Posted on 09/04/2003 12:33:34 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:16:24 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
September 4, 2003 -- As a violent thunderstorm flickered and dimmed the lights in Florida's execution chamber, a former minister was put to death last night for murdering an abortion doctor.
Paul Hill used his last breaths to call upon right-to-lifers to continue the fight - by any means necessary.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
The problem with your position is that it takes no real accounting of the facts of this case. Please answer directly the following questions:
1. Do you agree that any human being has the natural right to self defense?
2. Does that right to self defense include the right to use force in the defense of life?
3. If you agree that people do have a right to use force in the defense of life, then do you agree that one may use force in the defense of the life of another, innocent person?
(I'm really hoping you've answered "yes" thus far, as I'd hate to think that any American would deny any of that).
4. Do you agree that the human fetus is a human person, deserving of all the rights recognized for all others?
5. If you do believe that the fetus is a human being with rights on par with those of others, then do you believe that one may use force to defend them when their lives are threatened?
6. If not, why not?
I don't know why that is.
Why do you suppose it is?
The scripture verses that I think refer to the principle for government and also for the protection of life are:
Genesis 9:5-6
"And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting...And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting of his fellow man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man."
In this case it only worked one way, with Paul Hill being executed by the government. In the case of the killing of the unborn children, the government's position is opposite that of God's position. Who is going to stop the genocide and get justice for the babies killed?
Certainly not people who take the law into their own hands like Hill!
1. If a fetus is a human being, then standing outside an abortion clinic with a sign and a bullhorn is a dreadfully inadequate response to the problem.
2. If a fetus is not a human being, then standing outside an abortion clinic with a sign and a bullhorn is a waste of time.
Your answer: Certainly not people who take the law into their own hands like Hill!
I hope you're not saying that when faced with an issue that puts the government's position at odds with God's position that man's laws should supercede God's laws.
You need to seriously think about this. When your views are opposite of 99.999% of those who God has placed over you, maybe your position/view is wrong, not theirs.
I believe this man will be rewarded in heaven, even though such a sentiment is politically incorrect, and even sacireligious to some.
Why not? Man's laws apply equally to everyone, and must be followed or legal sanction results. All citizens are treated equally before it.
God's laws, on the other hand, apply only to those who subscribe to whatever particular religion whence they spring. They also have no means of Earthly enforcement. Thousands of different religions exist and are represented in America. However, in a Republic, only laws agreed upon by the majority have any hope of having effect.
A Christian's laws mean nothing to the muslim; his mean nothing to the animist. Man's laws, however, apply equally to all, and are agreed upon by majority vote in our system.
Whatever religious laws one believes in, their obeyance is strictly voluntary. The nation's laws, on the other hand, are not only enforceable but mandatory.
Paul Hill violated those laws. He murdered two people, and said that he would have killed more, including police officers, if they got in his way. He NEVER appeared sad about being "forced to take action"; instead he reveled and gloried in it. He had snide grin right up until the end, enjoying his perverse notoriety.
This places him solidly in the company of OTHER losers who sought such attention...like Ted Bundy, Richard Ramirez, and Usama bin Laden. he just had a different excuse, one which some misguided souls were more than happy to indulge.
Excellent post. It's another way of breaking down the moral dilemma that Heartbreak P. has been trying so logically and eloquently to lay out for us here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.