It could be called The Abominable Dr. Gosnell. Or perhaps Nightmare on Lancaster Avenue. Or maybe something as provocative as Scissors.
The plot might resemble a movie in the bloody Saw franchise. In the opening scene, a frightened teenage girl wanders into a dank, smelly clinic. Muted cries of women can be heard in a nearby room. Creepy violin music plays in the background.
A cat walks down a dark corridor, startling the girl. She sits down nervously on a sofa in the waiting room and sees a blood-stained blanket. The girl decides she doesn’t want an abortion—but when the doctor comes to take her to the procedure room, he gets angry when she protests. (Shouting is heard off-camera, followed by more of the Psycho-esque score.) The girl wakes up several hours later with severe cramps and realizes she has had an abortion.
This is not a clip from an Alfred Hitchcock film. The scene I described resembles what happened to a 15-year-old patient of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, the infamous Philadelphia abortionist whose trial ended Monday. Yes, there was a cat wandering in his clinic. (Observers testified that it had fleas.) Yes, there were bloodstained blankets in the waiting room. And witnesses testified that the girl was forced to have an abortion even though she decided not to go through with the procedure after arriving at Gosnell’s filthy office.
If that’s not enough R-rated horror for you, consider these facts:
◦The mother of “Baby Boy D” said her child was born alive in a clinic toilet before anyone could attend to her. The baby made swimming motions in the water, but a doctor’s assistant arrived and cut the infant’s neck. Witnesses in the Gosnell trial said many infants were born in toilets while waiting for the doctor to return to his office to complete procedures.
◦Gosnell allegedly examined “Baby Boy A” after an abortion procedure and remarked that the fetus was “big enough to walk me home.” One clinic worker, Steven Massof, testified that Gosnell “snipped” the spines of more than 100 babies after they had been born alive. He called this “standard procedure.”
◦Gosnell was on trial for first-degree murder in the case of seven infants allegedly born alive, as well as third-degree murder in the case of a woman who died after the abortionist gave her a toxic mixture of anesthesia and painkillers.
◦The clinic itself was compared to a horror movie set by people who worked there and by crime scene investigators. They described finding jars and jugs containing month-old fetal remains. They also told of locked exit doors, broken medical equipment, reused disposable supplies and untrained personnel.
All this would seem the perfect material for a remake of the old Boris Karloff movie Corridors of Blood. But my suspicion is that Hollywood will stay as far away as possible from Gosnell’s story. It’s just too politically incorrect for anybody to suggest that unborn babies—even third-trimester ones—have a God-given right to life.
When I learned about the “snipping” of tiny spines at the Women’s Medical Society clinic in Philadelphia, I realized how heartless our nation has become. Lawyers who defended Dr. Gosnell in court told the judge that when fetuses moved after being aborted, they were simply exhibiting “involuntary spasms.” We’ve become so drunk on sexual freedom that we can’t recognize when a baby is reaching out to us for justice.
When the apostle Paul described the condition of people’s hearts before the return of Jesus, he said, “In the last days difficult times will come. For men will be … brutal, haters of good … lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God” (2 Tim. 3:1-4, NASB, emphasis added). That brutality is never more blatant than in an abortionist’s office. Yet we cover the bloodshed with smooth American doublespeak.
How can we, as a nation, pride ourselves on providing rights for women, minorities or gay people when we ignore the crime of abortion? We protest puppy mills because of inhumane treatment, but we look the other way when the unborn are at risk. We self-righteously fight for the rights of seals and sea turtles, yet we allow 7-month-old fetuses to be decapitated. We call ourselves champions of women’s rights, yet many international abortions are performed to selectively kill infant girls.
We are sick with sin. Our hearts are hard. Our national conscience has been seared so that we can’t even feel the pain we’ve legalized. May God forgive us for creating this horror movie.
J. Lee Grady is the former editor of Charisma and the director of The Mordecai Project (themordecaiproject.org). You can follow him on Twitter at @leegrady. He is the author of Fearless Daughters of the Bible and other books.
DHS-Bound Official Warned Against ‘Christians Who Take the Bible Literally’
This story has been updated.
This weekend, an email written by Ron Trowbridge, the undersheriff of Prowers County, Colorado, started sweeping some of the viral corners of the internet. It alleges that a Colorado State Police training encouraged law enforcement officials to look at Bible-believing Christians with intense skepticism.
At first glance, the startling allegations in the letter, which was first posted on the conservative site Red Statements, were seemingly unbelievable. But TheBlaze reached out to Trowbridge to confirm that he wrote the note and to speak further about its contents.
In sum, the undersheriff said that he, indeed, wrote it and that the version that has been published is entirely accurate to what he experienced at the training session. Here are the first two paragraphs of his note, which summarizes the problematic training in its entirety:
On April 1, 2013 I attended training in La Junta, Colorado hosted by the Colorado State Patrol (CSP). The training was from 12:00 pm to 4:00 pm and covered two topics, Sovereign Citizens, and Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs. I was pretty familiar with motorcycle gangs but since we often deal with the so-called sovereign citizen groups I was interested to see what they had to say. The group consisted of police officers, deputies, and CSP troopers. There were about 20 people in attendance.
Trooper Joe Kluczynski taught a 2-hour section on sovereign citizens. Kluczynski spent most of his two hours focusing on how, in his view and apparently the view of Homeland Security, people turn to the sovereign citizen movement. Kluczynski started off by saying there are probably some sovereign citizens in this room and gave a generalized list of those groups that have sovereign citizen views. Among those groups, Kluczynski had listed, were those who believe America was founded on godly principles, Christians who take the Bible literally, and “fundamentalists”. Kluczynski did not explain what he meant by “fundamentalists” but from the context it was clear he was referring again to those who took the Bible literally or “too seriously.”
For those who are unfamiliar, the sovereign citizen movement is comprised of individuals who believe that they are free from state, local and federal laws. It is a loosely affiliated group that rejects many elements of governance, including, but not limited to, taxation.
As TheBlaze’s Jonathon M. Seidl explained last year, “They’re a mixed bag. Some reject their U.S. citizenship and don’t recognize government authority, like laws and taxes. But others don’t, and are more concerned with private property.” Of late, officials have cited a heightened potential of violence among these individuals as well tax evasion and other related crimes. The FBI began looking at this group more intensely back in 2009, as documented here.
Based on Trowbridge’s account, Kluczynski was essentially saying that Bible-believing Christians who take the holy book literally are more likely to embrace such notions. In his interview with TheBlaze, the undersheriff confirmed this detail, noting that Kluczynski purportedly stereotyped Christians, encouraging the 20 to 25 law enforcement personnel at the meeting to keep a watchful eye over such believers.
“It was a very, very fast course. This guy spoke at a very fast rate and he used a PowerPoint as he was going through it — and the first part of his course was on what causes people to lean more towards the sovereign citizen movement,” Trowbridge told TheBlaze.
“He had a list of groups of people who are likely or who are sovereign citizens. One was Christians and I don’t remember how he worded it, but it was Christians — but when he got to that part he said these are the people who take the Bible literally…these are the people who think that America was founded on Christian principles,” he continued.
Rather than telling officials to literally “go after” Christians, Trowbridge said that the trainer was alerting police and law enforcement to “be careful of these people,” as they are apparently at risk of joining the anti-government movement.
Kluczynski purportedly mentioned “fundamentalists” as well, but he didn’t delve into additional details surrounding what, exactly, he meant by the label. Trowbridge told TheBlaze that he was shocked that others in the room didn’t react more fervently to the insinuations being made during the presentation.
“What I found a little stunning was that it really didn’t catch the attention of many there,” he said.
But that wasn’t all. The trainer also apparently went on to say that it was the election of a black president that also spawned sovereign citizen sentiment. And he questioned whether or not officers would be ready to go after “illegal” weapons, if needed. Here’s the portion of the undersheriff’s letter that explains these details:
While Kluczynski emphasized that sovereign citizens have a right to their beliefs, he was clearly teaching that the groups he had listed should be watched by law enforcement and should be treated with caution because of their potential to assault law enforcement. Kluczynski explained why he believed these groups were dangerous saying they were angry over the election of a black president. When someone in the group suggested the failing economy was probably much more to blame, Kluczynski intimated that those who are not going along with the changes in America will need to be controlled by law enforcement. Kluczynski even later questioned some of the troopers present if they were willing and prepared to confiscate “illegal” weapons if ordered to.
Trowbridge told TheBlaze that he’s a Christian, which is why Kluczynski’s reported comments about believers were so perplexing to him. The undersheriff said that he reads the Bible daily and that he tries to live it out in practice. With that in mind, he seemed perplexed that authorities would assume Christians are more prone to being sovereign citizen enthusiasts.
“We’re taught to pay our taxes. We’re taught to be in authority of those over us. We’re to obey the law unless it conflicts with God’s law,” he continued.
Of particular note, Trowbridge said that he would have written off the claims had Kluczynski simply said that they were rooted in his own personal views. But the sentiments were apparently approached as though they were fact.
“He said he gets his information from Homeland Security — and it was on his PowerPoint,” he continued, noting that it seemed as though the Department of Homeland Security endorsed these ideologies.
Trowbridge also shared that Kluczynski told the group that he would be leaving the State Patrol to take a job with Homeland Security in the coming days.
TheBlaze has reached out to Kluczynski, Colorado State Patrol and DHS for comment. We have been unable to contact Kluczynski, however a representative for DHS told us the department is looking into the incident and will respond as soon as possible.
UPDATE: Around 3:30 p.m. ET, DHS issued the following response to TheBlaze:
The training referenced in the Undersheriff’s letter was not done in coordination with DHS and no DHS training materials were part of the prepared presentation. DHS provides law enforcement around the country with access to training that focuses on the behaviors and indicators of violent behavior, regardless of the ideology that may motivate it. (But they deny, too, that they have bought up ammunition to cause a shortage. So what should we believe?)
Link provided here.
Media bias, and government propaganda, has never been as blatant and disgraceful as in the present debate about guns. We are led to believe that guns are the problem, yet few realize that gun control is about people control. It is rooted in the perilous view that government can save us if only the citizens give the government sufficient power to do so. While left-wingers in Congress tell us, “you don’t need an assault weapon to shoot a duck,” they don’t seem to realize—or want to admit—that the Second Amendment is not about hunting, but about personal defense.
America’s founders knew that the Bill of Rights was necessary to protect the people from the government. Unfortunately, the indoctrination that has been the steady diet of American school children in public schools has so confused Americans that the general population is more afraid of an armed citizens than of the government. Yet, as R.J. Rummel’s sobering volume Death by Government shows, it is governments that have slaughtered their own people by the millions. Though there were two world wars and numerous regional conflicts in the twentieth century, “it is the penchant of governments for killing their own people that has made the last hundred years the deadliest of all centuries” (The New American, 10/8/12),
John R. Lott, who has held positions at the University of Chicago, Yale, Stanford, and others, has written extensively on this issue. He is the bestselling author of More Guns, Less Crime, and also The Bias Against Guns. In this latter volume he writes about the one-sided media frenzy that occurs when there are multiple killings involving guns. He observes, however, that “there is another side, rarely mentioned in the media. Concealed weapons in the hands of good people can be used to save lives and stop attacks. … And contrary to popular misconception, permit holders are virtually never involved in the commission of any crime, let alone murder” (p.99)
What About Police Protection?
We often hear that the police should be the ones to protect us, with guns, if needed. While we are all greatly indebted to the men and women in law enforcement, the police can’t be everywhere. That would turn America into a police state.
As attorney Richard Stevens has demonstrated in his book, Dial 911 and Die, thousands of felonies are committed every year after citizens have called for help. The police are required to protect the public at large, but have no responsibility to protect every individual at every moment of the day and night. The police apprehend criminals, but individuals are so labeled as “criminal” only after they have committed a crime and YOU have already been victimized. While we hear a lot about protecting yourself from crimes like “identity theft” by using a shredder, very little is said about protecting yourself from a violent crime by using a gun.
When is the last time the standard media featured a spot on how a citizen prevented a crime by using a gun? When Matthew Murray entered New Life Church in Colorado on December 9, 2007, with the intent of killing hundreds of worshippers, it was one of the worshippers, Jeanne Assam, who fired ten rounds wounding the would-be murderer who then took his own life. Some of the local newspapers reported that the pastor stated that Assam saved “over 100 lives.”
Should American Be Suspicious of the Federal Government?
The answer is an unequivocal “Yes.” The gun issue is not just about guns, but about an administration that has swept “Benghazi-gate” under the rug. It’s about a government that refuses to protect the unborn, a government that doesn’t wince about raising taxes on hard-working Americans, but doesn’t want to cut back on expenditures; a government that gives billions of dollars in foreign aid to countries that hate us, some of which consistently vote against us in the U.N. Why is the Obama administration planning to give 20 F-16s and 200 of our best tanks to the pro-Islamist government in Egypt and borrowing money to foot the bill? (aclj.org) It’s hypocritical for our government to restrict our rights to protect ourselves while refusing to take reasonable measures to stop the influx of illegal aliens into our country.
How To Maintain Freedom and Liberty
In a recent SWRC interview, David Rubin, former mayor of Shiloh, Israel, commented that even though so many Israelis carry guns, yet there are hardly any massacres like the ones that have occurred in American “gun free zones.”
In my opinion,” Rubin said, “the answer is that when we remove a system or morals and values based on God’s eternal truths, we create a dangerously insecure and chaotic vacuum. In that void enters broken families, leading to insecure children, and in some cases leading to mental illness, and senseless violence.”
Indeed, the Lord Jesus Christ spoke directly to this issue when He said, “And ye shall know the truth, and he truth shall make you free (John 8:32).
If you are the Pastor of a 501c3 [So Called] Church in the USA and think you are Friends with the Vatican then you may want to keep your eye on the U.S. Supreme Court for the next two days. The Court is PACKED with SIX Roman Catholic Justices and they are visiting Proposition 8 out of California! The People of California voted AGAINST legalizing Homosexual Marriage! Smart People! Now What SAY the Roman Catholic Supreme Court Justices?
Dated March 26, 2013