Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

Actions raise big questions

May 12, 2013
The Herald-Star

To the editor:

In April, in an address to Planned Parenthood, President Barack Obama reiterated his lifelong commitment to the destruction of that which we should most cherish, our progeny. One can surmise from his unprecedented presence at this gathering and the content of his remarks that there will be no forthcoming accommodation to those who, following the Decalogue, believe this to be a grave sin, only a forced assimilation into a secular ideology.

In its beginning, abortion had its birth in the arrogance of the rich and the pride of the powerful. These founders, as confessed in Margaret Sanger's writing, believed they could eradicate certain elements of the population as unfit. By his confession in his own book, Obama looks on birth not as a miracle, but as a punishment. In his address, he continually referred to "women's health issues," the new euphemism for abortion, but gave not one thought to infants' health issues. Currently, this segment of the population has less right to life than a laboratory animal.

Proving Cardinal Francis Spellman's maxim that "some interpretations of liberty have unjustly encroached on the liberty of others" and in an effort to expand his imperial domination concerning the power over life and death of the innocent, Obama's reign has commanded that through a bureaucratic mandate, that everyone must materially cooperate in the slaughter of those yet unborn. A well-developed conscience has no protection under this mandate, no matter whether or not one finds this unacceptable barbarism.

Many of us hold that "the almighty, desiring to lead us to perfection and improve our state socially, has revealed to us laws which are to regulate our action." (Maimonides: "The Guide for the Perplexed.") This includes a law which says, "Thou shall not murder."

I pray those who believe in the sanctity of life stand firm to protect the innocent, pre-born lambs from the wolves prowling the corridors of power in this nation's capital. To do otherwise is the appeasement of evil.

In this quandary between obediences to the law of God or secular power, we yet have an example of the effectiveness of passive non-compliance through two of the great men of the last century, Ghandi and King.

Ed Bednar

Wintersville

 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: