The “eco-terrorist” shot to death in Maryland hated humanity, especially unborn children. But this mentality should not be considered out of the mainstream. He was just more of an activist about it. After all, the “womb war” that Alveda King talked about at Glenn Beck’s rally has already cost the lives of more than 50 million children through abortion.

The mission, said the terrorist in his manifesto, was to stop “all programs” on the Discovery Health cable channel which are “encouraging the birth of any more parasitic human infants and the false heroics behind those actions.” He demanded, “Stop all shows glorifying human birthing on all your channels…”

One such program, Birth Day, highlights women giving birth and the struggle to save their infants when there are health problems. A description of the program says, “Whether we’re watching a natural home birth or an emergency c-section in a major metropolitan hospital, the series shares all the ups and downs of labor and delivery, while imparting useful information through the voices of parents, families, doctors, nurses and other caregivers.”

It is not designed to be pro-life, but that seems to be the impact on many people. After all, it seems pretty clear after a baby is born that it is, in fact, a baby, and that it is entitled to the same rights we enjoy.

There are many pro-lifers here and abroad who understand the stakes in this ongoing war on humanity. In fact, in New Zealand, right-to-lifers are considering filing a United Nations complaint alleging that a new government policy encouraging the abortion of unborn children with disabilities constitutes genocide under a global treaty.

Here, a big controversy has emerged in the conservative media over an Obama State Department report to the United Nations that has a few lines about the controversy over Arizona’s immigration law. But the 29-page report to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights has much more that is objectionable.

Consider that the report:

• Talks about the “story of the United States” as one “guided by universal values” but makes no mention of the unique nature of the American experiment and its Judeo-Christian heritage.
• Claims that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered persons have suffered “discrimination” and are still prohibited from joining the military and getting married.
• Says Muslims are denied “fair treatment” and subject to “hate crimes.”
• Praises Obama for signing “financial reform” legislation and a bill to reduce sentencing disparities between powder and crack cocaine offenses.
• Says the Obama Administration is committed to making sure that foreigners murdering American citizens on U.S. soil are given their rights under global treaties.
• Commits the U.S. to the “rights” of incarcerated persons and their “dignity.”
• Says the administration is promoting “alternatives to incarceration.”
• Sings the praises of Obama for “major legislation that expands access to health care for our citizens.”
• Says the U.S. is “a cornerstone in an international system of cooperation to preserve global security.”
• Commits the U.S. to humane treatment of suspected terrorists and protection of their privacy rights.

The few sentences about Arizona’s law consist of:

“A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.”

These lines are objectionable because the U.N. should have no jurisdiction over our borders, but the omissions in the report are just as significant and newsworthy. For example, what about the human rights of America’s unborn? Many of these victims are human beings said to be “defective” or inconvenient in some way. There is a 90 percent plus abortion rate for children diagnosed prenatally with Down syndrome.

This is usually justified under the cover of “choice” but the Right to Life Society of New Zealand notes that the Ministry of Health of the government of New Zealand has instituted an “Antenatal Screening for Down Syndrome and other conditions—Quality Improvements” program. The “quality improvement” program is specifically designed to eliminate those in the womb judged to be abnormal in some way.

“It is the opinion of this Society that the government is guilty of genocide, a crime against humanity which is a violation of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. New Zealand is a signatory to the Convention that was passed by the General Assembly on 9 December 1948,” the organization contends.

It quotes from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which defines genocide as acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. These acts include:

“(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

The Society says, “People with disabilities are the only group of people in New Zealand targeted for selective abortion. Down syndrome, and other conditions that are targeted, are genetic conditions that have no cure…The preventing of birth of a group of people falls within the definition of genocide under international law.”

The Society goes on, “We request that the government cease this screening program. In the event that the screening program is not terminated Right to Life New Zealand will lay a formal complaint with the United Nations [The Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide] against the government of New Zealand for genocide by imposing measures to prevent births of children with Down syndrome.”

There is, of course, no real hope that the United Nations would ever act favorably on such a complaint. And there is even less hope that the Obama Administration, the most pro-abortion in U.S. history, would ever think seriously about making the case for the right to life, which is set forth in our Declaration of Independence, in any report submitted to the U.N.

But we can continue to give much-needed attention to parents like Kurt Kondrich, who runs the “Stop Aborting Down Syndrome Individuals Now” website. He doesn’t have a public relations budget or any high-powered communications professionals working for him. All he has is the love of a Down syndrome child named Chloe. He and his wife met with Sarah Palin, the mother of a Down syndrome child, during the 2008 campaign.

In this age of the new media revolution, however, Kurt has the ability to post provocative and compelling articles about the struggle for life of those without a voice. Politically, Palin has the ability to make a difference by endorsing pro-life candidates, such as Brian Murphy, running for the Republican nomination for governor of Maryland. The “pro-choice” former Republican governor of Maryland, Bob Ehrlich, who is running for his old job, doesn’t want to talk about the Murphy/Palin challenge to his brand of Republicanism. The Republican primary is September 14.

Kurt Kondrich says: “I have since embarked on a mission to make sure people are aware of this genocide. I want people to see the beautiful faces of our kids and realize the priceless Blessings and Gifts they are to a society that has lost focus.”

In New Zealand we may be seeing the future of America under national health care legislation. That is why state challenges to the imposition of Obamacare in the U.S. are so significant. Nationally, Rep. Steve King has introduced a 100 percent Obamacare repeal bill. A discharge petition has been signed by more than 170 members. Once 218 signatures are collected, King could force a vote on his repeal bill which could not be blocked by Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

What lies ahead, if Obamacare goes forward, can be seen in New Zealand. The new government policy in New Zealand was preceded by the completion of a report on the “cost effectiveness” of aborting Down syndrome babies. It was determined that it was just too expensive to allow these babies to live.

One can easily envision such a policy developing under Obamacare, considering that we have a President and an administration that do not regard innocent unborn human beings as life worthy of life.

Share This

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

About the author