* If You Haven't Signed the Colorado Personhood Petition: Virtually everyone at the RMCF meeting signed Colorado's Brady Amendment personhood petition! Why are creationists are pro-life? Because they know that we haven't evolved from animals, but we're made in God's image! If you haven't yet signed please call Colorado RTL at 303-753-9394 to get a petition mailed to you. And if you're out of state, PLEASE call CRTL or go to their ColoradoRTL.org site and click on donate to give for the petition drive! Thanks.-Bob Enyart
Replying to Ron Paul's Facebook Supporters
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline
* A Christian from Asks for Reconsideration: Bob Enyart replies to a thread started by Larry on ARTL's Facebook Page in defense of Ron Paul.
* The Bible and Paul's Claim that Abortion is a States' Rights Matter: The claim is that the very principles of justice (i.e., God Himself) would have federal governments tolerate a state's decriminalization of murder generally, or decriminalization of murder for any particular group of victims. (Whether the victims would be Jews, Christians, or children, the principles remain the same.)
The Bible's teachings on the fundamental principles of justice can benefit not only America, of course, but any nation at any time in history. Further, Israel's 12 tribes are sufficiently similar to America's original 13 states to draw some lessons regarding "states' rights." For the Bible is not silent on the question of whether subdivisions of a national (federal) government have the authority to refrain from prosecuting the murder of the innocent. The Bible approves of local law enforcement, even local prosecution for murder (Deut. 21:1-9). But Scripture indicates that there is no local right to refrain from the prosecution of murder.
- Negative Evidence: No Scripture says the king should tolerate tribes that permit murder.
- Affirmative Evidence: The Book of Judges chapter 21 teaches that God does not recognize a local right to decide whether or not to prosecute murder. Rather, when one of the twelve tribes of Israel refused to prosecutethe murder of a concubine, for that lawlessness, the rest of the nation was justly outraged and moved to action, and with God's endorsement, they lawfully used force to punish Benjamin including of course any local authorities and magistrates who "would not listen..."
"So all the men of Israel were gathered... united together as one man. Then the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, 'What is this wickedness that has occurred among you? Now therefore, deliver up the men... that we may put them to death and remove the evil from Israel!' But the children of Benjamin would not listen to the voice of their brethren, the children of Israel. ... [So] The LORD defeated Benjamin before Israel. And the children of Israel destroyed that day twenty-five thousand one hundred Benjamites; all these drew the sword. Judges 20:11-13, 35
God's Word makes it clear that there is no "right" for a state to decriminalize murder nor to refuse to prosecute murder. As in Benjamin, such a "right" is tantamount to lawlessness. And such lawlessness, being manifestly destructive of all rights, cannot itself be an instance of any "right", state or otherwise. Righteous anger at any federal government does not validate perversion of justice. Those angered at a wicked federal government should exercise self control to avoid claiming that the evil government can go ahead and look the other way and ignore crimes committed anywhere within its borders against the innocent. It's hard to image evangelical Christians being killed in Massachusetts rejecting protection from federal marshalls; but it's easier to claim state supremacy when the blood is not one's own. Claiming that any subdivision of government, whether state, district, tribe, or province, should be tolerated even if it decriminalizes the shedding of innocent blood is an example of giving man's law supremacy over God. No true principle of justice, but only unrighteosness, would lead a nation to tolerate murder within its borders, whether of concubines (Israel), of Jews (Germany), or children (America).
Ron Paul is pro-choice state by state: "While Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid." 1-31-06 and he has long promoted the Libertarian Party even though:
* The Libertarian Party is Officially Pro-choice: Libertarian Party platform: "I.8 Reproductive Rights ... We oppose government actions that... prohibit abortion..."
* Paul Promotes the Immoral Libertarian Party: Libertarian Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination and remains on "good terms" with the Libertarian Party and spoke at its 2004 national convention and he has never repudiated them even though the Libertarian Party is viciously immoral and officially: pro-legalized abortion, pro-legalized homosexuality, pro-legalized pornography, pro-legalized adultery, pro-legalizing crack cocaine, pro-legalized suicide, and pro-legalized euthanasia, pro-legalizing prostitution, and against protecting marriage between a man and a woman, The Libertarian Party is based on a humanist rather than on a Judeo-Christian worldview and thus has misguided notions of governance and no compass for righteousness in law.
* Revisionists Libertarian Pro-Lifers: Typical Claim: The federal government gave us abortion with the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade. What makes anyone think the federal government will end abortion?
Truth: The states began "legalizing" child killing with 19 states permitting abortion for various reasons in the seven years before Roe (MS, CO, CA, OR, NC, NY, AK, HI, WA, FL, AL, AR, DE, GA, KS, MD, NM, SC, VA) including a number with virtual abortion on demand like New York which allowed abortion through six months.
* Paul's ‘Life' Bills Allow Abortion in the States: Sanctity of Life Act of 2007: "the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review... any case arising out of any statute... on the grounds that such statute... regulates--(A) the performance of abortions." Sec. 3(2) (consistent with other Paul bills)
* Paul's Bills Even Violate Constitution: Ron Paul would allow the use of government authority to deprive innocent children of life and liberty. Paul would require the federal government to violate the U.S. Constitution and tolerate child killing, rejecting the 5th and 14th Amendment: "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
* Libertarians Assert that Authorizing Murder Falls Under State's Rights: States prosecute murder. They do not have the right to decriminalize murder. God gives no country, state, or any subdivision of government permission to tolerate the intentional killing of the innocent. The federal and state relationship is irrelevant to the legalization of abortion. If a neighboring country legalized the killing of Christians, Jews, children, or any class of person not convicted of a capital crime, it thereby commits an act of war that would justify invasion. God won't and pro-lifers must not give a pass to the federal government to look the other way when American states authorize child slaughter.
* Personally Pro-life Means Officially Pro-choice: American RTL Action opposes candidates who are personally pro-life. The official position of someone who wants to be a governing official matters. If an official is personally against lynching blacks, killing Jews, and aborting kids but will officially tolerate such crimes, we will oppose him.
* Constitutional States' Rights are Side Deals: Ron Paul promotes a confused view of states' rights that suggests that the federal government can apathetically look the other way if the states authorize the killing of innocent human beings. No side deal that human beings make between themselves can exempt them from obligation to enforce God's enduring command, Do not murder. So even if the U.S. Constitution explicitly stated that most blacks would be counted for appropriations reasons as three-fifths of a person, or if it explicitly stated that the states have the right to decide whether to authorize the killing of Jews or unborn children, such provisions would be unjust and should not be defended under some perverse understanding of governmental principles but should be opposed by all.
* And Then You Can Kill the Baby PBA Fiasco: Ron Paul voted for the partial birth abortion ban. Any law that ends with "and then you can kill the baby" is a bad law. Thus the PBA ban is a bad law. The U.S. Supreme Court in April 2007 upheld this wicked child-killing regulation in the most brutally vicious decision ever issued by an American court. In their majority Gonzales v. Carhart ruling the court advocated "an injection that kills the fetus" and "less shocking methods" of killing the same late-term children, and the ban explicitly keeps partial-birth abortion legal declaring that the baby can be delivered up to "the navel" and then terminated, turning this ruling into a virtual PBA manual.
* "States' Rights" Violated by Advocate Ron Paul: Ron Paul, in violation of what he sees as a states' rights principle, voted for the federal partial birth abortion ban imposed upon the states. Paul rightly chastised the pro-life movement (which had been led by National RTL) for sponsoring the unprincipled PBA ban, but then he voted for this federal legislation violating not only God's enduring law but also his own states' rights principles even though he acknowledged his fear that this "pro-life" law "does more harm than good" by corrupting the principles of life and further undermining the possibility of legally protecting human life from fertilization. Paul gets a lot of funding from misled conservatives who also gave popular support to the evil PBA ban, so rather than risk alienating these voters, on the House floor Paul lambasted the law, and then voted for it.
* Libertarian President will Punt the Killing of Kids: Ron Paul is running for the nomination for president saying that abortion is not a federal issue. A thousand candidates for mayor have put off pro-lifers with the claim that city government has nothing to do with abortion. Candidates for governor have said abortion is a federal matter. Ron Paul is running for president and he says it's a state matter. God grants no such immunity for the tolerance of shedding innocent blood to any level of government (Deut. 21:1-2, 6-7). These candidates pass the buck, and hope to punt the abortion issue because they see it as hurting their chance to gain power.
Monthly Sermon MP3-CDs
Monthly Sermon CDs
Monthly Sermon Videos
Monthly Bible Study Audios
Monthly Bible Study Videos
Monthly Topical Videos
Monthly TV Classics
Monthly Best of Bob
Bible Studies MP3
Bible Studies DVD
BEL Video Library