| He killed people in the advancement
of his cause, believing his cause was just and the means were justified.
His actions left a trail of fear in his wake. However, when he died at
the hands of those committed to bringing him to justice, he expressed no
sorrow or remorse. Instead, he went to his death expressing his confidence
that there was a reward waiting for him in the life to come and calling
for others to pick up where he left off.
Does this sound familiar? Do you hear this story
and envision an Islamic fundamentalist, bent on the destruction of America
and/or Israel? Understandable, but in this case, wrong.
The man I am describing was Paul Hill, the former
minister who was executed by the State of Florida for the murder of Dr.
John Britton and James Barrett. Dr. Britton performed abortions at the
Ladies Center in Pensacola, Florida, and James Barrett was his bodyguard.
They were shot to death in July 1994 by Hill, who claimed that the shootings
were justified in order to prevent abortions.
Now, I am pro-life myself. I think the arguments
that deny the personhood of the unborn child are as wrong as the arguments
that denied the personhood of African-American slaves. I think legal
abortion is just as much an evil today as legal slavery was prior to the
Civil War. I think Roe vs. Wade was equal to the infamous Dred Scott
case over a century before in its error and false application of the law.
That being said, there simply is no possible justification
for Paul Hill's actions any more than there was for John Brown's.
The battle against abortion is a battle to be waged for the minds and hearts
of people. Women in the midst of an unwanted pregnancy need to be
persuaded that abortion is not the answer to the situation. Doctors
need to be persuaded that their hands should be applying their skill and
knowledge to the saving of lives, not the taking of them. Legislators
need to be persuaded that the life in the womb is deserving of the protection
afforded by the law. Judges need to be persuaded that the decisions
which outlawed abortion are based on a flawed understanding of the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution.
None of this will happen, however, at the point of
a gun. There is a saying (and I cannot remember where it comes from)
that "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."
You don't change a person's heart and mind by threatening them with death.
Lasting change will happen not when people are afraid to obtain or perform
abortions but when they no longer desire to or feel it is necessary.
More to the point, those of us who are opposed to
abortion call ourselves "pro-life" because that goes to the heart of our
belief about what makes abortion wrong. We want to see life preserved
because life is of instrinsic value. That doesn't matter whether
the life in question is of an unborn child or a doctor who performs legal
abortions.
In those rare instances where Scripture allows life
to be taken, such as a justly applied capital punishment or a justly necessary
war, Scripture places that power in the hands of the governing bodies,
not vigilantes operating not only outside of the law but in complete opposition
to the law. It certainly doesn't place that power in the hands of
people whose desire is to sow terror among those who do not agree with
them.
If we who are pro-life expect to be taken seriously,
then we need to be just as vocal in our repudiation of the tactics of the
Paul Hills of the world as we are in our opposition to the taking of unborn
life.
Otherwise, our claims to be concerned about life
won't be believed. And why should they be? |
