Please watch this video and then consider the comments below.

Okay, so presumably you have watched the video above. First of all, understand, we do not promote this mans decision to take the action he chose. He will face the Lord Jesus Christ one day and will be judged by a righteous judge, just as we all will for our sins. I don't want to speak to that. What I do want to speak to is the irony of the trial. The man was on trial for taking the life of a man who had been taking the lives of countless innocent unborn children (who were supposed to be safe within their mothers womb) for the last thirty some years.

Let's put this in a different context. Let's say those thousands of mothers wanted their children, and didn't consent to their lives being taken, that the "doctor" in question had performed the same procedure (taking the lives of the mothers children whilst still in the protection of their own wombs) and that the mothers, instead of being pleased, that the very same "procedure" was carried out, were outraged.  Under these conditions, undoubtedly the "doctor" would have been referred to as a serial killer and most people would, perhaps, not blink an eye that Mr. Roeder avenged the unborn (and their mothers). They would no doubt decry his methods, but would recognize that countless wrongs had been righted.

Let's alter the scenario a bit more and say Mr. Roeder merely performed a citizens arrest of this serial killer and brought him before the authorities. Many would applaud him as a hero, for bringing a known serial killer to justice. But somehow, the act of killing a child in its mothers womb goes from unthinkable and horrific, when the mother doesn't want it, but perfectly fine and acceptable when she does.  Understand that the child is the one being killed, not the mother.  No matter the scenario, there is always one victim, the unborn child.

Mr. Roeder made a good point in his testimony, the children in the womb were people, who's lives were cut very short.  For over 30 years the justice system did nothing. Funny how society abuses language to justify a desired activity, and condemns people when their outrage produces undesirable results.  The lawyers and the judge say Mr. Roeder murdered the abortionist, but used the sanitary term of abortion for the murder of countless unborn children. They indicate that what he did by killing one man in defense of the unborn is horrible, but that the doctor's acts of "aborting" the unborn are applaudable. Am I the only person thinking that this is the epidamy of hypocrasy, stupidity and evil?

If a woman was being raped and a man killed the assailant in the process of protecting her (the innocent), he would be a hero. Funny how people see things.

Just thinking out loud.