Innocent Blood

Please read the following story before you leave this page. The truth must be told!

Here is a page about the numbers. Read this and see for yourself just how abortion compares with all the wars this country has fought. See for yourself how many brave young men and women have lost their lives so we could live in freedom. And now we take anyway the freedom for a baby to live. Don't let these fine people die in vain. Choose LIFE!

It has often been said that until it can be determined when the soul joins the body of a new baby, abortion cannot be called murder.

This, however, is not the main concern of the Bible. The key phrase of Scripture is found in Genesis 9:4 where we read "the life thereof, which is the blood thereof...." That phrase is the basis for many other passages that equate blood with life and that call the shedding of blood sin.

What relation does this verse have to the problem of abortion? Just this: that every fetus has its own blood, and the shedding of that blood is as surely the taking of life as it would be in any other circumstance.

Before the fetus is three weeks old, it has a beating heart. Also, its primitive vessels and blood are in the process of developing continuously throughout the months of gestation. At no time is that blood the blood of the mother.

The term "innocent blood"is used repeatedly in Scripture, and in each case it is clear that God attributes very great significance to that term. Note the following passages:
....do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place." Jeremiah 22:3

"that innocent blood be not shed in thy land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and so blood be upon thee." Deuteronomy 19:10

9:10

"These six things doth the Lord hate......and hands that shed innocent blood." Proverbs 6:16, 17 (See also II Kings 24:4, Deuteronomy 19:13 and Deuteronomy 21:9)

Except for the blood of Jesus, there can surely be no blood more innocent than that of those bodies being newly formed in the womb by the hand of God. The burden of guilt described in the above passages falls on anyone responsible for terminating the life of the unborn. How can anyone hold that the timy body can be alive, but safe to slay because it may not yet have received its soul?

Surely God knew what He meant in Jeremiah 1:5 when He said, "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee," and the Holy Spirit, through David, make it clear that "all my members were written....when as yet there was none of them." (Psalm 139:16)

If Jeremiah or David had been conceived in our time in history, could his developing body have been aborted, and yet he would not be the victim of murder?

The Bible does not state when the soul and body are united. Even if one were to hold that, just possibly, the soul enters the body at some later time than conception, would he want to risk the wrath of God on such an unprovable matter, and teach men so?

Yes, some might do so, because there are many who do not believe the cardinal teachings of Scripture. But for those among who still tremble at the Word of God, t of God, the thought that He said to Cain, "the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground" (Genesis 4:10), brings with it the awesome burden of those voiceless millions in our land whose innocent blood is being shed year after year.

Must God visit His judgment upon us as a nation before we will recognize how grievous is this sin in His sight? The blood of countless millions cries to God, and it is on our hands.

by Millard M. Posthuma, M.D.

Special thanks to The Tract League, Grand Rapids, MI 49544-1390

54 Babies, By George F. Will
Source: Washington Post: December 3, 1998; Page A23

CHINO HILLS, Calif.Where Route 71 crosses over Payton Drive, at the bottom of the steeply sloping embankment, two boys, who were playing nearby, found the boxes. The boys bicycled home and said they had found boxes of "babies."

Do not be impatient with the imprecision of their language. They have not read the apposite Supreme Court opinions. So when they stumbled on the boxes stuffed with 54 fetuses, which looked a lot like babies, they jumped to conclusions. Besides, young boys are apt to believe their eyes rather than the Supreme Court.

The first count came to a lot less than 54. Forgive the counters' imprecision. Many fetuses had been dismembered -- hands, arms, legs, heads jumbled together -- by the abortionist's vigor. An accurate count required a lot of sorting out.

The fetuses had been dumped here, about 30 miles east of Los Angeles, on March 14, 1997, by a trucker who may not have known what the Los Angeles abortion clinic had hired him to dispose of. He later served 71 days in jail for the improper disposal of medical waste. Society must be strict about its important standards.

What local authorities dealt with as a problem of solid waste disposal struck a few local residents as rather more troubling than that. They started talking to each other, and one thing led to another, and to the formation of Cradles of Love, which had the modest purpose of providing a burial for the 54 babies.

The members of Cradles of Love -- just a few normal walking-around middle-class Americans -- called them babies, and still do. These people are opposed to abortion, in spite of the Supreme Court's assurance in 1973 that abortions end only "potential life." (Twenty-five years later the Supreme Court has not yet explained how a life that is merely "potential" can be ended.)

Some will say the members of Cradles of Love, who are churchgoers, have been unduly influenced by theology. Or perhaps the real culprit is biology. It teaches that after the DNA of the sperm fuse with those of the ovum a new and unique DNA complex is formed that directs the growth of the organism. It soon is called a fetus, which takes in nourishment and converts it to energy through its own distinct, unique organic functioning, and very soon it looks a lot like a baby.

Anyway, theology or biology or maybe their eyes told the members of Cradles of Love that there were some babies in need of burials. So they asked the coroner to give them the fetuses. Then the American Civil Liberties Union was heard from.

It professed itself scandalized by this threat to . . . what? The ACLU frequently works itself into lathers of anxiety about threats to the separation of church and state. It is difficult, however, to identify any person whose civil liberties were going to be menaced if the fetuses were (these are the ACLU's words) "released to the church groups for the express purpose of holding religious services." The ACLU said it opposed "facilitation" of services by a public official.

The ACLU's attack on the constitutionally protected right to the free exercise of religion failed to intimidate, and in October the babies were buried in a plot provided at no charge by a cemetery in nearby Riverside. Each baby was given a name by a participating church group. Each name was engraved on a brass plate that was affixed to each of the 54 small, white, wooden caskets made, at no charge, by a volunteer who took three days off from work to do it. Fifty clergy and four persons active in the right-to-life movement carried the caskets. Each baby's name is inscribed on a large headstone, also provided at no charge. Fifty-four doves, provided at no charge by the cemetery, were released at the services.

The ACLU trembled for the Constitution.

We hear much about the few "extremists" in the right-to-life movement. But the vast majority of the movement's members are like the kindly, peaceable people here, who were minding their own business until some of the results of the abortion culture tumbled down a roadside embankment and into their lives.

Which is not to say that this episode was untainted by ugly extremism. It would be nice if the media, which are nothing if not diligent in documenting and deploring right-to-life extremism, could bring themselves to disapprove the extremism of the ACLU, which here attempted a bullying nastiness unredeemed by any connection to a civic purpose.

Would You Consider Abortion?

1. There is a preacher and wife who are very, very poor. They already have 14 kids. Now, she finds out she's pegnant with her 15th. They're living in tremendous poverty... Considering their poverty and the excessive world population, would you consider recommending an abortion to her?

2. The father is sick with sniffles, the mother has T.B. They had these four children: The 1st. is blind, the 2nd is dead, the 3rd. is deaf and the 4th. child has T.B. She finds out that she is prgnant again. Given the extreme situation, would you consider recommending abortion?

3. A white man raped a 13 year old black girl and she got pregnant.If you were her parents, would you consider recommending an abortion?

4. A teenage girl is pregnant. She's not married. Her fiancee is not the father of the baby and he is very upset. Would you recommend abortion?

IF YOU HAVE ANSWERED "YES" IN ANY OF THESE SITUATIONS:

1. In the first case, you have just killed John Wesley! One of the great evangelists of the 19th. century.

2. In the second case, you have just killed Beethoven.

3. In the third case, you have just killed Ethel Waters, the great black singer.

4. If you said, "yes" to the fourth case, you have just declared the murder of Jesus Christ!

-- Author Unknown --

This Real Pro-Life Ring site is owned by CyberSpace Community Church. Click here to see List of all Current Members [ Prev | Skip It | Next 5 | Random | Next] Want to join the ring? Get the info.

After you have surfed the "Real Pro-Life" webring you can go to other Pro-Life web sites. This is the start of what I hope will become a large set of links that will help you get the facts on Abortion.

Michigan Life Works
Priest For Life
The Birth Site
Right To Life Of Michigan
National Memorial for the Unborn
National Right To Life
Eric's Abortion Information Page
Pregnacy Centers Online