitimate option, especially where our plea for mercy would itself advance the cause of respect for human life by testifying to the power of mercy and love.”


The death penalty is justified in Gosnell’s case Mr. George, and as such, mercy isn’t a legitimate option.  If we allow all murders mercy as recompense for their evil, the act of murder will increase. Furthermore, it simply isn’t biblical.

If those watching the case, regardless of their stance on abortion, can find it in their hearts to forgive Gosnell for both infanticide and murder, God bless them.  But forgiveness and (capital) punishment aren’t mutually exclusive by any means. Gosnell can be forgiven but he also needs to be sentenced to and punished with death for what he’s done.

Even God may not have mercy on Gosnell.


1). Cain killed Abel and God pardoned him. God also pardoned David for being complicit in Uriah’s murder (even though technically, David didn’t murder Uriah but conspired with the conditions to have him murdered).  That said, God can pardon who he pleases; we on the other hand, cannot. We are commanded first in Genesis 9:5-6 to punish with death those who shed’s man’s blood, be the offender man or animal. This was the requirement for justice because man is made in God’s image.  The universality of this imperative is underscored by the fact that it was given in the covenant God made with Noah regarding all men.

2). Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14.

3). Ezekiel 13: 19.