From: David Foss
What kind of a nation have we become when puppies and kittens are cherished more than babies?
Here is a graphic example. There are ten people standing near a busy roadway. Suddenly they see a puppy in the middle of the road and oncoming traffic is quickly approaching the puppy. All ten of these individuals rush onto the road and save the puppy from imminent death. Then they see a kitten in the middle of the road and all of them rush onto the road and save the kitten. Now they see a baby in the middle of the road and only one person rushes reluctantly onto the highway to save the baby. When this person and the baby are safely off the road, the other nine individuals become enraged. Why? Someone had just saved a defenseless baby! This response to the saving of a life might seem highly improbable and heartless when life was in the balance, but such an unconcerned response is not at all uncommon in todayís America. Need proof? Come to the defense of the defenseless - the unborn.
No one will throw a fit if someone saves a puppy or a kitten. He or she will be honored with all kinds of pats on the back, even national coverage on television. Many grateful and praiseworthy words will be lavished upon this person; however, when someone tries to save a babyís life, this person is apt to be scorned, mocked and even carted off to prison. Is such barbarism (the taking of innocent life) pleasing to God?
People save puppies and kittens and dogs and cats because they are cute, cuddly, and wanted. Well, shouldnít babies be wanted so much more than any animal? Shouldnít a babyís life be considered much more precious than an animalís life?
We never hear of stomach-churning things being said or done to those who save animals, but be prepared to pay the price for doing what is right - saving unwanted babies. Why does this abominable albatross exist in America today? Could it be that America has become slowly desensitized to wrongfulness - things that are shocking?
If a husband punches his pregnant wife in the stomach, and the baby dies, the husband will be convicted of voluntary baby slaughter. However, if the husbandís wife has an abortion, she will not be indicted of homicide. Why not? Where did this ill-gotten, illogical rationalization come from - from heaven or from the pit of hell?
What do we call the premeditated extermination of a baby today? Do we call this infanticide a mercy killing (1) Because the baby would be going into a home where it would not be wanted? (2) Because the baby has a defect of some kind? (3) Because the baby would be a financial burden on the parents? (4) Because the baby would be an inconvenience? (5) Because the baby would not be wanted by anyone else (huh!) anyway, etc.? Yes, we can always think of some satanic, worldly excuses to relieve our consciences of the responsibility of parenthood and of the destroying of human life.
Every baby and every pregnancy should bring jubilation into our hearts, not death-dealing inclination or intention. If any adult, teenager or child (toddlers included) were in danger and we didnít help in any way, we would be called many names (cowards being one of them). However, where are those who become enraged when no one helps those who are defenseless, those who are in danger of losing their lives - the unborn. Have we become so desensitized that even the extermination of the most innocent doesnít penetrate and bother our consciences? Are we akin to an assassin when we donít even raise our voices in protest of such barbarity? Would God be pleased with our inaction? Would He consider us as accomplices to a holocaust?
Ponder Isaiah 44:2a 24 Jeremiah 1:5 Revelation 21:8