All right, Psalm 139, verse 1,
O LORD, Thou hast searched me and known me. Verse 13, For Thou possess my
reins, Thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise
Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Marvelous are
Thy works, that my soul knoweth right well. my substance was
not hid from thee when I was made in secret, curiously wrought
in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance,
yet being unperfect, and in thy book all my members were written,
which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of
them. Now, today I'd like to kind of
wind up our study, eventually come into a summation, and we've
already had two previous studies dealing with abortion viewed
from the light, or in the light, or from the standpoint of the
Scripture. Really, that's our only view
of any matter is, what saith the Scripture? What does the
Word of God have to say? And so, in our first study, in
this reading from Psalm 139, to show that God views us as
persons and that He does so from the time of conception. That He possessed us, that is,
He covered us while we were yet not fully developed and born. That life is a gift of God and
only God can give life. When and how to end that life
is God's sovereign prerogative and is left with His good pleasure. We remembered where Justice Blackmun
wrote the dissenting opinion of the court. He could not solve
the mystery of when life actually began. Could not deal with that
question, could not know, he said, exactly when life began. But we know from reading in the
Scripture that here we are considered persons even from conception
and in the womb. Then in the second study, we
use basically Exodus 21, verse 22 through 25 to show that the
law of God in matters civil, and criminal actually protected
antenatal life, life while it was still in the womb, life while
it was developing along its way on the womb, and that a penalty
was imposed against the actions that brought harm to the unborn
child or to the mother, even to, and including, life for life,
strife for strife, burn for burn, wound for wound. But now we come
this evening basically just to sum up the whole matter and to
make some conclusion about this matter of abortion and the Scripture. Perhaps the first thing that
we ought to set forth this evening, since abortion has been made
legal, lawfully legal, by the ruling of the Supreme Court,
is to discuss briefly the way that abortions are performed. I wonder how many who hear the
word abortion never really considered it too much. I wonder how they
think is the procedure for aborting those babies that are not allowed
to live out their term. First of all, let's remember.
that a part of the Hippocratic Oath, which for centuries was
part of the oath taken by the medical school graduates, and
it states in part, quote, I will maintain the utmost respect for
human life from the time of conception." At one time that was in the Hippocratic
Oath. This is a clear statement on
their part that life indeed begins at conception. And then in the
generation that espoused abortion on demand, The phrase, from the
time of conception, was deleted from that Hippocratic oath, and
now those who of old vow to maintain the utmost respect for life,
even from conception, are now the exterminators of life after
conception. How is this grisly thing accomplished? What is the procedures that are
used? Now this is something that they,
that support of Barshin, don't like for the public to know. They don't like for this to be
talked about and basically they don't like pictures of it ever
to be shown or to be made public on the people and they have a
hissy fit anytime anyone publishes pictures of grisly abortions
and they are passed around. They cry foul, foul, yet if they
are so proud, quote, of a woman's right to choose, unquote, or
the right to abortion who oppose revealing for all to see the
results of this constitutional right as they have deemed it.
I've taken some of this information from Schaeffer and Koop's book,
Whatever Happened to the Human Race. I made mention of that,
I believe, in our last study. But out of that book, I have
taken the three leading procedures that are used in abortion, depending
on the time at which it is done. Number one, in the earlier stages,
some say basically 12 or 13 weeks, there are two procedures that
basically were used from the beginning for abortion. A, there was dilation and cuterage,
or D&C as it is called, when a little hoe-like instrument
is used to scrape the baby off of the uterus wall, in the process,
of course, tearing it all to pieces. There is the suction
abortion method that is also used when the dismembered is
suctioned out into a jar out of the mother. Secondly, in the
latter term when DNC and suction method would cause too much loss
of blood and stress upon the woman or the mother, the saline
abortion method is then used. When a saline solution, that
is salt of course, is injected with a long needle into the amniotic
fluid of the mother. Now let me quote from Schaefer
and Koop in that book, whatever happened to the human race. Quote,
the salt solution is absorbed through both the lungs and the
gastrointestinal tract, producing changes in the asthmatic pressure. The outer layer of skin is burned
off by the high concentration of salt, and it takes about an
hour to kill the baby by this slow method. The mother usually
goes into labor about a day later and delivers a dead, shriveled
baby." End of quote. Taken from the book by Schaefer
and Coop. Remember, the court has called
this And the law regards this as a constitutional right, a
woman's privilege. Thirdly, in the latter stages
there are, or could be used, what is called Caesarean abortion,
to remove the baby. Nothing is wrong with the baby.
It's not a question that we must now choose between the baby and
the mother. So, Caesarean abortion is done. It is set aside to die sometime,
killed or choked by the hand of the attending physician. Now
let's make a point of emphasis. Abortion advocates always speak
of the number of women who might die in illegal abortion." That's
one of their points. They always say, we must keep
it legal and keep it safe. And they bemoan the fact of how
many die in, quote, illegal abortion, unquote. But isn't it amazing
that the same ones are strangely silent on the number of babies
that are born alive in legal abortion. Hypocrites they are,
for they only want their cake. You should read some of the horror
stories that have been recorded by nurses who witnessed live
abortion. Babies left aside, laid aside,
left to gasp for air, and finally to die. Even some of them strangled
by the doctor that they might die. Some babies live through
abortion. Babies that have been marked
for death and intended to die, that were supposed to die. And
at times this has been a very complicated thing and sometimes
find its way into the courts. Some of these cases are the result
of an abortion drug marketed by Upjohn company, Prostine E,
as an abortion inducer. And it has caution, this medicine
comes with a caution of the very real possibility of a live birth. Now, it is intended as an abortion,
but it is warned that it could possibly result in a live birth. But if this has been a problem
in causing the death of a baby, a more recent practice has been
installed to guarantee a dead baby, and it's called partial
birth abortion, in which the, quote, abortion provider unquote,
causes a breech birth. That is, feet first, and then
just before the head, it leaves the mother, punctures the back
of the head, and the baby dies. How gruesome, what a consciousness
society we have become. to allow this and to be legal. Now in our last study, I made
the point that abortion is only the foot in the door. And how
the camel got his nose in the tent, pretty soon the camel is
all the way in the tent. With abortion, let me say, that
other evils are sure to follow. There can be little question.
that other evils will follow. Such as some of the quotes I
gave you last week. Actually, infanticide, even after
they are born, some have advocated they not be admitted to the race
but be euthanized. Then, what of legalized euthanasia? It's sure to come on the horizon. The killing of both the young
and of the old. By the statements of some, the
more radical, infanticide and euthanasia could be easily embraced
by them and made as well the law of the land, using the very
same reasoning that they used to justify abortion in the first
place. A Dr. Ron Paul wrote, and I have
his book and quote from it, those who argue that abortion won't
lead to infanticide and euthanasia are hiding from the facts, unquote,
in his book, Abortion and Liberty, page 29. Now consider, what started
out at 24 to 28 weeks and viability factored in, has progressed now
to Caesarean abortion, full term, and even partial birth abortion. This is always the tactic with
the enemies of righteousness. Start small. Start out with something
small than is intended in the final end. Do it by increments,
little by little, a little at a time. Get it declared legal,
passed by law, then expand it beyond all expectation and beyond
all reason. So that what started out as an
abortion of convenience, to be free of an unwanted pregnancy,
has now been enlarged to where such things are discussed as
the following. Abortion if the infant has a
handicap of some sort. Abortion, therefore, can take
care of that problem. Bad genes is another reason that's
been brought up for the need for abortion. Even in some cases,
they abort in order that they might harvest parts. for another
child. And this has been done and I've
read about it. Using them, in other words, for
spare parts. Even if it is the wrong gender,
some therefore have abortion available. If they don't want
a boy or they don't want a girl, therefore they can have an abortion. Now let me take a minute, if
I can, to tell you about our friends and neighbors Ron and
Gwen our country neighbors up in Grimes County. Both of them
were in their forties and had been married and wanted a child
for quite a while and finally Gwen conceived and during her
prenatal care it was discovered that the child was or would be
mongoloid. Of course the doctor mentioned
abortion as a possibility, suggested that unto her. They refused with
abhorrence And little Mary, their only child, is the light of their
life and is so loved by them and so congenial and is so friendly
to everyone that comes by them. But some would have put her in
the garbage if it had been left up unto them because of that
particular handicap. And I tell you, friends, brothers
and sisters, these abortionists are cruel, cold, calculating,
hard-hearted, and conscienceless people to perform their dastardly
deed. It is important to notice the
names that various movements adopt in order to define themselves
or that they want to be called by. And of course, this is absolutely
done intentionally. It is the result of psychology,
as our society, to use terms that camouflage the real nature
of a particular thing, particularly if it is something heinous. We
use a name that camouflages the heinousness of it. As an example
of that, drunkards have become, over time, alcoholics, and drunkenness
has become, over time, a disease. Sodomites have become gays. Dopeheads have become chemical
dependents or abusers of drugs. Taxes have become revenue enhancement. When you hear that word, think
taxes. Sin has become a bad judgment
or a mistake or something that I should not have done. And so
the abortion proponents would have us refer to them as pro-choice. This sounds more dignified than
pro-abortion. Pro-choice is the name that they
hide behind. Now, don't be fooled by these
cleverly designed terms. There are only two choices in
this issue. Number one, let it live, let
it develop, let it be born. Number two, kill it. And they
insist on the legal right to make that choice. They have their
right to choose to kill. Pro-choice means that they can
choose to abort or kill the developing baby within. And it just blows
my hat in the creek that millions of women will vote for politicians
based solely upon their promise, quote, to protect a woman's right
to choose, unquote. Translation, legalized murder
is what it is. Now would there be any profit
in us asking the question, who is it that favors abortion? If
it hadn't been overturned, probably won't be. But who might we find
defending abortion as being legal continually? Well, number one,
we would expect women, of course, many of them of the feminist-oriented
type, liberated women, who would not be encumbered by the burden
of motherhood, who would not tolerate the restrictions on
their lifestyle, who are hell-bent to go full ahead in their fun
and in their career. so that abortion preserves their
freedom, especially if it is what is called a problem pregnancy
in our day. Secondly, there are many men
who support abortion. They escape child support in
this way. Thus, the consequences of their
adultery, who had rather pay the few hundred dollars for the
abortion than eighteen years of child support, food and clothing,
medicine, college, and all of that, also favor abortion. Thirdly, I would put liberals
and socialists also up on this list who have no fixed principle,
no fixed integrity, no definite assessment of what is right or
wrong. They are pragmatists as to life
and law, willing to do whatever it is that will work in their
case without regard to right or wrong or God or the Scripture. Fourthly, I would put in here
humanists, secularists and atheists who regard not God. They do not
believe that life is the precious, precious gift of Almighty God. They have no quarrels, therefore,
about abortion. It's just a potential human being,
or some of them even refer to it as a human animal. Fifthly, I just put wackos, naysayers
who bemoan overpopulation. They're crying out, abortion,
overpopulation. On this list put the idiot environmentalists
who preach global warming and food shortage. Those nature-worshipping
heathens who are among us are okay with a million babies a
year being aborted, including forced ones in the country of
China and some other land. It's okay for a million human
babies to be aborted every year. But don't you dare mess up the
nest of an eagle, or mess up a dolphin, or snare a riddle
turtle in your sea net, or get oil on a dumb bird, or disturb
a spotted owl's nesting place. Kill all the human babies that
you will, but go to prison if you dare kill an endangered species,
one of these animals, on the protected list. Six, I'd put
organizations such as Planned Barrenhood. Did you hear that?
Planned Barrenhood, who operate clinics with such names as Family
Health Services, who have made Margaret Sanger their hero, and
their patron saint. They sing the praises of Margaret
Sanger. I wonder how many of them know
that this woman, Margaret Sanger, believed that minorities were,
quote, weeds unquote, in need of extermination. You check out
history and you'll find that that's so. Seventhly, those who
led and participated in the sexual revolution liked abortion. Eighthly, doctors who can make
fast money off of it performing abortion. I read of one doctor
who had so honed his skill at it that he could perform an abortion
in three minutes. I read that in that book that
I mentioned before by Dr. Ron Paul. So let us consider
the rank hypocrisy in the abortion movement and industry. Their hypocrisy not only reaches
to, but it stinks unto high heaven. I named some of them. Number
one, One point abortion proponents make is we need abortion so that
there won't be so much child abuse. Isn't that a oxymoron
if you ever heard one? To decrease incidence to child
abuse and make every child a wounded child in a wounded family. Now, two points. Abortion is
the ultimate child abuse. for it is deliberate murder.
B. Child abuse is epidemic since
abortion became legal, for abortion actually cheapens life. It has increased drastically
with the advent of abortion. It has not decreased. If they
can be killed in the womb, but you can't spank them. They can
be killed in the womb, but you can go or be arrested for spanking
them. Secondly, let's notice the constant
emphasis upon the children. Everything nowadays must be done
for the benefit of the children. You must strap them in their
car seat. They must not be spanked. Their
feelings must not be hurt. Their self-esteem must not be
wounded. They must be kept safe. They
must be vaccinated. They must be fed nutritious meals
and so on. But we must protect a woman's
right to kill if she does not want to bear a child. Aggregarian
hypocrites they are, like some of the politicians today, crowing
about helping the children. And yet all of them, or most
of them, are staunch supporters of abortion on demand. And one
late president even vetoed a law against partial birth abortion. to keep it legal. Thirdly, the
hypocritic doctors in the abortion business who have gone across
their Hippocratic oath to protect life from conception, who then
for profit become what's called abortion providers. Fourthly,
Let's not forget the hypocrisy of the Supreme Court in making
a law based upon pagan precepts directly an affront to the Scripture. And then there are, fifthly,
the legal clergy who support the killing of the unborn. Many
clergy, as they call themselves, Sixthly, the great movement to
protect animals in our day, even while aborting humans. Did not our Lord say, you are
of more value than many sparrows? And I might add dolphins and
spotted owls and eagles and so like. To show the absurdity,
one day a city in California passed a resolution referring
to pet owners as pet guardians, quote, unquote. Here is how. Love an animal, don't want a
child. Sixthly, and hear me good, any
Jew, such as Joe Lieberman, who whines about the Holy Cause,
and yet on the other side supports abortion, is a two-faced, double-barreled,
first-class, dyed-in-the-wool hypocrite with a capital H. We're getting holocaust museums
in every city, but abortion has become the world's greatest holocaust
of all. More have been aborted many times
over than have died in the atrocities that are so revered in our day. We hear little about the effect
of an abortion upon the woman, one psychologically, the lasting
emotional trauma as one day she may realize, I killed a life
inside me. How old would it be now? What
would it look like? Would it favor me? How many grandchildren
would I have? if I had not gone that way. Secondly,
the physical damage. In not a few cases, they are
not able to have other children after having an abortion. Thirdly, there have been deaths
from legal abortion. Let me remind you. Something
else they don't like to talk about, the news hardly ever touches
it, but I have clippings from the paper about those who died
from legal abortion. Now, let's recount the statement
that every argument for abortion is an argument for infanticide. Every argument for killing them
in the womb is an argument for killing them after they are born. Why do people support abortion? Is it economic? Somebody said,
I can't afford another child. I don't want a child, or I don't
want another child, or I don't like kids. I'm single. I can't afford daycare for them.
I want a career. Even the argument for infanticide
could be made in this same light. I want to raise a purely philosophical
question. How much effect is abortion having
on changing the racial makeup of America? Which race, would
you say, is the most depleting itself by having the most abortion? How is it affecting things? That's just something to think
about. But we close by returning to a point made in the first
study, that abortion is an integral part of that process of de-Christianizing
America, a term that we used last week. Divesting it of Christian
principles, divesting it of biblical issues and the influence of the
Bible, Christianity, and turning it into a strictly humanist and
secularist society, our country, antagonistic to the principles
of the Bible. And yet, the majority of our
laws were founded upon the principles of Scripture and of God's Word
in the beginning. But our society chafes under
the yoke of any law now that is from Christian influence. They would be rid of it. They
would replace it with secularism and with humanism and let religion
be, unless that religion be that of liberal Christianity and they
are welcome, welcome at all, which is in effect Humanism.
Liberal Christianity is nothing else but secular humanism with
a Bible under its arm, which they don't go by. Author H.G. Wells, early last century, proposed
the evolution of theistic religion and nationalism and replacing
it with a common religion and a world government run by statesmen
unquote. That's where many want us to
go today. Now the overthrow of our country
requires two things, one political and one religious. Political,
the setting aside of the Constitution. Many today are for putting in
its place a U.N. charter, doing away with the
Constitution, putting in place a U.N. charter. This is far more
advanced than many people realize in our society today. Secondly,
the overthrow of biblical Christianity's influence and replacing it with
secular humanism. They only hate what they call
right-wing Christianity. They don't hate left-wing Christianity. Left-wing is okay. They're content
to call God she if it pleases anybody. The left-wing Christianity
will refer to God as a female. our Heavenly Mother. I mean,
they said things like that and are saying them. And they favor
homosexuality and they question so much of the Bible. They support
a strictly social gospel. They don't preach the gospel
of Christ at all. Schaeffer said, quote, their
theories of liberation from biblical absolutes are bearing fruit,
unquote. In other words, they're making
inroads, they're gaining ground. And I close with a quote from
a French abortionist. Quote, we are fighting to destroy
Judo, Christian society, and civilization. To do so, we have
to destroy the family. We have to destroy its weakest
point, which is the unborn child. Hence, we are for abortion. Unquote. June 1, 1981. did that appear in print. So
we see the evil of it and other evils that will follow.