|
Financial Assistance requested
POB 850307, Mobile, AL 36685 - FAX/Ph: 205-639-7456
Jay Sekulow FAX: 804-579-2836 Dear Jay, The following is what I believe to be a sound response to your reasons for opposition to the question of "justifiable homicide" in relation to abortionists and their staffs, i.e., violence against them. Much of what is written below has been extracted from two of the several documents I have developed concerning the subject. I believe that Paul Hill is correct in the action he is alleged to have taken. Further, I have been able to clearly refute all supposedly authoritative position proofs made in opposition to the position of justifiable homicide. If you are willing, I would like to proceed with a dialogue in regard to the question of justifiable violence--as it is commonly termed. Thus far I have been able to sustain my position against those who have taken the time to be concerned. However, acceptance of Paul Hill's alleged action is a struggle for most because it is counter cultural in Christian countries because of extreme pacifism and liberalism. When Peter was admonished by Jesus for using the sword, it was because Peter had failed to understand the mission of Jesus and the prophesies concerning His death. Peter, still thinking in terms of the flesh, had more concern for temporal human values than he did for long term eternal spiritual values. It was for this reason he was admonished by Jesus. This is further made clear by these words of Jesus to Peter, "Put your sword into its scabbard. Shall I not drink the cup that the Father gave me?" John 18:11 When one uses quotations to attempt to prove a point he should be sure to evaluate its meaning from examining, in context, the whole of Scripture so as not to quote with false interpretation. One should also understand that the unshakable foundation for Christianity was established in the Old Testament. Most principles of faith and morals recorded in the Old Testament were well established. Others Jesus further developed, explained or specifically rescinded, i.e. laws concerning diet restrictions and forms of sacrifice, etc. There was no need however for Jesus to rehash undisputed teachings and practices. Jesus stated, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Mat 5:17-20 In the above passages Jesus was attempting to make clear that the weight of law was being expanded for those who were not already living according to the spirit of God. An example of this is seen in the extension of the commandment against adultery which now includes adultery committed in the mind as well as that committed by physical act. Concerning the woman caught in adultery and brought before Jesus. This woman was not stoned because Jesus was making a change in law. She was set free precisely because of the exactness of the law. The accomplice in her adultery had been set free. The men who set the adulterer free became accomplices to the crime of adultery and therefore were legally guilty of the crime they had been accusing the woman of committing. They realized that if they testified against her, they would also be subjects for the death penalty. For this reason, when each had read what Jesus had written on the ground, they left the area. With good reason the witnesses against the woman decided not to testify. Jesus was not personally a witness and therefore was not qualified to testify against her. If one were to argue that Jesus, as God, was witness to her guilt, it should also be understood that, by Jewish law, there had to be at least two eyewitnesses in order for anyone to be executed. No just person has ever inferred that Jesus did not perfectly know and understand all Jewish teachings and law. Jesus was always obedient to all true Jewish laws for He knew better than anyone else that they originated from His infallible Father. Had both the adulterer and the adulteress been brought before Him, for judgement, He would have been obedient to the already proclaimed will of His Father. The adulteress received an opportunity to reform her life because of the unlawful act of her accusers. The directive of Jesus to the woman, "Go and sin no more" gave her an extra opportunity to be repentant and save her immortal soul. What was probably written on the ground were the Hebrew equivalent of the accusatorial words of Jesus which asked, "Where is the man?" This question reveals the sin they were guilty of in common when He had made the statement, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." With the following words Jesus made it clear that He came to increase conflict, even deadly fighting, in the world, "Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. For I have come to set a man 'against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's enemies will be those of his household.' "Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. Mat 10:34-39 "Put your sword back into its sheath, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword." Mat 26:52 When Jesus said these words to Peter He was admonishing him for acting according to his human desires and not from a spiritual motivation developed from a proper understanding of the mission of Jesus. Today the invective applies against abortionists et al, i.e. those who are murdering innocent human persons and there accomplices. They have taken to the sword by killing innocent preborn babies and they are to perish by the sword--have their lives taken violently from them. Anyone who acts from the perspective of saving innocent human life, or for other justifiable reasons, is to be considered a righteous person and is guilty of no crime against God or man. The proof of this statement is found in the following passages. "Yet a certain Israelite came and brought in a Midianite woman to his clansmen in the view of Moses and of the whole Israelite community, while they (the Israelites) were weeping at the entrance of the meeting tent. When Phinehas, son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, saw this, he left the assembly, and taking a lance in hand, followed the Israelite into his retreat where he pierced the pair of them, the Israelite and the woman. Thus the slaughter of Israelites was checked; but only after twenty-four thousand had died. Then the LORD said to Moses, `Phinehas, son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned my anger from the Israelites by his zeal for my honor among them; that is why I did not put an end to the Israelites for the offense to my honor. Announce, therefore, that I hereby give him my pledge of friendship, which shall be for him and for his descendants after him the pledge of an everlasting priesthood, because he was zealous on behalf of his God and thus made amends for the Israelites.'" Num 25:6-13 History testifies to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. This destruction and the scattering of the Hebrew nation is accepted as a consequence of the Jewish denial of Christ and His subsequent suffering and death as was predicted by Jesus. "But now one who has a money bag should take it, and likewise a sack, and one who does not have a sword should sell his cloak and buy one." Luke 22:36 These words of Jesus make it even more clear that there will be times when it will be necessary to enter into offensive against evil. One may always protect himself or another innocent person from the common thief and murderer. However, to choose to give witness to one's faith by being willing to die for it is a response to a totally different set of circumstances. As certified in the new "Catechism of the Catholic Church" every innocent person has the right to be defended by another. 2265 Further there has also been established a clear obligation to defend those who are innocent. 2269 No mother has any more right to kill a baby in her womb than the virgin Mary would have had the right to kill her Son, Jesus, in the womb. The National Organization of Women used this chant at a rally held in Pensacola, Florida the week following the deaths of Dr. John Britton and his escort James Barrett: "Stop the violence." This should have been a prolife slogan referring to the violence perpetrated upon the innocent babies in the womb. "Stop the hate." The NOW people, abortionists, sodomites and those of similar ilk certainly must hate God, the innocent, and the righteous. Pro-life people are not acting out of hatred. They are acting out of true love for the innocent according to God's will. "We won't go back." They are determined not to have to go back to being called sinners and having to sin in secret. They prefer to mock Christians and others by openly displaying their evil deeds. Tolerance for evil has come into existence through the extreme liberalism and false pacifism which is now in vogue. The Pro-abortion diversionary slogan, "Pro-choice", is intended to misdirect people into the belief that a woman has the right to make choices in regard to all things concerning herself in this life. The point is overlooked that the slogan really refers to her having the right to choose to have her children murdered upon any whim. The use of this slogan is the product of a very spiritually sick mentality. By both medical and moral definition, the baby in her womb is intrinsically a complete individual. A preborn baby, even though in the womb, is extrinsic to the mother, i.e., not a part of the mother. He is receiving nourishment, shelter, warmth and hopefully protection from the mother. These are all things a born person requires. Some have said that they believe praying is the best way to stop abortion--let God do it syndrome. What is it they expect will result from their prayers? Do they believe that God is going to come down and do their work for them? That He will resolve problems that we have been assigned to take care of in this life? God has already demonstrated by His inaction that He is waiting for us to take action. He has given creation into our custody. How we accept or reject our responsibilities in this life determines how we will be judged on the final day. Jesus prayed in preparation for activity--accomplishing the works He had been given to achieve in this life. He also prayed as a form of spiritual uplifting, for communication with His Father, and for focus concerning His mission. He prayed in petition for release from suffering, stress and anxiety concerning His upcoming persecution and death. He prayed for His disciples that they would each be faithful to the assignments given them by being kept safe from the temptations of the prince of the world. Jesus never prayed that God the Father would take care of things that He could do Himself. We should pray as Jesus prayed: as a prelude to action; in concern regarding coming events; for evangelists that they fulfill their mission; and that government leaders might open their minds and hearts to God through witness given to them by true evangelists and people of faith. At Fatima, Mary asked for prayer that future events predicted to take place would be averted. Mary, however, never said that a change of heart would take place without the action of man acting in accordance with the mind and heart of God. In essence the praying of the Rosary was to serve as a preparation for the actions of man so that they would grow and become aligned with the will of God, i.e., for valued Christian activity that comes through growth in faith brought about by prayer. One does not pray for the safety of a child that is seen to be drowning and could be saved if one were to take immediate action. One does not pray and realistically expect God to send one of His angels to protect a screaming and struggling woman who is about to be raped and perhaps murdered when it is within ones own power to successfully intervene, even at the possible risk of ones own safety. If one knows that innocent people are going to be murdered--during a given period of time at a given location by a particular person or persons, and cannot obtain lawful protection for them--and has it within his ability to stop the murderer and/or his direct accomplices, and does not act with the full necessary force which is available to him, he himself becomes a participant in the crime by an act of omission to the degree he has the ability to act and has been called to act. To do little or nothing in defense of the innocent should always be understood as a serious sin of omission. Truly God is capable of doing all things. He can immediately stop abortion and all other evils which are taking place. To do so however would in effect remove our free will. There would be no moral activities taking place upon which to base a decision as to whether we have accepted or rejected His will for us in this life. We were placed in this life for spiritual growth. The growth process is arduous because we are asked to make many decisions which are against our basic sinful nature. We all desire human peace in this life and shun that which may bring us into conflict with others. Jesus, on the other hand, proceeded on course from day-to-day rejecting all of the trials and temptations of this life. He allowed Lazarus to die. This was an event which brought much grief to Lazarus' sisters but was necessary so that God's power could be made manifest. During the "Agony in the Garden" Jesus pleaded with His Father to not have Him suffer and die, but, acknowledged that His Father's will must be done. He fully accepted the perfection of the knowledge and wisdom of the heavenly Father. Jesus proceeded on course and suffered a horrible death so that we might believe and be saved. Jesus was given a special mission and did not divert from that mission. It is true that at any time He could have called legions of angels to protect Him, but His death was seen as necessary, by the Father, so that many would be saved that otherwise would not be saved. His particular assignment was not to search and destroy. His task was to teach and convince people of all nations in a manner that would have long term persuasive effect. It was for this reason that Jesus stopped Peter from protecting Him. Jesus had no false belief that humans would never be required to use justifiable violence on many occasions to protect the innocent and stop other grave injustices. However, His particular mission did not allow Him to use violence or otherwise intervene to stop the atrocities and other grave injustices commonly taking place around Him during His lifetime. Had He done so His unique mission of teaching and then giving special witness by being executed and then being raised from the dead would never have been accomplished. Jesus accepted execution so that others would have sound witness to His own belief in the truths He had taught. His desire was that all future generations would believe in Him and His teachings and thereafter be called to join the eternal Father with Him. His life on earth would not otherwise have accomplished the required long term goal directed at human salvation. Our mission in life, to please God by developing our own spiritual nature so that we will be with Him for all eternity, is intrinsically different from that of Jesus'. As we learn and grow in spirit we are progressively asked to accomplish ever more difficult tasks in this life. Tasks which are often contrary to the ways which we would naturally follow while we are living humanistically, i.e., for temporal goals. Teachings and then challenges are given us to help us grow. They are intended to help us recognize how we should be developing and improving our relationship with God. Ultimately the tasks we are asked to perform are tests which establish whether we are true believers or are merely believers of convenience. Jesus was greatly weakened in the desert for forty days and was then given strong temptations as tests to establish His readiness for His assigned ministry. We should each try to focus on the importance of our ultimate goal. Is Heaven worth taking materialistic risks in this life? Is living with God eternally worth being called to do the unusual, something out of the ordinary? We are not judged on doing the strictly ordinary things of life, things which follow the natural pattern of life. We are primarily judged upon our willingness to do the extraordinary activities of life given according to each ones own gifts and capabilities. Keep in mind that what is ordinary for some is extraordinary for others. Jesus often scolded the Scribes, Sadducees, and Pharisees of His time for their close mindedness. He said they were stiff necked with hardened hearts. They were not open to the fuller understanding of teachings which He was presenting to them. They closed their minds and hearts to Him and planned His death in order to protect their own set of standards. God wants us to keep an open mind to developing conditions around us and be able to meet new challenges with open minds and hearts. One person who recently wrote me agrees with the concept of "Justifiable Homicide" but states that the termination of an abortionist would only be acceptable if one were a direct witness to an act of murder in the process of taking place. This is a learned response acquired from teachings which in no way envisioned the circumstances of legalized abortion. To repeat, we must be open to adapting to every new condition in our developing world. If we remain with rules which were not intended to apply to new and different circumstances then we have not kept our minds and hearts open to growth of the "Word of God" within us. We are then no better than were the Scribes and Pharisees of Jesus' time. The application of the principle of double effect is as follows: The intention is to defend an innocent person who is incapable of defending himself. The method necessary to accomplish this morally obligatory end--determined by the well established pattern of previous occurrences of known murders of innocent persons, in this category, imminently doomed to violently die--is to eliminate the aggressor(s), i.e., the abortionist, and/or his direct accomplices. Deadly force is not only acceptable, but in consideration of the public knowledge, public protection, gravity and history of the offense this may readily and legitimately be deemed necessary since a de facto and civilly legal war has been declared on the unborn. A parallel can be seen in the act of Phinehas which is quoted elsewhere. Num 25:6-13 As publicly known, regularly scheduled, mass murderers they are already subject to the death penalty by moral law. Gen 9:5-6 In the present day circumstance of unjust civil law, which provides police, FBI agents, ATF agents, etc. to protect the murderers of a defenseless class of people, it is practically speaking impossible to defend the innocent using any method other than the elimination of the guilty at any available opportune time and place. This means that even though the deaths of known murderers may be planned, i.e. the secondary effect seen as the available means to the just end which is the primary effect, the primary direct intention is to save innocent people from violent murder by active unrepentant sinners with the only proven reasonable means available. Think carefully! Do the conditions today, in relation to procured abortion, match the conditions of the age when particular rules of defense were written? If not, one must adjust his thinking and act accordingly. One must be willing and able to meet new challenges as they are presented. God is dynamic, not static. We are made into His image and likeness. We also should be dynamic and not static. Laws are guidelines for those who are seeking rehabilitation in order to establish a positive relationship with God. These guidelines serve for a time to replace what has been lost through sin. They serve to help us re-establish the natural openness to truth that has been lost and to affirm the knowledge of what is good and just. The loss of rights of the unborn parallel the rights lost by the Africans who were captured and brought to America and other countries as chattel without any rights. The unborn's loss of rights also parallel the loss of rights of the American Indians and the natives of Central and South America. In each of these cases it was necessary to establish they were beings composed of body, soul, and spirit with inalienable rights and to be protected under the "Law of Dominion." The Fifth Commandment, "Thou shall not kill," must be understood within the whole context of Scripture. It always refers to the shedding of innocent human blood. The admonitions to shed guilty blood are clear throughout Scripture, Gen 9:6, Prov 6:16-17, Exo 23:7, Deut 19:10, Deut 19:13, Deut 21:9, Deut 25:1, Deut 27:25, 2 Sam 4:11, 2 Kings 21:16, 2 Kings 24:4, Job 22:30, Psalm 10:8, Psalm 64:5, Psalm 94:21, Psalm 106:38, Prov 6:17, Isaiah 59:7, Jer 2:34, Jer 7:6, Jer 22:3, Jer 22:17, Joel 3:19, Matthew 27:4, Matthew 27:24, AddEsth 16:5, Susanna 1:53, Susanna 1:62, 2 Macc 8:4, and others. Please do not be mislead by the humanists of this age. Immediate defense of innocent blood is required of men of faith according to their ability and calling. Defense of the innocent is diametrically different than punishment of the guilty. Neither punishment or vengeance is the motivation for the defense of the innocent. The unborn have the right to life just as the born do. To love ones enemies should never be interpreted to mean that they should be allowed to practice moral evil, to rape, rob, testify falsely, sexually abuse children, etc. Aside from praying for your enemy and being willing to help one who has unfounded reason for hating you, i.e., prejudice, jealousy, etc., you could well be doing him a good deed by preventing him from committing additional or greater evils in the sight of God which could bring him much more intense suffering in Hell for all eternity. Most Christians profess that full human life begins at conception. Abortionists kill innocent human beings and are therefore morally guilty of murder. They are not innocent. If they are killed they are victims of their own evil deeds. They do not have the same right to life as do innocent human beings--the babies in the womb. There is a collision of rights between the innocent unborn and the guilty abortionists. To attribute dignity or sacredness to lives consumed by repeated evil acts is contrary to Christian tradition. Neither Paul Hill nor Michael Griffin acted as either judge or executioner. They accepted public knowledge of evilly condoned acts and proceeded to justly defend the unborn when society was willing to accept, even applaud their unjust execution. Many methods of violence are used against the unborn and all methods used are violent. The latest method used for some abortions is the D&X procedure. This method of abortion takes place in the following fashion. Using forceps an abortionist grabs a leg of a violable latter term baby who is contorting, writhing, and struggling in pain. He delivers the living baby feet first until the base of the hairy head is exposed. He then pushes a pair of scissors into the base of the skull to make an opening. Into this opening made in the skull of the perhaps still struggling baby he pushes in the suction tube he then uses to extract the brain tissue which is then used for experimentation or medical purposes. The skull of the baby is then crushed and the baby is delivered dead. The organs of the now dead baby are then harvested for a variety of usages including the usage of a female babies ovaries to obtain ovum for potentially producing many children for the murdered preborn baby. Her children who are born obtain rights she was never accorded. My sorrow is for the innocent unborn, not for the murderer who is capable of and has committed horrible violence. Truth is in the nature of God. The desire for truth must be made a part of our nature. Through the positive seeking of truth and the placing of truths learned into action we establish the relationship with God that is needed in order to enter eternal life. We must keep open minds in order to develop truth within us. When we avoid having truth grow within us we are avoiding growth with relationship to God. The simple but profound statement, "There are two mistakes one can make along the road to truth: not going all the way, and not starting," has been attributed to the prophet Buddha of the fifth century B.C. One of the most evil of beliefs is that a murderer of innocent children should not have his or her life terminated when extinction of his life would save, at least for the time being, the lives of innocent persons--(Note: The saving of a person from being killed in a traffic accident today does not prevent him from being killed in a different accident tomorrow.) This belief goes directly against God's expressed will stated in Genesis 9:5-6, "For your own lifeblood, too, I will demand an accounting: from every animal I will demand it, and from man in regard to his fellow man I will demand an accounting for human life. If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; For in the image of God has man been made." God is unchangeable. His is totally consistent. If this were not true there would be no reason to accept His teachings or to believe in Him. The sentence of death by human hands is required by God's law. The immediate execution of this sentence is required most particularly when it is in defense of the innocent. The circumstances of particular situations determine how and when this is to be accomplished. Keep in mind the certainty of what will happen to the innocent if such sentence is not expeditiously carried out. Keep in mind the circumstance of evil civil law which is not acting justly according to the will of God, and, that God's will must be carried out if one expects to have eternal life. When Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's", He meant that when we were required to, we should pay taxes and follow just civil laws of even otherwise unjust governments. However, we were to render full allegiance to the source of the spiritual values of truth and justice, God, and give Him full honor and glory. The condition of relationship one has with God at any given time is ones own responsibility. Such condition should not be a question others need take into consideration when he is performing gravely unjust acts. Justice has priority when there has not been given an indication of a desire for mercy coupled with a demonstration of willingness to reform. Further, as God is a just God, it must be believed that every effort has been or will be made by God to see to it that no person suffers eternal punishment without having been given just and reasonable opportunity for salvation. However, to repeat, each one is responsible for the condition of his or her own soul at the time of death. Final judgement is in God's hands. He has told us to act justly at all times. It is manifestly unjust to take the lives of the unborn. He has clearly told us to protect, to save innocent human life. Scriptural references in regard to the consequences for shedding innocent human blood, or allowing it to be shed in ones community, are quite numerous. For over twenty years now pro-lifers have been nonviolently protesting and seeking political solutions to a grave evil which has always called for immediate action on the part of those who have a real relationship with God. Over thirty million innocent people during this period of time have been cruelly slaughtered. How much longer and how many more children must die before direct intervention is seen to be necessary and taken? I am saddened that you have joined the multitude of voices who are condemning additional millions to great violence in the womb. There is equal humanity in each person from the moment of conception until death. Unless you accept this scientific and moral statement, any claim you have to salvation is futile. The stage of ones growth and the location of ones being does not affect the reality of existence. For the sake of the lives of millions and the condition of your own soul rethink your position. Unless you are one hundred percent certain and are infallible you cannot risk holding to the position that a preborn child does not have an immortal soul and spirit. I am grieved by what seems to be the apparent position of your associate, Pat Robertson. The reality
of humanity is not predicated on ones race or upon the laws of the country one is conceived in. The ability to
enforce selective morality throughout the world is not the question. The acceptance of full humanity from the
moment of conception is the question. Aside from ones ability to immediately defend another human being,
one has the moral obligation to at least speak directly and clearly in their defense. The ability to feed 1.2 billion
or 100 billion has nothing to do with a persons inalienable right to life. In my mind and in the minds of many
others, Pat Robertson now falls into the category of the many others who are in ministry for the rewards of
public acclaim and prosperity. His statement indicates that he does not believe in God's ability to provide what
is necessary for the survival of people of faith.
The following are quotations extracted from the new "Catechism of the Catholic Church". This is the approved English edition translated from the original version authorized for publication, October 11, 1992. Except for the last two references, they are all taken from article 5, concerning the Fifth Commandment, "You shall not Kill." 1. 2258 "Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains
for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its
beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right to destroy an innocent
human being."
The witness of sacred history 2. 2260 For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning.... Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image. (Gen 9:5-6) 3. 2261 ... "Do not slay the innocent and the righteous." The deliberate murder of an innocent person is
gravely contrary to the dignity of the human being, to the golden rule, and to the holiness of the Creator. The
law forbidding it is universally valid: it obliges each and everyone, always and everywhere.
Legitimate defense 4. 2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor....The one is intended, the other is not." (St. Thomas Aquinas, STh II-II, 64,7,corp. art.) 5. 2264 ... Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow: ... Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's. (ibid.) 6. 2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for ...the common good of the family or of the state. 7. 2266 Preserving the common good of society requires rendering the aggressor unable to inflict harm.
Intentional homicide 8. 2268 ... The murderer and those who cooperate voluntarily in murder commit a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance. 9. 2269 ... The moral law prohibits ... refusing assistance to a person in danger.
Abortion 10. 2270 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an ends or as a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes. 11. 2273 ... "The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death." "The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the foundations of a state based on law are undermined....As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights." 12. 2274 ... the embryo must be defended... like every other human being. 13. 2275 "It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."
Euthanasia 14. 2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate
to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment....The decisions should
be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient,
whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.
Peace 15. 2304 ...Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication
among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is
"the tranquility of order." Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity.
IN BRIEF 16. 2321 The prohibition of murder does not abrogate the right to render an unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. Legitimate defense is a grave duty for whoever is responsible for the lives of others or the common good. 17. 2323 Because it should be treated as a person from conception, the embryo must be defended... like every other human being. 18. 2326 Scandal is a grave offense when by deed or omission it deliberately leads others to sin.
19. 1902 ...A human law has the character of law to the extent that it accords with right reason, and thus derives from the eternal law. Insofar as it falls short of right reason it is said to be an unjust law, and thus has not so much the nature of law as of a kind of violence. (St. Thomas Aquinas, STh I-II, 93, 3, ad 2.) 20. 1903 Authority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned and
if it employs morally licit means to attain it. If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to
the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience. In such a case, "authority breaks down
completely and results in shameful abuse."
Copies of this document are being sent to Thomas Patrick Monaghan and to other interested parties.  Editor
|
