Friday, February 26, 2010

Abortion is Murder, 7-18, April 2010

Formerly Stop the Killing of Young People (skyp) and soon, perhaps, Stop Killing Preemies

April, 2010 Vol. 7 No. 18
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – cell—484-706-4375, machine -- 610-396-0332
Email –
Web –
Circulation – 102
John Dunkle, Editor

Abortion is Murder, a weak, pathetic response to baby murder, is sent out at least once a month. If the gestapo hasn’t jailed you for defending the innocent realistically, you either have to tell me you want it or go the website. Faxes and emails are free but snail-mail is free only for POC’s, $100 for others.
Because I believe we should use every legitimate means, including force, in our attempt to protect those being tortured to death, I want to hear from people who’ve been forceful. I’d also like to hear from those who disagree with me.

Prisoners of Christ:
1. Evans, Paul Ross 83230-180, USP McCreary, P.O. Box 3000, Pine Knot, KY 42635
2. Gibbons, Linda - Vanier WDC, 655 Martin St., P.O. Box 1040, Milton, ON, Canada L9T 5E6
3. Griffin, Michael 310249, Okaloosa Correctional Institution, Crestview FL 32539-6708 9/11
4. Howard, Peter Andrew 57760-097, FCI, Box 900, Safford, AZ 85546
5. Jordi, Stephen 70309-004, FCI P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute IN 47802 6/30
6 Knight, Peter CRN 158589, Port Philip Prison, P.O. Box 376, Laverton, Victoria, Australia
7. Kopp, James 11761-055, USP Canaan, 3057 Easton Tpk., Waymart, PA 18472
8. McMenemy, David Robert 08168-030, FCI Elkton, P.O. Box 10, Lisbon OH 44432
9. Richardson, Alonzo Lee 12898-021, PO Box 474701, Des Moines, IA 5094
10. Roeder, Scott, Sedgewick county Jail, 141 West Elm, Wichita, KS 67203
11. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
12. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca, Unit A, P.O. Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093 3/31
13. Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, United States Penitentiary, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg PA 17837 8/25
14. Weiler Jr., Robert F. 39385-037, FCC - Delaware Hall, Box 1000, Petersburg VA 23804 (new)
15. Whitaker, Vincent, FCI, Box 699, Estill SC 29918

The Lord has asked people to make sacrifices related to opposing abortion which all but a handful have had too weak a heart to make. And they’ve looked for any pretense they could conjure up to claim that the sacrifice wasn’t required. They even deluded themselves, as people often do, into “believing” the pretense was real . . . When they get what they’ll get, they’ll fully deserve it. Peter Knight

April, the end of Volume 7 of “Abortion is Murder.” Now there might be an April 2 or even an April 3 but in May I begin Volume 8. Hard to believe that it’s been eight long years since I got kicked out of “Pro-Life Berks“ and had to change the name of this newsletter from that to “skyp.” I’m tired of starting from scratch every year; so, everyone who gets it now will continue to get it, unless he asks me to stop.

Rev Lee Roy's Good Doctor Gunned Down

Yes Sireee folks
We have composed a short little email
To honor Good Doctor George
Recalling his final moments shortly before
His tail
Hit the carpet
For george was
The Best
Doctor for publicizing his latterm baby killing business
Witicha had ever seen
Entered the hallowed halls of
Reformation Lutheran & sent good doctor
To an eternal conference
With other good doctor killers

Good doctor tiller
Was going about his christian service & duty
Ushering in those for sunday services
In the soon to be very merry month of may
Smiling to those he met
Not knowing his final breath
Was only minutes away
Not realizing this would be the day
Good doctor tiller
Would meet the Lord in an extremely close up & personal way

Months later good doctor tiller's killer
Would appear
Here in sedgewick county courthouse
Judge wilbert
Of his internationally famous case
And put a bright smile on his lying face
Let's give the media something to write about
And let's give the media something that will give
Good judge wilbert as much publicity as
Good doctor george & vile vile
Evil evil antiabortionist
So good judge wilbert’s
Went throughout the land
Invol manslaughter
NOW COWS had a hissy fit
With good judge wilbert's writ
Good doctors could more easily be gunned down
In the american land
Good proscetutor nola
Played to the cameras well
Swell she said
We will just proceed
And prove invol manslaughter is not right
While good judge wilbert gave an off camera out of sight
Slap to her right thigh
We will ride high
They both knew
Let's just change directions out west
And let the nation believe
A man can shoot a good doctor
And not do life
In the pen
Then after the first degree murder verdict comes in
We can begin
More lucrative careers
Here or abroad
The world will know our name
Why should good doctor tiller & good shot
Get all the fame
And that's just what happened
Year of our Lord Twenty & Ten
A miscarriage of justice
Brought about by a lying evil man
Claiming to represent justice
In the matter of
The state of kansas v SCOTT ROEDER
Tobra (of course)

More from Abortion, the Irrepressible Conflict:

If you think the violinist example is strange, try this one. Thomson asks you to imagine being “trapped in a tiny house with a growing child.” Not just any house or growing child, no, she means a really tiny house and a “rapidly growing child.” If you don’t get out quick, the fat kid will crush you to death. What do you do? The fat punk is safe; he’ll walk away from the rubble without a scratch. But you’re going to die unless you do something to stop Blimpy from crushing you.10
Thomson finds it understandable if a bystander responded to your cries for help, saying, “we cannot choose between your life and the child’s, we cannot be the ones to decide who is to live, we cannot intervene.” But she also insists that the woman should not have to sit “passively” waiting for the fat kid to crush her. She has the “right of self-defense.”11
Thomson then gives her justification for abortion-on-demand. Does a child’s right to life obligate the mother to give him the use of her body to keep him alive? To answer this, Thomson calls on Henry Fonda, the actor. Imagine that you are sick with a rare fever and the only thing that can save you is the “cool touch of Henry Fonda on your fevered brow.” You live on the East Coast; Henry lives on the West Coast. Are you entitled to Mister Roberts’ touch? Should Henry feel obligated to fly out and lay hands on you? No, of course not, says Thomson: “It would be frightfully nice of him to fly in from the West Coast to provide it... .but I have no right at all against anybody that he should do this for me.”12
Thomson is not arguing that the fevered patient in need of Henry Fonda’s touch, or the violinist, or the unborn child, have no right to life. They do. But they don’t have a right to use another person’s body to secure their life unless that person gives her voluntary consent. We are all little sovereign autonomous entities with no prior social obligation. We dole out rights on a voluntary basis. But we don’t owe anybody anything, says Thomson.
Even in cases where sex was consensual, the child’s right to use his mother’s body is still dependent on the mother’s consent. Many people engage in casual sex solely for pleasure, says Thomson. They use birth control not expecting or wanting a pregnancy. But pregnancies occur anyway. Are these women obligated to carry the child to term? Not at all. If you opened your window “to let the air in” (had sex for pleasure) and a burglar (baby) climbed in instead, are you obligated to let him stay? What if you “installed burglar bars” (contraception) on your windows and a burglar came through anyway? A mother is no more obligated to let the unwanted child stay in her womb than the homeowner is obligated to let the burglar stay in his home.13
Try this one: “Suppose,” says Thomson, “people-seeds drift about on the air like pollen,” and they can “take root in your carpet and upholstery” if you let them float through your window. Naturally, you don’t want any “people-seeds” taking root in your lovely new carpets, so you install screens on your windows (contraception), designed to keep out the obnoxious seeds. But despite the screens, a seed gets through. Are you obligated to let the little “people-seed” (baby) grow in your brand new Stainmaster carpet? asks Thomson. No. You can’t help it if these “people-seeds” are floating around. It’s normal for people to open their windows to breath air (sex). You even took the precaution of installing screens (contraception) to keep the “people-seeds” out, but still one got through. They are your carpets; you didn’t invite the “people-seed” to take root. Thomson believes you have every right to spray the little seedling with Roundup (abortion).14
A woman’s body is her private property, says Thomson. The unborn child is a trespasser. “Minimally Decent Samaritanism” may cause the mother to allow the trespasser to stay, but she has no obligations to a trespasser who has violated her property. Even in cases where pregnancy was intended, the unborn child’s right to life doesn’t trump the mother’s right to kick him out of her property. At best the unborn child is a guest. But if for whatever reason the mother decides that he has worn out his welcome, she is well within her right to show him the door—vacuum aspirator. It may be “indecent and self-centered” to deny the child the use of her body “for one hour,” but it’s not “unjust.”15
No one is required to be a Good Samaritan, insists Thomson. Kitty Genovese was murdered in a New York City street, while thirty-eight people watched and heard her cries for help. Yet no one tried to intervene, or stopped to call the police. Their indifference to Kitty’s plight may have been “immoral,” but it was not illegal. Same with abortion; even in those cases that outrage the moral conscience: “It would be indecent in the woman to request an abortion, and indecent in a doctor to perform it, if a fetus is in her seventh month, and she wants the abortion just to avoid the nuisance of postponing a trip abroad.”16 Such an abortion would be immoral. The state, however, has no legal basis to interfere.
Thomson’s complete disregard for babies grates on the consciences of many liberals. So the personhood argument was invented for those liberals who are not prepared to accept the humanity of their victims. In his decision, Blackmun emphasized that fetuses were not persons in the constitutional sense. Mary Ann Warren’s essay “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” takes this position as well. Warren defines personhood as,
(1) Consciousness (of objects and events, external and internal to the being, and the capacity to feel pain); (2) reasoning (the developed capacity to solve new and relatively complex problems); (3) self-motivated activity (activity that is relatively independent of either genetic or direct external control); (4) the capacity to communicate, by whatever means, messages of indefinite variety of types, that is not just with an indefinite number of possible contexts, but of many possible topics; (5) the presence of self-concepts, self-awareness, either individual or racial, or both.17
Don’t let the little buggers fool you, says Warren. The “eight-month-old fetus” may look like a human being, but he can’t “communicate messages,” can’t “reason,” can’t engage in “self-motivated activity.” The unborn child, “even a fully developed one, is considerably less person-like than is the average mature mammal, indeed the average fish.” The fetus has no more “right to life than a new born guppy.” Such an insignificant claim should “never override a woman’s right to obtain an abortion, at any stage of her pregnancy.” Refusing to give her reactionary enemies the slightest traction, Warren castigates Comrade Thomson for allowing that some abortions may be “indecent,” if sought for frivolous reasons, such as a trip to Europe: “Whether or not it would be indecent (whatever that means) for a woman in her seventh month to obtain an abortion just to avoid having to postpone a trip to Europe, it would not, in itself, be immoral, and therefore it ought to be permitted.”18
Like Thomson, Warren has a penchant for bizarre examples. She asks the reader to imagine a human spaceman, who has been taken prisoner by space aliens. The aliens want to use his cells to clone “enumerable” humans. If the space traveler doesn’t try to escape, thousands of humans can be cloned using his cells. Does he have the right to escape? asks Warren. Certainly:
Regardless of how he got captured, he is not morally obligated to remain in captivity for any period of time for the sake of permitting any number of potential people to come into existence, so great is the margin by which one actual person’s right to liberty outweighs whatever right to life even a hundred thousand potential persons have. . .Consequently, a woman’s right to protect her health, happiness, freedom, even her life, by terminating an unwanted pregnancy, will always override whatever right to life it may be appropriate to ascribe to a fetus, even a fully developed one.19 (tbc)

From The Abortioneeers:

Dr. Tiller had a whole bunch of sayings that he said guided his behavior, temperament and advice to others....

* The great battles of life are fought between our ears and not any other fields of contact.
* Don't let the protesters live rent free in your head.
* Solutions...not problems.
* Always say thank you personally.
* A life of reaction is a life of spiritual and emotional slavery.
* If there is plenty, take plenty; if there is none, take it all. (great grandad Romney - quoted by Stanley Tiller '91)
* An infinite amount of quality can be added to any service.
* It's nice to be important but it's more important to be nice.
* It's not going to change until you change.
* When you have to eat crow - chew rapidly, swallow quickly and it doesn't taste too bad.
* It is better to do a good deal poorly than a bad deal well.
* If you are going to bet on someone, bet on yourself first.
* It never pays to dance on someone else's grave.
* You can change the world - if you do not have to take credit for it.
* If it's too hot in the kitchen, DON'T COOK.
* A man has got to know his limitations.
* You cannot be all things to all people.
* Ego trips are expensive.
* It is never the wrong time to do the next right thing.
* Paddle your own canoe. - Grandma Tiller '59
* Glory may be fleeting BUT mediocrity is forever.
* The only requirement for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

The Abortioneers forgot one: you can shoot me but you can’t stop me.

Neocutis, a company based in San Francisco, sells a skin cream that it says can "turn back time to create flawless baby skin again." Valerie Richardson, reporting for the Washington Times, quotes its website: "Inspired by fetal skin's unique properties, Neocutis's proprietary technology uses cultured fetal skin cells to obtain an optimal, naturally balanced mixture of skin nutrients." The cell line was developed using the skin of an aborted human fetus. Richardson also quoted the company's statement in response to critics: "Our view—which is shared by most medical professionals and patients—is that the limited, prudent and responsible use of donated fetal skin tissue can continue to ease suffering, speed healing, save lives and improve the well-being of many patients around the globe." And who can doubt that people with dry skin are, in their own way, suffering? It is a relief to learn that Neocutis is not exercising its legal rights thoughtlessly.
Sent in by Jim Kopp

Theocratic Law and Its Function
Chapter III of Paul Ross Evans’ The Militant Christian

How does apocalyptic preparation and Christian unity violate God’s Law? It doesn’t. God has, in fact, instructed us repeatedly to mind both of those chores closely. But if there was ever a way that the mass man of this epoch has violated God’s Law, many times unknowingly, and adhered to God’s Law in other arenas, it has been through following corrupt governments Romans 13 now comes to the forefront of every pacifist Christian’s mind. Can you not see, my brothers and sisters, that this instruction was intended for the upright seat of government? Throughout the entire Bible, did not God bring to the ground governments which followed idols and were corrupted morally, sexually, and spiritually – even His own people?
As the perspective of the books of Chronicles (Old Testament) is theocratic, so should the body of Christ analyze and interpret the affairs of the United States in modern times. The author(s) of Chronicles analyzes Judah’s affairs, and more importantly whether or not the reigning king in certain time periods faithfully executed God’s law and will upon the nation. Do we do that today? When examining such books of our Bible, it is clear that the Lord greatly blesses His people when the people serve him and promote, enforce, and protect His will, all the while looking out closely for His best interests. As well, it is apparent that when the nation forsakes Him and follows idols or abandons His Love and Will, it is punished severely. Christ’s church will, no doubt, never prosper unless it chooses to abandon evilness, and associations with evil, and walk upright in the ways of righteousness.
In studying the books of Kings (I/II) in the Old Testament, we learn several lessons as well that can be applied to the theocratic mission of Militant Christianity:

* The modern political process can never be trusted in establishing godliness for our people as a Church or a nation.
* The only way to achieve righteousness and establish righteous social order is to meticulously follow God’s Law from Sinai (barring sacrifices and various laws) and fundamentally follow Christ’s laws, and His spirit of struggling against an evil world.
* Genuine realization of the fact that a diminishing code of morals throughout and within a civilization demonstrates a path that leads to harsh divine punishments.

Let us remember the things that God hates, and which are an abomination unto Him:
Proverbs 6:16-19 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: a proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, a false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

As well, let us remember what exactly it is that we follow:
Proverbs 8:13 The fear of the Lord is to hate evil, pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.

Nearly every modern government strays from the Christian mission. Some were true for short periods, but were eventually corrupted. Many have projected themselves as anti-Christian in every measure for quite a while. The Christian militant does not recognize such a government’s sovereignty or validity. The Bible is law, not those “law makers” who have abandoned God’s moral codes. Morally-neutral indifference is the present mind-frame for most Americans. It is an attempt to smother moral uprightness, such as those codes held by Christian militants, and it must be recognized and disintegrated.
As well, in present times, we find ourselves battling modern media who press ultra-liberal acceptance of anything non-traditional. As a nation, mass man grasps anything non-Christian. Codes previously mentioned such as Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, or atheism aren’t necessarily anti-Christian to the point of violence in many cases; however, they have been used large-scale by enemy media groups, in order to leave Christianity largely inundated.
Negative references have been made toward any Christian group lately, and have left the mass man with a false perception of Christianity. Christ’s teachings and the fact that he was MURDERED by the “authority” of that time have been forgotten, as evil governments have intended from the beginning.
Largely a subculture has emerged, through the disguise of “musical taste” in which it has become popular to worship modern crime and criminals. Most of the mass man, sadly, has no idea what the modern criminal faces on the long term, either. Drug-dealing, theft, random violence, and rape have all been elevated to the position of glamour and pizzazz. The idol of money is surely at the center of such a venture; however, the idols of sexual “satisfaction” and pride play a large role in this mostly usufruct ideology. The nihilist has succeeded in this venture, in portraying modern man and life in general as a pointless and senseless existence. He screams that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded (such as ours) and people should simply enjoy themselves now, before “it’s too late.”
Juridically, we can never let these types of values penetrate our Christian body. The theocratic stance will be an edifice that such nonsense cannot break or destroy. As long as the officials are divinely inspired and/or chosen by a body of Christian voters, this approach will be most unsuccessful. The “values” mentioned above, the basis for the nihilistic approach, is the foundation of modern Satanism and everything that the Evil One promotes. Certain governments have taken to promoting such beliefs and we should work as a body to prevent such beliefs from penetrating the body of our nation and church. Such mendacious self-centeredness has no room or place with those who are loyal to the Father and the Son. Large-scale, the theocracy works as a sound structure that the Church and nation can stand on in the face of such treacherous codes.

Several laws were given for the theocratic nation and it falls on each generation to sort though those laws and apply them to modern living. Practically, these laws may be sometimes interpreted quite simply, and in other cases, with some difficulty. The importance in these matters, as hopefully the readers of this text have derived thus far, lies in establishing a solid foundation to build upon. Indispensably, the manner of our construction upon these keystones is not through human wisdom, rather with God-willed inspiration. That being said, the following principles have been set down.

First of all, the Father is the head of the household, is the authority, and the power over life and death. These rules are backed by Exodus 12: 26, 27; Deuteronomy 6:7, and as well, Job 1:5 just to name a few. This IS NOT (in any shape or form) a manner in which men use God’s Law to bully or mistreat women. Yes, the woman should submit to her husband. She answers to him as the head of the household. The husband answers to the Father as well, submitting to His will. The wife is surely the husband’s subordinate. Her importance to the family and to civilization, however, is indispensable. She is the center of life, and as a woman, who fulfills her obligation to the family in terms of fidelity, loyalty, faith to God, and the giver of love and compassion, every respect should be rightly hers. (And don’t forget Christ’s directive to the husband,”Love your wife.” Love has always seemed to me a more powerful command than obey.)

The husband and father answers to God, as we just mentioned. There is a definite chain of commands. When this chain of commands is followed, the family unit runs smoothly and is the center piece of creation.
God’s Law is equally applied among aliens, as citizens living among a Christian nation. Such verses back this equality of law structure, as those who journey and/or remain living in a Christian land. They are subject to the Laws and Regulations of that land:

I will continue Paul’s Chapter III with these verses next issue

More from Peter’s long excoriation of Greg Cunningham and those like Greg:

Jesus’ concern for those people, his willingness to lay down his life so that they too would be drawn to him and receive life, has made all his true followers love him so much the more. More than anything else could have. “That they might have life and have it more abundantly” Jn 10:10. His suffering and death were not just the lure which has attracted many people to him, they are the crown jewel and crowning glory in all his people’s love of the Lord. It makes no difference to their love that a portion may have been drawn to him in some other way,
Some people, especially those who seek and desire an easy life for themselves and their families, would see this as placing a very harsh burden on Jesus. Maybe even an unjust burden. Why not see to it that the Gospel was promulgated by an easier means which asked less of Jesus, and which allowed his people to love him less? But God, wiser and more knowledgeable, knew that this was the necessary way for things to be done. He wanted people to love his son as much as possible so he called on him to lay down his life for them. It was not just a case that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, Jn 3:16, it was also a case of God so loved his Son that he wanted the very best for him and asked him to do it.
He wanted to be there with his Son. And he was with him until the last moments. He experienced all his sufferings with him. When they mocked and beat and crucified Jesus, they mocked and beat and nailed God to the cross as well. And the more Jesus was beaten down the taller he stood in the eyes of his people. This is the greatest truth of the Christian religion.
It’s a truth, though, that so many preachers have never mentioned, never explained, and do not appreciate. God did not love Mohammad or Buddha like this. He did not call on them to lay down their lives for their followers so they would be loved the more by them. It is true too that Jesus died to pay the price for people’s sins so they would be forgiven, in that they would not have repented and had their sins forgiven had they not been drawn to him and his teachings and had their lives changed by them.
It is God’s paramount desire that people be drawn to his Son and to him, not by the Christmas story, not through any of his miracles, not through any of his teachings, not through anything else in the Bible, but by his Son’s supreme act of love for his people. Therefore, the greatest duty of every Christian is to see that his act of love receives the fullest reward possible. And it is not only their greatest duty, but it is the true Christian’s greatest desire and greatest joy to see his supreme act of love given its very fullest reward.
There is only one way anyone can do that: by preaching, and preaching in the correct manner, by bringing people to Jesus in the way God wants, through telling them about the Lord’s crucifixion and why he willingly laid down his life.
It is therefore a grave error to attempt to convert anyone, whether adult, adolescent, or child, than doing anything other than firstly explaining the facts about Jesus’ crucifixion. And then having them read the following sections of the Gospel so that they understand what Jesus endured for his people and what he offered them (MT 26: 36-46; JN 18 2-11; LK 22 52-58; JN 18 12-27; MT 26 75; MK 14 55-65; MT 27 1; MT 27 3-10; JN 18 28-40; MT 27 22-30;JN 19 4-15; MK 15 21-22; JN 19 19-24; MY 27 38-45; JN 19 25-27; MT 27 46; JN 19 28-30)
If someone’s heart isn’t sufficiently affected by that to be keen to learn about the rest of Jesus’ life testimony, then he is a loser who has a heart which is made of ice and isn’t worth bothering with any further and shouldn’t be bothered with any further. It is sometimes necessary to put one pearl before swine. But if they treat that pearl with contempt, then you cannot put any more of his pearls before them so they can trample on them as well.
In the April 2 AIM one writer said that he disapproves and disagrees with that. The writer told us that enormous and irreparable damage will be the result of any attempt to talk to people about religion, any attempt to talk to them about Jesus. He said that his experience has taught him that good people get angry and resentful when Jesus comes or is brought near them, and that the only right way to bring people to a better and more enlightened way of life is to firstly keep Jesus out of the way where he won’t be a nuisance, then impress the good people with how intelligent and how cool and how credible the April writer is, and only after that might you allow Jesus to come in and give him a chance to play a minor secondary role in bringing people to a better and more enlightened way of life. The April writer listed for us the ways in which he had impressed people with his intelligence and coolness and credibility. Principally, he says, by not talking to them about religion/Jesus. He went on to say that before anyone makes an attempt to have people brought to Jesus, that, “we must first appeal to their logic.”
Well, the first thing you must appeal to is people’s hearts, so you can find out if they have one. Because if they do not have a heart, if they are losers who have lost it, than you have no business seeking or accepting their voluntary assistance with anything. By far the best way to find out if they have a heart is to tell them about the one who had the best heart, and see what their response is to him.
God wants people to be drawn to his Son, and to him, and to a better way of life, first and foremost, by one thing and one thing only. That one thing is not the story of Jesus’ birth, it’s not his teachings in the Sermon on the Mount, it’s not the account of the poor widow’s charity, and he certainly doesn’t want them drawn to his Son and a better way of life by the April writer’s intelligence, or the AW’s credibility, or the AW’s real coolness as this person suggested. The one thing is Jesus’ wonderful act of love.
Maybe the April writer can tell me what he thinks it is about Jesus that would give anyone an excuse for saying anything other than – I’ve never seen a love so true, this is the Man I want to follow.
Having given every last thing he had on the cross where can any justification be found for someone who then insults Jesus by telling him that that wasn’t good enough and means nothing to him?

And where in his life-giving teachings that he died to promote was there such a big error that anyone could claim they were justified when they rejected his teachings? And thereby rejected him.
For what is it therefore that leads the April writer to decide that those who have rejected him are good and worthy people? So good and worthy that he makes them the vehicle by which to try to show that his crap intelligence and his crap credibility and his crap coolness can be better inspiration and do what Jesus’ most priceless pearl couldn’t. (tbc)

The “Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer” sells palm-sized cards with the following information on one side:

Why Aren’t Women Being Told?

Abortion is the Most Preventable
Cause of Breast Cancer

Extensive studies since 1957 document a
connection between abortion and breast cancer.

Eight medical organizations recognize the link
between abortion and breast cancer.

And this on the other:

Why Aren’t Women Being Told?

Additional Risks for Breast Cancer

Combined oral contraceptives have been identified by the World Health Organization as Group 1 Cancer Causing Agents.

A Mayo Clinic meta-analysis found the use of oral contraceptives before a first full-term
pregnancy increases the risk of pre-menopausal breast cancer by 44%.

“Most combined contraceptives are taken orally, but they can also be delivered by injection, transdermal patch, or vaginal ring.” -Lancet Oncology 2005;6:552-553.

Patrick Carroll (Pension and Population Research Institute) in his study of eight European countries found that abortion is the “best predictor” of future breast cancer rates.*

For additional information call 1-877-803-0102
or visit

Contributions to the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer are tax-deductible.

These cards are easy to place on cars parked near mills, especially during the days before they do “the procedures.”


John Dunkle said...

2/26 Most of these comments are responses to posts on a website called The Abortioneers. I used to use it to respond to one called Bullywatch009, but Kate Ranieri ran away when she realized she had nothing else to offer. I give Abort... two weeks. The posters are a particularly sad group of perverts; just look at their names.

Strange post but some good news here for us antis. About Susan Hill -- she died from breast cancer. Hear that Abortioneers? She died from breast cancer. Challenge Nature and she will do you in.

John Dunkle said...

My mistake -- the Inquirer story on Susan Hill does mention the fact that she died from breast cancer, but I'll bet the journalist was clueless about its link to abortion. He also has to be clueless of the irony in the Hill quote he closes the article with: "We're still here and we're going to be here." Hill might be there, heaven or hell, God knows, but she sure ain't here, now is she.

John Dunkle said...

1. Abortion are murders, the worst kinds of murders because you have to torture the victims to death.

2. Women who have abortions are either stupid or satanic.

3. A woman facing an unwanted pregnancy needs to realize she is carrying a young person inside her and she does not have the right to have that person tortured to death.

4. In this country abortion should be illegal.

5. People working to restrict abortion should realize that force will be necessary to overturn the law.

6. People working on behalf of women's rights to choose should realize that someone may not choose to kill an innocent person or to pay someone else to kill her.

John Dunkle said...

Do I understand Mr. Anonymous's 2/28 post correctly? African-American children are not being eliminated at three times the rate of European-American children because MLK's niece had two abortions? I grew up in a black neighborhood; therefore, I should be allowed to kill young people? Nobody listened to MLK because he was drowned out? Slavery in the USA is still legal? No wonder he didn't sign his name.

John Dunkle said...

3/2 Boy, what a muddled post this is, syntactically, grammatically, and thoughtfully. (Can't you edit these things, VF.) Of course I don't know what point or points Sparky is trying to make. Maybe it's this: [We use abortion to solve our "black problem." Since we can no longer make them work for free, we want them outta here. What better way than to persuade them to kill themselves. All we have to do is build our little aucshwitzes near where they live and persuade them that marriage is for nerds.] Maybe that's not what Sparky says, but who can tell?

John Dunkle said...

3/3 In your next post, RV, don't write things like this, "I used to be amazed when someone insisted they couldn't get another $10 or that they had nothing to pawn..." Instead, write, "I used to be amazed when someone insisted she couldn't get another $10 or that she had nothing to pawn..." It is quite obvious you are talking about a woman, not a man. And you'll be amazed how clarifying language helps clarify thought. And you'll be amazed how this will bring you closer to realizing that baby killing should be made again illegal.

John Dunkle said...

3/4 I sat through the whole performance by the comely lady in red because it kept promising to get interesting. Never did. And made about as much sense DW's comments above.

Anonymous said...


John Dunkle said...

3/5 AA, what's the point?

John Dunkle said...

3/7 For the young lady it doesn't matter how clean the mill or how competent the baby-killer. Her arms and legs get pulled off same as in Gosnell's place.

Vanessa said...

Abortion is truly a mortal sin. The one who will commit this will really suffer. Why do we need to abort?if we can let those poor humans live.

To avoid abortion, we should think a hundred times before having an intercourse with your partner. There are also fertility kits that will surely help us in knowing if we are fertile or not.

So, let us follow the will of God and avoid sins.

John Dunkle said...

3/9 AAG, this compulsion to get away, to escape, to forget is telling. It is telling you that what you are doing is horrible. One of the minor reasons to again outlaw abortion is to relieve the pain, usually sublimated, of those working in the industry. You will be surprised at how much life improves the farther away from Satan you distance yourself.

John Dunkle said...

3/10 I guess when you promote the enormous lie that some people are not people, the little lies mean nothing, like on the disclaimer above that my comments "will not be published." The truth would be that they are published on, or, they are not published here.
Now to AA, I'm sure she is right: there are many things AA would rather do than carry an unwanted baby (no one carries a pregnancy, stupid!). And I am sure there are people out there who have many things they would rather do than hang around with AA. Does that mean they have a right to kill AA or the unwanted baby just because she's not wanted? Am I getting through to any of you, or are you all that dense.