Two Court Cases Involving Killers of Innocent Persons
From a public perspective, the pro-life news this week was dominated by the appearance in court of Robert Dear. Dear is the gunman who killed three people and injured nine at a Planned Parenthood center in Colorado Springs, Colorado. During his court appearance, the man with apparent mental problems aligned himself with the pro-life movement and declared he was “a warrior for the babies.”
Judie Brown, president of American Life League, issued an immediate rebuttal of Dear’s claim:
It is mind-boggling that a person who admits to the murder of three persons and the injuries inflicted on nine others could consider himself some kind of fighter for preborn children. The pro-life movement has always condemned the use of violence in defense of the defenseless. For this obviously mentally disturbed individual to try to claim some affinity with those who truly work peacefully and prayerfully to save the lives of preborn children is absurd.
We say to anyone else out there who is tempted to use violence to solve the slaughter of the innocents, “Don’t do it! We do not want or accept your ‘help.’”
If you really want to stop the killing, PRAY. Pray for our president. Pray for our elected officials. Pray for our Supreme Court. Pray for our judges. Pray for the people at Planned Parenthood and other abortionists. Pray for every American who has ever thought of having an abortion. The direct killing of human beings in the womb is satanic. Only God can defeat Satan.
Other news this week concerned the lawsuit brought by the National Abortion Federation against the Center for Medical Progress—the group that released the undercover videos at Planned Parenthood. This week CMP released its response to the lawsuit. It says in part:
CMP’s investigation uncovered extensive evidence in the abortion industry of willingness to engage in criminal practices, including the sale of fetal body parts for profit and the alteration of abortion methods to procure fetal body parts for research, as well as evidence of desensitization toward the highly developed human fetus by practitioners of late-term abortion.
NAF has spun this investigative journalistic endeavor into an eleven-count complaint containing allegations ranging from racketeering and fraud to trespass. Despite months of rhetoric about CMP’s putative “fraud” and “crime spree,” however, for its preliminary injunction motion, NAF relies on only two claims: breach of contract and violation of California Penal Code § 632.
[NAF] cannot show a likelihood of success on these claims, nor can it show a threat of irreparable injury on the basis of the actions of third parties unrelated to Defendants who are strangers to this lawsuit. Moreover, NAF’s requested relief is both unsupported by the evidence and contrary to the public policy against restraining publication of matters of enormous public interest.
PLTW will keep you updated as this court case proceeds.