The Fruits of "legal" Abortion - child murder. The ancient pagan murder cult targeting children has been brought back leading directly to the Antichrist.

God forbids abortion always.

Look up, your redemption is at hand: Right to Life: THE LORD SAID

Culture: Abortion is Murder

We posted this on Mother's Day for the Islamic Cultures of the Middle East and everywhere and we repeat it here on the West's Mother's Day, and yes I told my Mother I love her and wished her a happy and blessed Mother's Day.

Until you defend the right to life of the unborn, the way that Jesus Christ did and the way that Muhammad did and the way that Mother Teresa did, please don't tell the world how concerned you are for the rights of others. In other words, there are NO exceptions, all babies from the moment of conception have the absolute, utter and complete right to life that God gives them. Amen.

The genocide against the babies outweighs any other. One half BILLION (Billion with "B") murdered by abortion and abortafacient (the Pill, it induces abortion of just conceived babies).




Ex:20:13:
13 Thou shalt not kill. (DRV)
Dt:18:9, 10:
9 ¶ When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God shall give thee, beware lest thou have a mind to imitate the abominations of those nations.
10 Neither let there be found among you any one that shall expiate his son or daughter, making them to pass through the fire: or that consulteth soothsayers, or observeth dreams and omens, neither let there be any wizard, (DRV)
Dt:18:10 "... expiate his son or daughter, making them to pass through the fire..." Refers to the practice of murdering a live infant by fire to the pagan goddess Moloch. Today the same thing, murder by burning, is saline abortion. There is also murder by sucking the brains out of the live infant, this is referred to as partial birth abortion. There is also murder by abortafacient at or very close to the moment of conception, this is referred to as “the pill” or a patch or whatever method of ingesting the abortafacient. There hasn’t been a “pill” that doesn’t do this for 40 years.
ALL ABORTION IS OBVIOUSLY MURDER MOST EVIL


The Didache
TEACHING of the TWELVE APOSTLES

Chap. II.

1. And the second commandment of the Teaching is:
2. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not corrupt boys; thou shalt not commit fornication. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not use witchcraft; thou shalt not practice sorcery. Thou shalt not procure abortion, nor shalt thou kill the new-born child. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods.
3. Thou shalt not forswear thyself (swear falsely). Thou shalt not bear false witness. Thou shalt not speak evil; thou shalt not bear malice.
4. Thou shalt not be double-minded nor double-tongued; for duplicity of tongue is a snare of death.
5. Thy speech shall not be false, nor vain, but fulfilled by deed.
6. Thou shalt not be covetous, nor rapacious, nor a hypocrite, nor malignant, nor haughty. Thou shalt not take evil counsel against thy neighbor.
7. Thou shalt not hate any one, but some thou shalt rebuke and for some thou shalt pray, and some thou shalt love above thine own soul (or, life).


Matthew 18

1 ¶ At that hour the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Who, thinkest thou, is the greater in the kingdom of heaven?
2 And Jesus, calling unto him a little child, set him in the midst of them.
3 And said: amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven.
5 And he that shall receive one such little child in my name, receiveth me.
6 But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea.
7 ¶ Woe to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh.
8 And if thy hand, or thy foot, scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee to go into life maimed or lame, than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into everlasting fire.
9 And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee having one eye to enter into life, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.
10 See that you despise not one of these little ones: for I say to you, that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven.
11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
12 What think you? If a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them should go astray: doth he not leave the ninety-nine in the mountains, and goeth to seek that which is gone astray?
13 And if it so be that he find it: Amen I say to you, he rejoiceth more for that, than for the ninety-nine that went not astray.
14 Even so it is not the will of your Father, who is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
(DRV)

From Mary Meehan’s "The Road to Abortion" Copyright © 1998, 1999 & 2002 by Mary Meehan. In 1966 Dr. Alan Guttmacher, apparently trying to be witty, wrote from Africa to a U.S. colleague: "My trip has been great. I believe I converted the Jews in Israel and now I am working on the pigmented savages." This private comment from Guttmacher (who was Jewish, but not observant) came soon after his Planned Parenthood group gave an award to the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.(32)
32. William H. Draper, Jr., to P. A. Gorman, [8 or 11] Sept. 1967, Guttmacher Papers; Alan F. Guttmacher to Frank Notestein, 13 June 1966, PPFA (II), box 125; and Congressional Record (10 May 1966), vol. 112, part 8, 10164-10165. In his statement accepting the Margaret Sanger Award, Dr. King praised Sanger and family planning and spoke of "the modern plague of overpopulation." Unfortunately, he seemed unaware of the eugenics connections of Sanger and of population control in general. Ibid.

Also see: http://www.angelfire.com/mo/baha/king.html
Dr. King did in fact receive the Margaret Sanger Award in 1966. But it is also a fact that in 1966, Planned Parenthood was still (at least publicly) anti-abortion. [It seems from all the evidence, that unfortunately Dr. King, who was staunchly anti-abortion, was unaware of what Margaret Sanger stood for.]

Alan Guttmacher Institute Mission: "The Institute's mission is to protect the reproductive choices of all women and men in the United States and throughout the world. It is to support their ability to obtain the information and services needed to achieve their full human rights, safeguard their health and exercise their individual responsibilities in regard to sexual behavior and relationships, reproduction and family formation."

Alan Guttmacher (1898-1974) did more to cause the widespread use of abortion to murder babies, especially gentile babies, than anyone else, including Margaret Sanger.

One who followed in the footsteps of Guttmacher, Dr. Bernard Nathanson (born 1926). Dr. Nathanson repented of his genocide against babies.

CONFESSION OF AN EX-ABORTIONIST
By Dr. Bernard Nathanson

I am personally responsible for 75,000 abortions. This legitimises my credentials to speak to you with some authority on the issue. I was one of the founders of the National Association for the Repeal of the Abortion Laws (NARAL) in the U.S. in 1968. A truthful poll of opinion then would have found that most Americans were against permissive abortion. Yet within five years we had convinced the U.S. Supreme Court to issue the decision which legalised abortion throughout America in 1973 and produced virtual abortion on demand up to birth. How did we do this? It is important to understand the tactics involved because these tactics have been used throughout the western world with one permutation or another, in order to change abortion law.

THE FIRST KEY TACTIC WAS TO CAPTURE THE MEDIA

We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favour of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalising abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalisation.

THE SECOND KEY TACTIC WAS TO PLAY THE CATHOLIC CARD

We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its "socially backward ideas" and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion. This theme was played endlessly. We fed the media such lies as "we all know that opposition to abortion comes from the hierarchy and not from most Catholics" and "Polls prove time and again that most Catholics want abortion law reform". And the media drum-fired all this into the American people, persuading them that anyone opposing permissive abortion must be under the influence of the Catholic hierarchy and that Catholics in favour of abortion are enlightened and forward-looking. An inference of this tactic was that there were no non-Catholic groups opposing abortion. The fact that other Christian as well as non-Christian religions were {and still are) monolithically opposed to abortion was constantly suppressed, along with pro-life atheists' opinions.

THE THIRD KEY TACTIC WAS THE DENIGRATION AND SUPPRESSION OF ALL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION

I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a prenatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the foetus in the womb. A favourite pro- abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Foetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy. Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of foetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic at $300 a time, 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion. It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma, but to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.

AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION

Although I am not a formal religionist, I believe with all my heart that there is a divinity of existence which commands us to declare a final and irreversible halt to this infinitely sad and shameful crime against humanity.


Dr. Bernard Nathanson's film Silent Scream, real abortion, the real truth, watch it.

Dr. Nathanson’s videos at: The Silent Scream



Those who follow in the footsteps of Guttmacher and do NOT repent:

IOF cold blooded murder of Mothers and Childen


Roe v. Wade declared that the human being in a mothers womb is not a human being. Roe v. Wade was brought about directly by the instigation of the Alan Guttmacher Institute. Guttmacher, a Jew, based his instigations to murder babies on his Talmudic beliefs that Gentiles, non-Jews, were "Goyim," cattle to be murdered at will. This is one of the prime sources of the Antichrist, the Jew false "messiah" worshiped and plotted for by the Jew family, the Rothschilds, rising in the world.

See: Parousia of Jesus Christ Our Lord: The Justice of God: Ancient pagan polytheistic sites | Syncretism | Osirus/Isis pagan worship

The Pagan phallic worship always had its concomitant mother goddess baby murder accompanying it.

God and His Messiah Jesus Christ our Lord - our right and duty to witness to Him: Abortion and the Ancient Practice of Child Sacrifice by Andrew White, M.D.

The ancient pagan Satanic murder sacrifice of children was the predominant sin of Apostasy of the ancient Israelites and is the modern preferred mode of Satan worship of Judaism and its Antichrists.

Parousia of Jesus Christ Our Lord: Europa & Palestine News « Europa & Middle East News

The entire Zionist offensive against God, Jesus Christ, Moses, all the Prophets of the Old Testament and all the faithful of God of the Old Testament, the entire Church, Muhammad, the entire Ummah and all the peoples of the earth began anew in Babylon in the 6th Century B.C. and offended everyone by their Anti-God Anti-people Satanic hatred of everyone and everything – continuing since then until today. The prophets foretold their rejection by God and their perfidy towards the Messiah to come, Jesus Christ. When Jesus Christ (Isa al Maseeh) came they were condemned by Him. They have had blood on their hands, the entire Haburah-Naasseni-Pharisee Rabbinic academies etc. since the prophets of the Old Testament condemned them for sacrificing children to false gods under every tree and in every wadi: 

Isaiah 57:5 …4 "Against whom do you jest? Against whom do you open wide your mouth And stick out your tongue? Are you not children of rebellion, Offspring of deceit, 5 Who inflame yourselves among the oaks, Under every luxuriant tree, Who slaughter the children in the ravines, Under the clefts of the crags? 6 "Among the smooth stones of the ravine Is your portion, they are your lot; Even to them you have poured out a drink offering, You have made a grain offering. Shall I relent concerning these things?…"

Child Sacrifice/Abortion and the rest of the accompanying evils are all part of the Satanism of the Antichrist.

Parousia of Jesus Christ Our Lord: Abortion - Child Sacrifice - Satanism | all the same thing 

Abomination of Desolation, Abortion, Antichrist, Bishop Thuc, Child Sacrifice, Judeo Masonry, Judeo Masonry is the vilest Satanic criminal organization there is, Kennedy, Satanism, Sedevacantism

One correction to Father O'Connor, he would have known this when he was treated so brutally by the false Vatican II non-authorities at the end of his life, all of the so called "Popes" (actually Antipopes and Satanists) and the Vatican since the 1958 conclave are false non-Christian Anti-Catholic imposters.

Father John O'Connor: The Reign of the Antichrist 

CIA And Satanism

Look up, your redemption is at hand: Right to Life: Leila Hussein: Right to Life: THE LORD SAID

Look up, your redemption is at hand: The return of ancient murdering lies in the sacrifice of children – today it is abortion, then it was divination.

Abortion

child sacrifice

The sin of Israel in the Old Testament was child sacrifice to Satan; when they coupled that with rejection of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, and the utterly abominable sin of Deicide, the Jews were rejected forever as a nation by God and forbidden by Him to ever inhabit the Holy Land again.

When the Antichrist, the Jews' false Talmudic maschiach to come, makes human sacrifice offering in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, that will be the Abomination of Desolation that Our Lord Jesus Christ warned of and said to flee from without even getting one's coat.

Matthew 24

15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let no one on the housetop go down to take anything out of the house. 18 Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. 19 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20 Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.

Matthew 24:15 Daniel 9:27; 11:31; 12:11
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+24&version=NIV

Abortion and the Ancient Practice of Child Sacrifice

by Andrew White, M.D.

       Dr. White is a 1978 graduate of the Michigan Medical School now in the private practice of family medicine in the North Shore of Boston. He is also currently studying for a Master of Divinity at Gordon-Conwell Seminary.

Despite considerable biblical evidence already summoned to support a strong pro-life position, more scriptural testimony seems to be needed to convince some Christians that anything less than such a position is unbiblical. One objection frequently raised to a dogmatic stand against abortion is that the Bible never specifically addresses the issue. The reason for this omission has been pointed out by the Old Testament scholar Meredith Mine who, commenting on the lack of abortion legislation in biblical law says, "It was so unthinkable that an Israelite woman should desire an abortion that there was no need to mention this offense in the criminal code."¹

There was, however, a rite performed in ancient Israel which has many parallels to the modern practice of abortion and is specifically addressed in the Scriptures. It was the rite of child sacrifice and Moses said it was one of the "detestable things the Lord hates" (Deuteronomy 12:31). In this paper the largely neglected parallels between the ancient rite of child sacrifice and the modern practice of abortion will be examined in detail.
 

Archeological and Extra-Biblical Literary Data

Before the biblical texts which address the practice of child sacrifice are examined, it will be helpful to draw on some of the archeological and extra-biblical literary data for the background they provide.

In 1921 the largest cemetery of sacrificed infants in the ancient Near East was discovered at Carthage. It is well established that this rite of child sacrifice originated in Phoenicia, ancient Israel's northern neighbor, and was brought to Carthage by its Phoenician colonizers. Hundreds of burial urns filled with the cremated bones of infants, mostly newborns but even some children up to age six years old, as well as animals have been uncovered at Carthage.

They were buried there between the 8th century B.C. and the fall of Carthage during the third Punic War in 146 B.C. On the burial monuments that sometimes accompanied the urns, there was often inscribed the name or symbol of the goddess Tanit, the main Phoenician female deity, and her consort Ba'al Hammon.' Infants and children were regularly sacrificed to this divine couple.

Fulfillment of a vow was probably the most frequent reason an infant or child was sacrificed as witnessed by the third century B.C. Greek author Kleitarchos (paraphrased by a later writer):

Out of reverence for Kronos (the Greek equivalent of Ba'al Hammon), the Phoenicians, and especially the Carthaginians, whenever they seek to obtain some great favor, vow one of their children, burning it as a sacrifice to the deity if they are especially eager to gain success.³

A typical example of an inscription follows:

"To our lady, to Tanit, the face of Ba'al and to our lord, to Ba'al Hammon that which was vowed (by) PN son of PN son of PN. Because he (the deity) heard his (the dedicant's) voice and blessed him.⁴

Thus fulfillment of a vow before or after obtaining a special favor from the gods, a favor that brings blessing or success to the dedicant, appears to be the most common reason for child sacrifice. Occasionally, however, at times of civic crisis, mass child sacrifice was practiced as attested by the first century B.C. Greek historian Diodorus Siculus who reported the response of the Carthaginians to their army's defeat by Agathocles in 310 B.C.:

Therefore the Carthaginians, believing that the misfortune had come to them from the gods, betook themselves to every manner of supplication of the divine powers . . . In their zeal to make amends for their omission, they selected two hundred of the noblest children and sacrificed them publicly.⁵

  The actual rite of child sacrifice at Carthage has been graphically described by Diodorus Siculus:

There was in their city a bronze image of Cronus extending its hands, palms up and sloping toward the ground, so that each of the children when placed thereon rolled down and fell into a sort ofgaping pit filled with fire.⁶

Plutarch, a first and second century A.D. Greek author, adds to the description that:

the whole area before the statue was filled with a loud noise of flutes and drums so that the cries of wailing should not reach the ears of the people.⁷

There is conflicting evidence regarding the actual cause of death of the victims. Some reports suggest that they were burned alive⁸ while other reports suggest that the infants and children were slaughtered first.⁹ The victims, themselves, were members of both the wealthy mercantile and estate-owning class as well as the lower socioeconomic class as attested by the titles of the dedicants on the burial monuments.¹⁰ Occasionally, however, the upper class would substitute lower class children for their own by purchasing them from the poor and then sacrificing them as Diodorus Siculus reports:

in former times they (the Carthaginians) had been accustomed to sacrifice to this god the noblest of their sons, but more recently, secretly buying and nurturing children, they had sent these to the sacrifice.¹¹

Two inscriptions at Carthage even show that occasionally the parents would sacrifice a defective child hoping to later receive a healthy one as a substitute. In one inscription a man named Tuscus says that he gave Ba'al "his mute son Bod'astart, a defective child, in exchange for a healthy one. "1z Child sacrifice probably became a standard practice for both religious and sociological reasons. Diodorus Siculus suggests that the:

ancient myth that Cronos did away with his own children appears to have been kept in mind among the Carthagians through this observance.¹³

The second and third century A.D. Roman lawyer and Christian apologist who was a native North African and spent most of his life in Carthage, Tertullian, wrote:

Saturn (the latinized African equalivant of Ba'al Hammon) did not spare his own children; so, where other people's were concerned, he naturally persisted in not sparing them; and their own parents offered them to him, were glad to respond...¹⁴

According to the ancient myth, Saturn selfishly swallowed up the first five of his children in order to prevent his destined dethronement by one of them.¹⁵Hoping to gain Saturn's favor and thus his blessing, the Carthaginians worshipped Saturn by imitating him. Serving a god with ungodly attributes, the Carthaginians were willing to submit to his murderous demands. Indeed Saturn's demands may have assisted the Carthaginians in their own self-serving plans. For the Syro-Palestinian archeologists Lawrence Stager and Samuel Wolff suggest that "Among the social elite of Punic Carthage the institution of child sacrifice may have assisted in the consolidation and maintenance of family wealth. One hardly needed several children parceling up the patrimony into smaller and smaller pieces . . . for the artisans and commoners of Carthage, ritual infanticide could provide a hedge against poverty. For all these participants in this aspect of the cult, then, child sacrifice provided `special favors from the gods."¹⁶ This suggestion is supported by archeological evidence at Carthage that the practice of child sacrifice flourished as never before at the height of its population as well as civilization."
 

Biblical Citations

Child sacrifice was not confined to Phoenicia, Carthage and the western Mediterranean world. It was also practiced by the Canaanites and through the process of religious syncretism by some Israelites. The earliest reference to child sacrifice in the Bible is found in Leviticus where the practice is address by Moses in connection with Molech:

Do not give any of your children to he passed through (the fire) to Molech for you must not profane the name of your God. 1 am the Lord.

(Lev. 18:21; see also 20:1-5)

In I Kings 11:7, Molech is identified as "the detestable god of the Ammonites" and recent archeological evidence in the former territory of the Ammonites from the period of the Conquest supports biblical testimony that child sacrifice was practiced in Jordan roughly contemporarily with Moses."¹⁸ The Hebrew word Molech is the same Semitic root as the Punic word mulk which was found inscribed on several burial monuments at Carthage giving linguistic evidence for the continuity between the practice of child sacrifice in Canaan and at Carthage. But whereas at Carthage the word refers to the sacrificial offerings including human sacrifice, in Leviticus it refers to the god who demands child sacrifice.¹⁹ The "passing through" refers to sacrificing by burning in a fire.²⁰For this "passing through to Molech" (same Hebrew words in Leviticus and Jeremiah) took place later in Israel's history in the region of the high places of Ba'al in the Valley of Ben Hinnom in Jeremiah 32:35. This murderous scene was described by the Lord through the mouth of Jeremiah in earlier chapters:

For they have forsaken me and made this a place of foreign gods; they have burned sacrifices in it to gods that neither they nor their fathers nor the kings of Judah ever knew and they have filled this place with the blood of the innocent. They have built me the high places of Ba'al to burn their sons in the fire as offerings to Ba'al - something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind. So beware, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when people will no longer call this place Topheth (possibly derived from an Aramaic word meaning hearth or fireplace but here referring to the precinct of child sacrifice)'' or the Valley of ben Hinnom, but the Valley of slaughter.

(Jeremiah 19:4-6; see also 7:31,32)

The history of child sacrifice in ancient Israel and God's response to the practice can be uncovered by examining the biblical texts that address it in the Pentateuch, historical books and prophetic writings. In the Pentateuch, Moses warns the Israelites who will soon enter the land of Canaan (Leviticus 18:3 and 20:21-24) where they will be exposed to the cult of Molech not to sacrifice any of their children to the god:

The Lord said to Moses, say to the Israelites: "Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him. 1 will set my face against that man and 1 will cut him off from his people; for bygiving his children to Molech he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. If the people of the community close their eyes when that man gives one of his children to Molech and they fail to put him to death, 1 will set my face against that man and his family and will cut off from their people both him and all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molech.

(Leviticus 20:1-5; see also 18:21)

The penalty for sacrifice to Molech is harsh, i.e., stoning to death (Lev. 20:2); for it is a serious offense against the Lord.

1. It defiles God's sanctuary (Lev. 20:3) and since His holy presence cannot abide in a place polluted by sin it threatens abandonment by God of His people.

2. It profanes God's holy name making God appear less than the holy God that He is by inferring that He is a God who desires, or at least permits, child sacrifice.

3. God knew that the practice of child sacrifice to Molech was a form of spiritual prostitution (Lev. 20:5). God's relationship to His people is a close personal one with a human analogy in the sexual intimacy of marriage. God, of course, expects the exclusive commitment of marriage, not the pick-and-choose relationships of prostitution.

4. In Deuteronomy, God through Moses rejects child sacrifice even if allegedly done in the worship and service of God Himself (Deut. 12:29-31). In reference to the nations of Canaan that Israel was about to invade and dispossess (12:29) and the worship of their gods (12:30), Moses commands:

You must not worship the Lord your God in their way because in worshipping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the Lord hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods.

(Deuteronomy 12:31)

With remarkable discernment Moses recognized that such unacceptable service can sometimes begin not as a conscious determination to do ungodly things but as an "ensnaring" by other nations and their gods (12:30).

Two of Moses' admonitions against child sacrifice are found in the stipulation section of the loosely covenant treaty form of Leviticus 1821 (Lev. 18:21) and the more rigid covenant treaty form of Deuteronomy²³ (Deut. 12:29-31). In the covenants made between God and Israel, the Lord expected His people to obey the civil, moral and religious stipulations. His commands were to be obeyed because of allegiance to His Lordship and out of a sense of gratitude for His great acts of redemption (Lev. 18:2,3 and Deut. 5:1,2,6 and 12:1).

Failure to obey the covenantal stipulations is failure to give God full allegiance as Lord and failure to respond appropriately to His gracious acts ofredemption.

Disregarding the covenant stipulations is a serious offense, some of which, including child sacrifice, are so grievous as to be punished by capital punishment which is to be done by the entire community (Lev. 20:2,3). If the offense goes undetected by the community, God Himself threatens to "set my face against" and "cut off" the offender (Lev. 20:3) - probably a threat of premature death.²⁴ So detestable to God is child sacrifice that He even threatens to set His face against and cut off those who, though not participants in the practice, "close their eyes" to the crime (Lev. 20:4,5). Further, the warning not only applied to God's covenant people but to any non-Israelite living in Israel (Lev. 20:2). Child sacrifice was not one of the many tribal customs aliens who lived in Israel were permitted to practice.

In these Pentateuchal passages dealing with child sacrifice the offense is recognized as a sin in at least three different ways. As noted above it was seen as a sin against God, i.e. in defiling His sanctuary, in profaning His holy name, in spiritual prostituting to Molech and in ungodly worship of the Lord Himself. But child sacrifice was also perceived as a sexual sin and/or sin against the family as well as a sin against the community. In Leviticus 18 (see also Lev. 20:9ff) the stipulation against child sacrifice is listed among various sexual sins, e.g. incest (18:6ff), adultery (18:20), homosexuality (18:22) and bestiality (18:23). It is not obvious from the immediate context of Leviticus 18 and 20 why child sacrifice is linked to various illicit sexual practices. It is probable, however, that the worship of Molech not only involved child sacrifice but the pagan custom of cultic prostitution. In Isaiah 57:9, "Molech" (Melechin Hebrew. But it must be remembered that vowel notation was a later addition by Masorete scholars to the received consonantal text). is mentioned. Earlier in the chapter "those sacrificing their children" (57:5b) is in parallel with "those burning with lust" (57:5a). They are also described in 57:3 as "offspring of the adulterer and the prostitute." The Hebrew word for adulterer is masculine while the prostitute is feminine, indicating that the children are the offspring of an adulterous father and a prostituting mother. But the phrase is not to be taken literally. Rather, the declared attributes of the parents are in fact used to characterize the offspring themselves." The connection between child sacrifice and cultic prostitution is even clearer in Ezekiel where we read:

And you took your sons and your daughters whom you bore to me and sacrificed them as food to the idols. Was your prostitution not enough? You slaughtered my children and made them pass through (the fire) to the idols.

(Ezekiel 16:20,21)

Thus the Old Testament scholar Moshe Weinfeld links cultic prostitution with child sacrifice in Isaiah and Ezekiel saying, "The children born of cultic prostitution associated with Molech were presumably delivered to the idolatrous priests, even as the offspring of a regular marriage may have been handed over to Molech."²⁶ Given that some of the children offered to Molech were conceived illegitimately during adulterous/prostituting affairs, it seems probable that child sacrifice offered a convenient way to dispose of the consequences of these aberrant sexual practices.

Another possible reason for grouping child sacrifice with illicit sexual practices is that they are all sins against the family. Of the sexual sins listed together in 20:l0ff, the Old Testament scholar Walter Kaiser, Jr., says: "Every assault against an individual here is simultaneously an attack on the very existence of the family."²⁷ Kaiser sees these sexual sins all as sins against the family since they disrupt normal family relationships. It is possible then that child sacrifice, which was clearly an assault against the family, came to be associated with other stipulations that protected the family. Since the family was the foundation of Israelite society, any threat to the family was a threat to the community as well. Thus, the community was to be vigilant in guarding against the practice and was to take the severest community action against any offenders, i.e., stoning to death.

Despite the covenantal stipulations and warnings against child sacrifice, Scripture records that some Israelites did in fact practice child sacrifice. Of Ahaz, the 8th century B.C. king of Judah, we read:

He walked in the ways of the kings of Israel and even made his son pass through the fire, following the detestable ways of the nations the Lord had driven out before the Israelites. 

(2 Kings 16:3)

Sadly Ahaz's grandson Manasseh followed in his footsteps (2 Kings 21:6). But these accounts of child sacrifice were not isolated as recorded by Jeremiah (see above). Being a prophet of God it was Jeremiah's obligation to prosecute on behalf of God the covenant lawsuit against those who had broken the covenant. The evidence against the Israelites was incontestable for it was publicly visible to all. As the Lord's mouthpiece, Jeremiah testifies against Judah:

They have set up their detestable idols in the house that bears my Name and have defiled it They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire - something 1 did not command nor did it enter my mind.

(Jeremiah 7:30,31; see also 19:4,5)

Because of this offense for which Israel is corporately responsible, Jeremiah predicts disaster (7:32-34 and 19:1-3), 6-15). If only the people would repent, disaster could be thwarted (Jeremiah 18:5-11). But the Israelites were a "stiff-necked" people who would not listen to God's words (Jer. 9:15; see also 18:12; cf 18:5-11). They had forsaken their God to serve other gods even to the extent that they would sacrifice their own children spilling "the blood of the innocent" (Jer. 19:4). Mannaseh's grandson Josiah had tried to bring about reformation among the Israelites. After renewing the covenant between God and His people (2 Kings 23:1-3), Josiah:

desecrated Topheth which was in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, so no one could use it to make his son or daughter pass through the fire to Molech.

(2 Kings 23:10)

But Josiah's reformation was short-lived as evidenced by Jeremiah's prophetic witness (see above). God used Rome to judge Carthage in 146 B.C., bringing an end to child sacrifice there. Hundreds of years earlier God used Babylon to judge Israel when the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem, leveling God's temple which signified God's just abandonment of His people, and leading Israel into captivity. While exiled in Babylon, Ezekiel reminded the two prostituting sisters Oholah (representing Samaria in Ezekiel 23:4) and Oholibah (representing Jerusalem) of the reason they had been exiled. In confronting the two with "their detestable practices" the Lord through Ezekiel said:

they have committed adultery and blood is on their hands. They committed adultery with their idols, they even made the children they bore to me pass through the fire) as food for them.

(Ezekiel 23:36,37)

Idolatry had not disappeared by New Testament times, but took on a broader meaning. Commenting on- the New Testament authors' understanding of idolatry, Herbert Schlossberg notes that "a man can place anyone or anything at the top of his pyramid of values, and that is ultimately what he serves. The ultimacy of that service profoundly affects the way he lives."²⁸ Physical idols were still common in New Testament times, e.g. I Corinthians 8:4,5. However, in Pauline theology idolatry is also recognized as any worshipping or serving the creature rather than the Creator which is equivalent to exchanging the truth of God for a lie (Romans 1:25 cr 1:23).²⁹ Placing anything above the Creator and His truth is idolatry, for in this idolatry the creature's erroneous value judgments are substituted for the Creator's correct ones. Sadly, people know the truth but suppress it (Romans 1:18). For God has revealed His nature, power and laws both in the visible world and in the hearts and consciences of humanity (Romans 1:19,20, 2:14,15). But mankind is on a downward spiral of depravity and destruction that begins with devaluing the Creator and His truth and ultimately leads to an outpouring of God's just wrath at the final judgment (Romans 1:24-32, 2:5,8,9,12). Even now mankind is experiencing God's wrath as He gives men over to the consequences of their sin (Romans 1:27,26,28). Apart from God's gracious intervention, all mankind faces the present and future revelation of God's just wrath. But as recipients of God's righteousness through faith in Christ Jesus, we have been justified (Romans 1:17, 3:21-28). Having been justified by His grace, our lives must not be conformed to his world's idolatrous values but be transformed by the renewing of our minds to God's perfect will (Romans 12:2).
 

Parallels of Abortion and Child Sacrifice

At the risk on the one hand of pointing out obvious parallels and on the other hand of suggesting parallels which some may say are forced, we compare the ancient practice of child sacrifice with the modern practice of abortion. However, before going any further it should be noted that the parallels between the two have been recognized for centuries. Tertullian, for example, commenting on the Roman practice of infanticide by comparing it to the Carthaginian practice of child sacrifice admonishes:

there is no difference as to baby killing whether you do it as a sacred rite or just because you choose to do it.

In the same context Tertullian describes the Christian attitude towards both abortion and infanticide saying: 

For us murder is once for all forbidden; so even the child in the womb, while yet the mother's blood is still being drawn on to form the human being, it is not lawful to destroy. To forbid birth is only quicker murder. It makes no difference whether one take away the life once born or destroy it as it comes to birth. He is a man, who is to be a man, the fruit is always present in the seed.³⁰

The most obvious parallel between the rite of child sacrifice and the practice of abortion is the sober fact that the parents actually kill their own offspring. There are however many other parallels. At Carthage the main reason for sacrificing a child was to avert potential dangers in a crisis or to gain success through fulfilling a vow. Today many times when a woman faces an unwanted pregnancy, abortion seems to be the only way to resolve the crisis she finds herself in. The potential danger to reputation, education, career, etc., become overwhelming. To avert the seemingly terrifying consequences of carrying a pregnancy to term, the woman may turn to abortion as a means of escape. Another woman may experience much less of the anxiety and fear that accompany a crisis. She may simply see the pregnancy as an intrusion into her self-serving lifestyle and an obstacle in the way of the road to her success. Sadly this woman's offspring must be sacrificed so that she can continue uninterrupted with her plans for the future.

It is no secret that in American society extramarital sexual intercourse (fornication and adultery) is the cause of most pregnancies that end in abortion. Pregnancy is a risk many are willing to take knowing that any undesired consequences can be eliminated by abortion. The theologican Carl Henry recognizes this fact in calling abortion "the horrendous modern immolation of millions of fetuses on the alter of sex gratification."" As suggested earlier, child sacrifice in Canaan may have been a convenient way to dispose of the consequences of the illicit sexual practice of temple prostitution associated with the cult of Molech. If so, the modern practice of men irresponsibly engaging in sexual intercourse with women to whom they do not intend to commit themselves and provide for parallels the wayward Israelite man engaging in extramarital relations with a temple prostitute. In both cases the men leave the women to bear the consequences of their aberrant sexual practices. New England Christian Action Council executive director John Rankin rightly calls this irresponsible behavior of men towards women as "the ultimate male chauvinism."³²

As noted earlier, child sacrifice may have been a means of population control at Carthage. At present around the world abortion is sanctioned, even encouraged, by some societies as a means of population control. In China, communist party agents actually impose great social and economic pressure on couples to abort their offspring if they already have one child. In this country, the sanctions are more subtle. Presumably, Medicaid-funded abortions afford the poor equal access to medical care, but one wonders whether some wealthy policy makers hope to control population growth among the poor under the guise of good will. In this there is an intimation of a parallel to the Carthaginian practice of the wealthy buying the poor's offspring to sacrifice in place of their own children. Apart from state funding, occasionally both the rich and the poor will abort later pregnancies if they feel their families are large enough. As at Carthage, socioeconomic concerns often play a prominent role in the decision.

Sometimes the Carthaginians sacrificed defective children in exchange for healthy ones. It is now standard medical practice to do an amniocentesis at an early stage of pregnancy when congenital abnormalities are suspected. If an impairment is confirmed, the parents are advised to consider terminating the pregnancy. To carry to term and raise a defective child is not expected of the parents since they can exchange the frail one they now have for a healthy one in the future. In some states obstetricians who fail to advise their patients of the need for an amniocentesis can be successfully sued for malpractice on the legal grounds that the delivered infants are "wrongful life."³³

Even the actual rite of child sacrifice has modem parallels in the medical techniques used to perform abortions. In the saline abortion the dying infant is chemically burned as it thrashes about for minutes to hours before finally succumbing. In the suction abortion the loud whir of the vacuum pump muffles the sound of the mother crying out in pain and sadness and the ripping and gushing sound of the infant being tom piecemeal from the womb.

Finally, the flourishing of abortion in modern America, like child sacrifice in ancient Carthage, at the height of its civilization is an unmistakable parallel. The words written by P. Mosca at the conclusion of his doctoral dissertation dealing with child sacrifice might well be written of abortion today, ". . . it is impossible to deal with this subject at any length without coming to terms with the human dimension: how could a culture so well developed morally, intellectually and materially tolerate so 'abominable' a custom? How could a sophisticated people sanction what seems to be such a barbaric practice for so long a time? How at the most visceral and critical level could human parents bring about the destruction of their own child?"³⁴

One religious truth emerges in comparing ancient child sacrifice to modem abortion, i.e., people become like the gods/God they worship. The Carthaginians worshipped Ba'al Hammon, equivalent to Kronos and Saturn. Not surprisingly they became like him, willing to sacrifice their children to avert potential danger and gain success in their self-serving endeavors. Modern autonomous man worships himself and is willing to abort his own offspring in order to resolve crises and achieve his own goals. In serving the idolatrous self, men become more and more like the self-serving idol they worship, i.e. sinful man. They are willing to disregard any of God's gracious laws in order to accomplish their own ends. In their self-idolatry men have set themselves on a downward spiral of depravity and destruction from which only God's gracious mercy can deliver them.

In contrast to those who worship themselves, those who worship the holy God become holy. God sets Himself before His people as the standard of righteousness, "Be holy because I the Lord your God am holy" (Lev. 19:2). In serving this righteous God, men and women become more and more like Him in righteousness. Of course, even the holy people of God have faith not in their own righteousness, but in the saving work of their righteous Lord, Jesus Christ.
 

Conclusions

Since there are many parallels between ancient child sacrifice and modern abortion, it is reasonable to conclude that the attitude of our unchanging God towards abortion today is similar to His attitude towards child sacrifice in the past. What then can we rationally surmise is God's judgment regarding the practice of abortion both among Christians and those who are not His people?

Like child sacrifice in ancient Israel, the practice of abortion by Christians is spiritual prostitution to an idol, defiles God's sanctuary and profanes His holy name. God alone is the Author of life and it is not the creature's prerogative to question the Creator's wisdom in bringing to life a fellow human being at conception. Whenever men disregard their Creator's wise judgment by destroying His innocent creation, they are serving another god. They are, in fact, spiritually prostituting themselves to the idolatrous self whom they believe is wiser in its value judgments. Some values which are put forward to justify abortion are clearly idolatrous, e.g., the mother's right to choose, which is placed at the top of the pyramid of values by those who call themselves pro-choice. Other idolatrous values are more subtle, e.g., empathy for a mother's suffering in the midst of the crisis arising from an unwanted pregnancy or concern for the quality of life of a defective fetus. Both of these later values are good in themselves but become idolatrous when they abrogate the Creator's wise judgment in creating human life. It is not as though God fails to realize in creating some human beings that they may become a source of conflict in an unplanned conception or that a handicapped person will indeed face difficulties.

Whenever Christians disregard the Creator's true value judgments, they dethrone God and by their sin defile the temple in which He dwells, the temple of their own body (see I Corinthians 6:19). Dethroned and defiled by the idolatrous sin of abortion, God threatens to abandon the wayward Christian unless there is repentance. For God will not dwell in a temple in which another god is enthroned and a sanctuary polluted by sin. And the Christian who approves of or participates in the sin of abortion not only affects himself but he profanes God's holy name. People intuitively know that a man's attitude and behavior reflect his values. The Christian claims that God's authoritative Word determines his values. If a Christian then speaks or acts in away that is contrary to that Word, he brings dishonor to God's name. For to those who do not know God, the Christian is their chief witness to the Word of God. And the Christian who approves of or participates in the practice of abortion is testifying to the world that his God condones the practice. He is in reality bearing false witness, for by his attitude and behavior he infers that the Creator consents to His creatures destroying innocent fellow creatures. This false witness actually implies through his testimony that God is at odds with Himself. For in creating a human being God has clearly judged it to be of value. If God approved of abortion, He would be essentially saying that his value judgments are sometimes wrong.

Many Christians who accept or take part in the practice of abortion have not made a conscious decision to sin and bring dishonor to God by condoning idolatrous values. Regardless of the motive, however, these Christians are unacceptably serving God. Indeed God hates the detestable sin of abortion. For not only is abortion a sin against God and His innocent creation but it is a sin against the family and community as well. Scripture throughout teaches that children are a blessing from the Lord and that loving nurture is the godly response of parents toward their offspring. Abortion is the rejection of the God-given role to parent His creation. For an unmarried woman unable to cope with the doubly difficult role of single parenting, the child may be God's gift through her to a barren couple within the community. Whether God's blessing is received and lovingly nurtured by the biologic parents or given to adoptive parents, the birth of a child is a blessing to the family and community.

Often abortion is the evil solution to the consequences of a sexual sin. Whether a pregnancy results from fornication or adultery, where the mother is a guilty participant in the sin, or a pregnancy results from rape or incest, where the mother usually is the guiltless victim of another's sin, abortion is an ungodly solution. For the Sovereign Redeemer is able to bring about good where there was evil. A new creation resulting from a sexual sin is an extraordinary witness to this redemptive truth.

Sadly many Christians refuse to completely submit to the Lordship of the Creator and fail to appreciate the redemptive power of their God to save man from the full consequences of sin. The defective fetus is the victim of that original sin which resulted in the fall of all creation. A mother may be the victim of her own or another's sexual sin or the victim of corporate societal sin, e.g., unjust poverty. In all of these situations abortion has no redeeming character; for God never deals with sin or its consequences by countering it with sin but with righteousness. The unhealthy child should be loved and cared for more not less because of its weakness. The pregnant woman should be counseled to do what is right and given assistance in every possible way to support a godly decision to nurture in her body God's creation during its first nine months of life. Christians must always affirm, both by word and deed, the sovereignty of the Creator and recognize His power to righteously redeem mankind from the results of sin.

Up to this point we have been trying to discover God's attitude towards abortion among Christians, based on Scripture's testimony of His attitude towards child sacrifice among the Israelites. We now turn to God's judgment regarding abortion among those who are not Christians and the Christian response to the practice among them.

As previously noted in the theocratic nation of Israel, some non-Israelite customs were tolerated and some, like child sacrifice, were not. Today God's people in the United States do not live in a theocracy; rather, they live in a democratic state. As such, Christians must determine, based on the principles of God's law, when they should become actively involved in the democratic process to restrict the behavior of some individuals in the interest of other individuals and society-at-large and when they should tolerate different values and customs. Abortion is clearly a practice which is intolerable and must be restrained by the state. For abortion is the denial of the inalienable God-given right to life" of an innocent human being and it is an attack at the very foundation of our society, i.e., the family and community. Even many of those who are not Christians acknowledge that abortion is wrong. For God's law is written on the hearts of men and women to which their conscience bears witness (see Romans 2:14). Others have suppressed God's truth by substituting their own self-serving idolatrous values. The truth of God's power and divinity have been revealed in creation (see Romans 1:18ff). But men and women have suppressed this truth and their rejection of this revelation of God is clearly evident in the sin of abortion. For scarcely is the power and divinity of God more clearly seen than in His creative power bringing to life each human being, everyone made in His own divine image (see Genesis 1:27). No man-made technology has the power to create life, much less a human life stamped with the divine imprimatur. Rather, through the medical technology of abortion mankind rebels against the creative power of the Almighty by destroying the divine image-bearers. No, abortion is not acceptable as practice by Christians or non-Christians and must not be tolerated by this or any other society. Those individuals who fail to heed God's law by condoning abortion will surely face God's judgment if they remain impenitent. Even those who do not condone abortion but fail to take action against it will face judgment. For as noted previously in Leviticus both the Israelite who sacrificed his child to Molech and those who closed their eyes to the sin faced the judgment of God. And if a society as a whole persistently rejects God's laws it will surely corporately face God's judgment. The city of Carthage and the nation of Israel are but two of many historical testimonies to the outpouring of God's wrath against unrelenting corporate sin.

Something is happening in this land which God did not command nor did it enter His mind - this place is being filled with the blood of the innocent. So beware, for blood is on our hands and God will set his face against us unless we repent and are cleansed by his merciful forgiveness.

This is what the Lord says:

Look I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan against you.  So turn from
your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your actions.

(Jeremiah 18:11)

Oh, that we might not respond like ancient Israel.

It is no use. We will continue with our own plans, each of us will follow the stubborness
of his evil heart.

(Jeremiah 18:12)

References

1. Kline, M.G., "Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 1977, p. 193.

2. Harden, D., The Phoenicians, 1962, p. 88.

3. For translation see Mosca P.G., Child Sacrifice in Caananite and Israelite Religion, Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1975, p. 22.

4. Stager, LE. and Wolff, S.R., "Child Sacrifice at Carthage - Religious Rite or Population Control?", Biblical Archaelogy Review, Jan./Feb. 1984, p. 45.

5. Siculus, Diodorus, The Library of History, Book XX:14, The Loeb Classical Library.

6. Ibid.

7. Plutarch, De superstitione 171, The Loeb Classical Library.

8. Mosca, P.G., op. cit., p. 27, Mosca translates Kleitarchos' paraphraser from Scholia to Plato's Republic as follows: "There stands in their midst a bronze statue of Kronos, its hands extended over a bronze brazier, the flames of which engulf the child. When the flames fall upon the body, the limbs contract and the open mouth seems almost to be laughing until the contracted body slips quietly into the brazier. Thus it is that the `grin' is known as `sardonic laughter,' since they die laughing."

9. de Vaux, R., Studies in Old Testament Sacrifices, 1964, p. 81. de Vaux says that slaughter preceding the cremation "has been well established by J. Guey in melanges d'archeologic et d'histoire, 1937, pp. 94-99."

10. Stager, L.E. and Wolff, S.R., op. cit., pp. 45, 47, citing P.G. Mosca's epigraphic work documented in his Ph.D. dissertation op. cit.

11. Siculus, Diodorus, op. cit., See also Plutarch op. cited where he says "Those who had no children would buy some little ones from poor people and cut their throats as if they were so many lambs or young birds."

12. Kennedy, C., "Queries/Comments," Biblical Archeologie Review, May/June 1984, p. 20, citing J. Feuvier's article "Une Sacrifice d'Enfant chez les Numides," Annuaire de l'Institut de Philogic et d'Histoire Orientales et Slave, 1953.

13. Siculus, Diodorus, op. cit.

14. Tertullian, Apologeticus IX: 4 The Loeb Classical Library.

15. Hamilton, E., Mythology, 1940, pp. 65, 66.

16. Stager, L.E. and Wolff, S.R., op. cit., pp. 50,51

17. Ibid., pp. 40-42. The archeologic evidence to support their conclusion is the greater proportion of human remains to animal remains in the most recent burial urns.

18. Wenham, G.J., The New International Commentary on the Old Testament - The Book of Leviticus, 1979, p. 259. There are text critical problems with I Kings 11:7. It may be that Milcum should be substituted for Molech in this verse (see I Kings 11:5, 33 in Hebrew)

19. Some scholars suggest that some uses of Molech in the Old Testament may have originally been used to refer to the live sacrificial offerings like Punicmulk. e.g., Mosca, P.G., op. cited, for summary see conclusions of chapter two and three.

20. Some scholars unconvincingly suggest that the "passing throught to Molech" was a ritual "passing through" without active sacrifice. e.g., Snaith, N.H., "The Cult of Molech," Vetus Testamentum, 1966, vol. 16, pp. 123, 124. For the best refutation of this view see Mosca, P.G., op. cited, esp. p. 152; also see the Jeremiah passages quoted in this paper.

21. Smith, W.R., Lectures on the Religion of the Semites, 1901, p. 377. Note the reference to the fire pit of Topheth in Isaiah 30:33.

22. Wenham, G.J., op. cit., p. 249.

23. Kline, M.G., The Treaty of the Great King, 1963, pp. 79-83.

24. Wenham, G.J., op. cit., pp. 285, 286.

25. Whybray, R.N., Isaiah 40-66: New Century Bible, 1975, p. 202.

26. Weinfeld, M., Ugarit-Forschungen IV, 1972, p. 144. Translation by P. Mosca, op. cited, p. 143.

27. Kaiser, W.C., Jr., Toward Old Testament Ethics, 1983, p. 124.

28. Schlossberg, H., Idols for Destruction, 1983, p. 6.

29. Romans 1:23 and 1:25b mutually inform each other as indicated by the identical Greek verb translated "exchange" and parallel sentence structure.

30. Tertullian, Apologeticus IX.- 6,8.

31. Henry, C. in reviewing G. Jone's book Brave New People, 1985, see book cover.

32. Rankin, J.C., Contrabortion, June 1984, pg. 1.

33. Schmidt, S.M., "Wrongful Life," Journal of the American Medical Association, Oct. 28, 1983, Vol. 250, pp. 2209-10.

34. Mosca, P., op. cit., pp. 273, 274.

35. The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America, July 4, 1776.
 

Note: Scripture quotes are the New International Version.

Acknowledgements

Credit is due to Gary Pratico, Ph.D., for his assistance in directing me to extrabiblical literary sources and archeologic data regarding child sacrifice.

Credit is due to Gordon Hugenberger, Ph.D., candidate, and Hilton Terrell, M.D., for grammatical and stylistic help.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Abortion%20is%20Murder/sacrifice.htm

Source: http://bmei.org/jbem/volume1/num2/white_abortion_and_the_ancient_practice_of_child_sacrifice.pdf


The Facilitators

Judeo Masonry is the vilest Satanic criminal organization there is.

Related to the Facilitators

God and His Messiah Jesus Christ our Lord - our right and duty to witness to Him: The Kennedy Assassination in full - all of who did it, intelligible and fully explained

Kennedy Assassination

Kennedy

This shows the opening of the diabolic forces at the enthronement ceremony of Satan in the Vatican on June 29. 1963, the same year the two Presidents Diem and Kennedy were Assassinated as part of Satan's plan. The Vatican since then has been absolutely Satanic and was void of any Catholicity even before that - since the 1958 conclave.

Bishop Thuc and why Sedevacantism without any return of a valid Papacy is true

The Apocalypse, the Book of the Revelation: 9.

1 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 8:7, 10!; 20:1
2 … Scripture reference – IV Esr.: 7:36; Gn.: 19:28
3 … Scripture reference –
4 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 7:1, 3!; Ezek.: 9:6
5 … Scripture reference –
6 … Scripture reference – Job: 3:2
7 … Scripture reference – Joel: 2:4
8 … Scripture reference – Joel: 1:6
9 … Scripture reference – Joel: 2:5
10 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 9:19
11 … Scripture reference –
12 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 11:14
13 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 8:7!
14 … Scripture reference –
15 … Scripture reference –
16 … Scripture reference –
17 … Scripture reference –
18 … Scripture reference –
19 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 9:10
20 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 2:21; 16:9;Dan.: 5:23
21 … Scripture reference – Rev.: 2:21; 16:11

The Fifth Trumpet

Rv:9:

1 ¶ And the fifth angel sounded the trumpet: and I saw a star [1] fall from heaven upon the earth. And there was given to him the key of the bottomless pit. … Scripture reference – Rev.: 8:7, 10!; 20:1
2 And he opened the bottomless pit: and the smoke of the pit arose, as the smoke of a great furnace. And the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke of the pit. … Scripture reference – IV Esr.: 7:36; Gn.: 19:28
3 And from the smoke of the pit there came out locusts upon the earth. And power was given to them, as the scorpions of the earth have power.
4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth nor any green thing nor any tree: but only the men who have not the sign of God on their foreheads. … Scripture reference – Rev.: 7:1, 3!; Ezek.: 9:6
5 And it was given unto them that they should not kill them: but that they should torment them five months. [2] And their torment was as the torment of a scorpion when he striketh a man.
6 And in those days, men shall seek death and shall not find it. And they shall desire to die: and death shall fly from them. … Scripture reference – Job: 3:2
7 And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle. And on their heads were, as it were, crowns like gold: and their faces were as the faces of men. … Scripture reference – Joel: 2:4
8 And they had hair as the hair of women: and their teeth were as lions. … Scripture reference – Joel: 1:6
9 And they had breastplates as breastplates of iron: and the noise of their wings was as the noise of chariots and many horses running to battle. … Scripture reference – Joel: 2:5
10 And they had tails like to scorpions: and there were stings in their tails. And their power was to hurt men, five months. And they had over them … Scripture reference – Rev.: 9:19
11 A king, the angel of the bottomless pit (whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon [3] and in Greek Apollyon, in Latin Exterminans).
12 One woe is past: and behold there come yet two woes more hereafter. … Scripture reference – Rev.: 11:14

The Sixth Trumpet

13 ¶ And the sixth angel sounded the trumpet: and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before the eyes of God, … Scripture reference – Rev.: 8:7!
14 Saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet: Loose the four angels who are bound in the great river Euphrates.
15 And the four angels were loosed, who were prepared for an hour, [4] and a day, and a month, and a year: for to kill the third part of men.
16 And the number of the army of horsemen was twenty thousand times ten thousand. And I heard the number of them.
17 And thus [5] I saw the horses in the vision. And they that sat on them had breastplates of fire and of hyacinth and of brimstone. And the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions: and from their mouths proceeded fire and smoke and brimstone.
18 And by these three plagues was slain the third part of men, by the fire and by the smoke and by the brimstone which issued out of their mouths.
19 For the power of the horses is in their mouths and in their tails. For, their tails are like to serpents and have heads: and with them they hurt. … Scripture reference – Rev.: 9:10
20 And the rest of the men, who were not slain by these plagues, did not do penance from the works of their hands, that they should not adore devils and idols of gold and silver and brass and stone and wood, which neither can see nor hear nor walk: … Scripture reference – Rev.: 2:21; 16:9;Dan.: 5:23
21 Neither did they penance from their murders nor from their sorceries nor from their fornication nor from their thefts. … Scripture reference – Rev.: 2:21; 16:11
(DRV)

[1] -Ver. 1. A star: Lucifer. This is confirmed by the words, the key of the bottomless pit. This key was given to the fallen star, and therefore the star is an individual.
Bottomless pit: abode of the damned with the devils and the demons.
[2] -Ver. 5. Five months: the general period of a locust plague is about five months.
[3] -Ver. 11. Abaddon: i.e., destruction. Apollyon: I.e., destroyer.
[4] -Ver. 15. Who had been kept ready for the hour: the loosing of the angels would take place at a definite period, the year, month, day and hour of which are known, in accordance with the Providence of God.
[5] -Ver. 17. The Greek text is usually punctuated to read, “I saw. . . the horses and those who sat on them. . . , having. . . ..

If you can "legally" murder someone, then you own them like property (supposedly), in that case property can (supposedly) be disposed of any way the "owner" chooses. This is the fruits of Roe v. Wade. The same Diabolic asinine illogic was applied in the Dred Scott case by the Freemasonic US Supreme Court.

Rotherham, Political Correctness, & The Rape Of Common Sense | The American Conservative

Rotherham, Political Correctness, & The Rape Of Common Sense By ROD DREHER • August 27, 2014, 8:21 AM

Chris / cc

About the systematic rape and sexual abuse of 1,400 — that’s one thousand four hundred — girls in a single English city by groups of men, The New York Times (of all places!) doesn’t mince words in talking about who did this, and to whom they did it:

The vast majority of perpetrators have been identified as South Asian and most victims were young white girls, adding to the complexity of the case. Some officials appeared to believe that social workers pointing to a pattern of sexual exploitation were exaggerating, while others reportedly worried about being accused of racism if they spoke out. The report accused officials of ignoring “a politically inconvenient truth” in turning a blind eye to men of Pakistani heritage grooming vulnerable white girls for sex.

More:

Some officials were apparently ordered by their managers to withhold information on the ethnic origin of the abusers, the report said. As a result, no contact was made with local Pakistani leaders for help in identifying gangs that continued to assault and abduct teenagers.

It beggars belief how sick and corrupt so many English people have become. My God, you let men rape and torture your daughters, but don’t dare say anything because somebody, somewhere, might call you a racist, or a fellow traveler with the BNP?

The Guardian writes:

Council and other officials sometimes thought youth workers were exaggerating the exploitation problem. Sometimes they were afraid of being accused of racism if they talked openly about the perpetrators in the town mostly being Pakistani taxi drivers.

More:

Jahangir Akhtar, the former deputy leader of the council, is accused in the report of naivety and potentially “ignoring a politically inconvenient truth” by insisting there was not a deep-rooted problem of Pakistani-heritage perpetrators targeting young white girls. Police told the inquiry that some influential Pakistani councillors in Rotherham acted as barriers to communication on grooming issues.

And:

A mortgage adviser who drove a BMW and owned several properties promised to treat a 13-year old “like a princess”. Another man pulled the hair of a 13-year old and called her a “white bitch” when she tried to reject his attempt to strip her.

Straight-up, violent, sexist racism. But the Rotherham police and politicians turned a blind eye.

It’s not only reverse-racist political correctness at fault. If you read the entire report, you see a bureaucracy rife with dysfunction. A crude, sexist, macho culture within the police force is partially to blame. Disgusting men.

Over 1,400 female children treated like animals, by animals. And aside from the Council leader who voluntarily resigned yesterday, not one of the people responsible for this moral outrage will be punished. Not one.


Ed West at The Spectator nails it:

‘I didn’t want to appear racist’ is truly the ‘I was only obeying orders’ of our time. 

… Political correctness was supposed to make us nicer, but in reality it just makes people stupider. As anyone who has done any sort of online test will tell you, much of human intelligence comes down to pattern recognition; the whole purpose of political correctness is to stop us noticing patterns even when they stare us in the face.

British progressives, let’s not hear another word about how the sacrosanct nature of the Catholic Church contributed to the sexual exploitation of children by priests until you face up to the fact that the values of political correctness on the matter of race and ethnicity contributed to the sexual exploitation of children by these Pakistanis. Catholicism doesn’t “cause” clerical sexual abuse any more than anti-racism “causes” Pakistanis sex gangs to rape children. But a big part of the meaning of Rotherham is that Rotherham authorities were willing to sacrifice the humanity of at least 1,400 little girls to the god of political correctness.

And you watch: some progressives are even now worrying more about people thinking the Wrong Thing about Pakistani men than they are about these children, their rapists, the potential anti-white race hatred of the children’s rapists, and how the authorities failed those children.

Posted in Crime and Punishment, Political Correctness, UK/Europe. Tagged Britain, Pakistani, political correctness, rape, Rotherham, UK.



Human Trafficking in Israel | Veterans Today 

Human Trafficking in Israel

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights obligates nations to respect and safeguard all individuals within their territory, as well as prevent, investigate and prosecute violations of their rights.

by Stephen Lendman

In February 2003, the Tel Aviv-based Hotline for Migrant Workers (HMW) published a report titled, “Modern Slavery and Trafficking in Human Beings in Israel,” saying:

“In September 2002, a new ‘Deportation Police’ (Immigration Administration) was set up (to) expel 50,000 migrant workers” by year end 2003. Unprecedented in scope at the time, it reflected Israel’s longstanding “official policy towards migrant labor.”

HMW’s report showed a pattern of denying migrant workers basic rights “to such an extent as to result in modern slavery and trafficking in human beings.”

Ever since Israel allowed non-Palestinian migrant workers entry in the early 1990s, their rights steadily eroded. More recently, HMW said:

“Its primary manifestations include debt bondage, restrictions and violations of basic human freedoms, and renting and selling of workers,” policies ongoing today.

Beneficiaries include employers, employment agencies and smugglers, reducing human beings to chattel. Though aware of the problem, authorities have done little to prevent it. Moreover, they’re complicit by binding workers to employers, not enforcing applicable laws, and arbitrarily deporting migrant workers called “illegal” for reasons like refusing to work for abusive employers at low pay under degrading or sub-human conditions.

In fact, combined, these policies facilitate “conditions of slavery and trafficking in human beings in Israel,” made possible by:

    – companies recruiting workers abroad;

    – using exploitative employment service intermediaries;

    – binding workers contractually to a single employer;

    – extracting large fees up to $15,000, entrapping them in debt; in fact, importing workers solely for that purpose;

    – paying below legal minimum wages and extracting large overcharges for food and housing;

    – providing sub-human living conditions;

    – restricting worker freedoms;

    – confiscation of passports;

    – letting employees terminate workers unilaterally, leaving them vulnerable to jailing and deportation;

    – letting them sell workers to other companies like chattel; and

    – overall affording no legal rights under international law.

International Law Prohibitions on Slavery and Human Trafficking

Paragraph 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:

    “No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.”

The 1926 Convention on Slavery, amended by the UN in 1953, prohibited slavery in all forms, defining it in Article I (1) and (2) as:

    “the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, (including) capture, acquisition or disposal of a person with intent to reduce him to slavery….”

The UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children (called the Palermo Protocol or Trafficking Protocol) defines the practice as follows in Article 3:

    “Trafficking in persons shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability, or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs….”

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights obligates nations to respect and safeguard all individuals within their territory, as well as prevent, investigate and prosecute violations of their rights.

Other relevant laws include:

    – the UN Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others;

    – the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women;

    – the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children; and

    – the UN Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air.

Like many other nations, including America, Israel ignores them all, despite its own laws protecting migrants as human beings. As a result, HMW said:

“By focus(ing) on punishing foreign workers while ignoring their rights,” Israel treats them “as objects that can be brought in and sent back, imported and allocated as quotas, transferred from one employer to another, bought and sold, exploited and deported.”

At the same time, Israel calls this “an effective and humane solution that will reduce or totally eliminate the number of illegal aliens in Israel.” In fact, it facilitates human trafficking and modern slavery, affording migrant workers no rights, leaving them vulnerable to the will of employers and state authorities. “In the final analysis, a heavy price is being paid, not only by the migrant workers themselves, but by all citizens of Israel.”
Israel’s Proposed New Slavery Law

On March 28, 2011, Haaretz writer Merav Michaeli headlined “The Modern slavery law,” saying:

The Knesset Interior and Environmental Committee was considering legislation “that would yoke foreign nursing-care workers to a specific employer and area of the country,” preventing them from leaving voluntarily. However, enactment will circumvent Israel’s 2006 High Court ruling that limiting them this way constitutes illegal modern slavery.

Debate occurred at the same time authorities avoided negotiating with striking social workers to enforce greater pressure for low pay. “Indeed, before the import of foreign caregivers, there were many more Israeli (ones), both men and women, employed under much better working conditions.”

As a result, dependent elderly or disabled people must choose between a poorly paid foreign caregiver or expensive nursing facility. In contrast, government officials see no “problem in exploiting weakened, aging citizens (as well as) subjugating even weaker” caregivers, afforded no rights.

On March 24, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) addressed the same problem in an analysis headlined, “The ‘Slavery Law’ and Beyond: New Bills Targeting Foreign Residents,” saying the Knesset is considering three bills to restrict the legal status of non-Jews in Israel. If enacted, their basic rights will be more compromised on the pretext of reforming current immigration policy.

(1) The “Slavery Law”

Mainly affecting migrant women, the first bill restricts nurses and caregivers, giving the Interior Minister power to bind them to employers or specific work like caring solely for the elderly, disabled or minors, as well as in one location. Violators would be arrested and deported. As explained above, Israel’s High Court ruled this illegal.

(2) A second bill stipulates that persons remaining in Israel illegally may acquire legal status only after a 1 – 10 year “cooling period” outside the country. It applies to:

– spouses of Israeli residents and citizens;

– parents of Israeli minors, disregarding their welfare;

– children and elderly parents of Israeli residents and citizens;

– non-citizens;

– native Negev Bedouins, Israeli citizens afforded no rights;

– migrant workers;

– victims of human trafficking;

– humanitarian cases; and

– others.

Persons this bill mostly harms will be families of Israeli citizens and non-citizen spouses, parents and children. Moreover, Israel’s High Court addressed this issue in 1999 and 2006, ruling it illegal to require non-resident spouses of Israeli citizens to leave the country before or until their status is clarified. The Court also said doing so fails the proportionality test because of the harm caused to married couples’ rights.

(3) The third bill establishes a Justice Ministry immigration and status tribunal. As part of the executive branch, justices will be allowed to rule with no public or oral debate. Authorities will also be exempt from “presenting various documents to the court and will be allowed to demand ex-parte hearings (where one party isn’t present or given notice of court proceedings).”

If enacted, it will thus subvert “every rule of natural justice” by giving the Justice and Interior Ministries total authority over immigrants and non-Jews. These ministries will then have extrajudicial power to determine policies, “introduce procedures, execute them, judge them, and” decide on their legality, irrespective of Israeli and international law.

Increasingly in Israel, the rule of law is null and void, mainly affecting the most vulnerable, including migrant non-Jewish workers.
A Final Comment

A previous article discussed revoking East Jerusalemites’ status, accessed through the following link:

East Jerusalem Palestinians: Lawlessly Revoking Their Status

On May 11, Haaretz writer Akiva Eldar headlined, “Israel admits it covertly cancelled residency status of 140,000 Palestinians,” saying:

It affects those traveling abroad between 1967 and 1994, “in a new document obtained by Haaretz.” During that period, “Palestinians who wished to travel abroad via Jordan were ordered to leave their ID cards at the Allenby Bridge border crossing,” exchanging them for another valid for three years.

Palestinians not renewing them on time were no longer residents. The document includes no warning or information about the process, leaving travelers uninformed and vulnerable, including students studying abroad, businessmen, and laborers who worked in the Gulf.

The Center for the Defense of the Individual said that:

“mass withdrawal of residency rights from tens of thousands of West Bank residents, tantamount to permanent exile from their homeland, remains an illegitimate demographic policy and a grave violation of international law.”

Article 13 (1) and (2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in fact, states:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.”

Moreover, “(e)veryone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”

Israel, of course, ignores international laws and standards, especially for Palestinians and its Arab citizens.