Description of Bible in Roeder Auction Used to Justify Violence Against Providers


Update: As of 6pm EST on November 2, 2009, eBay has taken
down the rest of the items up for bid for violating their "offensive
materials" policy. Thanks to eBay and to all of our readers and followers who signed our petition asking eBay to take down the auction items. 

The description of a "prolife" bible offered for auction on eBay by a group seeking to fund a "justifiable homicide" defense for Scott Roeder uses the bible as a rationale for justifying killing providers.

Don’t believe me.
Believe God. This is the King James Version Bible owned by S.h.e.l.l.y
S.h.a.n.n.o.n until she sent it to me about 10 years ago when she was
transferred from state to federal prison. I have highlighted many
verses in it which prolifers cite to show that conception is "when life
begins", at least in God’s opinion. Bookmarks help you easily find each
one. With the Bible is an article listing the verses and explaining, in
some cases, how the verses apply to the issue, or the meanings of the
words in the original language.

For example, did
you know even Roe v. Wade cites a verse from Exodus? Would you like to
know how the Court justified genocide out of that verse?

The list of verses here, and
comments about them, have been contributed by several prolife
activists. In fact, as this auction runs, I will invite prolife friends
to contribute additional verses, with explanations of their relevance.
I also invite YOU to submit verses and discussion. Send to
Pilgrim@Saltshaker.US. The high bidder will receive the Bible and an
article compiling all these results.

"VIO-LENCE" IN THE BIBLE. The Bible
provides a rational context for judging if and when “vio-lence” is good
or evil. Police are deliberately equipped and authorized to be
vio-lent. Is it an offense against reason and morality to glor-ify
police? Kansas courts sometimes order the kil-ling of kil-lers. Shall
we censor those who respect Kansas courts?

The Bible agrees with police and Kansas courts that
sometimes the vio-lent need to be vio-lently stopped. Police and courts
agree with Ecclesiastes 3 that there is “a time to k.i.l.l, and a time
to heal; …a time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a
time of peace.”
 
So how can comments after news articles be
full of condemnation of the Bible because it glor-ifies vio-lence, yet
full of respect for police who
exist for violence, and for courts which justify
their violence? These bloggers express so much rage against any appeal
to the moral authority of the vio-lence-tainted Bible that you know
many of them would vio-lently censor any mention of God were they under
one of the many governments around the world sympathetic with that
goal.
 
This at first appears contradictory, but upon examination it proves merely hypocritical.
 
There is real disagreement between God and America’s police and courts. It is not over whether vio-lence is sometimes just-ified, but it is over when it is just-ified.
 
God takes the position that ALL who kill the
innocent need to be killed. Gen 9.6. God’s position is that those who
kill killers, through as legal a process as their government permits,
are not criminals, nor are they “avenging themselves”, but they are
fulfilling God’s vengeance. Romans 12:19, Isaiah 63:4.
By contrast, human governments have,
throughout history, given kil-lers open season on selected groups of
human beings, calling their slaughter “legal”, refusing to recognize it
as a “harm”, and prosecuting those who try to save them.
 
This is where the positions of God and of human governments part ways. This is what God promises to judge with the same degree of vio-lence which the vio-lent have committed.
 
Therefore when people want to censor only that
“vio-lence glor-ifying” speech which God justifies, it should be
obvious that their real target is that speech which glor-ifies God.
 
Not that God cares about glory, for His
benefit. Who are we, that He should care what we think of Him? Job
35:5-8. But God loves us, and hates what we do to ourselves by
justifying genocide. He invites us into Heaven. But if we are this
comfortable with genocide all around us, how are we going to be
comfortable in Heaven where the very thought of the slightest
unkindness would be an abomination?
VIO-LENCE AND LOVE. If God
loves all, why is it hard to grasp why Bible verses like Pro 24:10-12
would call us to rescue those being unjustly slaughtered? How can the
innocent live, unless those who murder them are stopped? Should we have
no police? No courts? No laws?
 
Laws mean to protect good and restrain evil. It would be
absurd for any law to expressly intend great harm. Mark 3:4. In
situations where enforcement of the letter of a law would cause harm,
the spirit of the law would be violated by enforcement, which is
rightly suspended by the Ne-cess-ity De-fense.
This is S.c.o.t.t R.o.e.d.e.r’s defense. It would be absurd
to interpret Roe v. Wade as expressly intending genocide. Yet Roe said
"the judiciary…is not in a position to speculate" on whether the
millions of unborn slain at its direction are human beings. Roe said if
triers of fact determine that they are, Roe should "collapse".
 
Lower courts violate Roe by deciding the fact question which
Roe said no judge is qualified to decide: the judges say they can’t
recognize abortion as harming human beings because it is "legal".
Besides that, judges decide this fact question by themselves, before
the trial begins, and order defendants not to say a word about their
defense, and the only contested trial issue, to the jury, even though
they tell juries they are judges of the facts. Attorneys are used to
this system, but most Americans would not call this a "trial by jury".
They would call it a "trial by a judge".
 
Nothing can be more illegal than what courts have done all these years to keep abortion "legal".
 
WHAT WE SUPPORT. Our goal is an end to
vio-lence against abortionists, and against babies, through restoring
the Constitutional Right to Trial by Jury, even in abortion prevention
cases. Proceeds from this auction will be devoted to that end.
 
I can’t imagine anything more American than fund raising for
an attorney to give a man his right to a trial by an informed jury.
American mailboxes are clogged with fund raising letters to pay
attorneys. The ACLU sends out a fund raising letter so they can afford
to sue somebody for putting up a Christmas tree. The ACLJ sends out a
fund raising letter so they can afford to oppose the ACLU. That’s the
American system.
 
I can’t imagine anything more unAmerican than any move by
anyone to censor such an effort.  I would be less surprised by a move
like that in Communist China.

 

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Jodi Jacobson on twitter: @jljacobson