One of my all-time favorite television dramas aired through the 1990s, an NBC cop procedural called Homicide: Life on the Streets. Gritty, thought-provoking compellingly acted, heartbreaking — it never garnered blockbuster-level ratings, but plugged away for seven seasons, yielding top-shelf and elevating entertainment. Definitely, must-see TV in my world.
One H: Lots episode opened with a brief scene of a suspect in “the box” — the program’s forbidding interrogation room. As a series regular peers through one-way glass at a slack-jawed, blank-eyed “perp”, he turns to a fellow detective and contemptuously snaps, “Crime makes you stupid.”
Reading the other day about Biana Coons and Cristobal Ruiz, a slightly adjusted version of that mordant maxim leapt to mind: Wickedness makes you stupid. The Scriptures indicate the Creator agrees: “[T]hey are insane with their idols”, He announced centuries ago about those who rejected His ways (Jeremiah 50:38); and “[t]he nations are deranged”. (Jeremiah 51:7) (NKJV)
About Coons/Ruiz, National Review’s Jack Crowe reports,
An Idaho couple filed suit last week against a New Mexico Planned Parenthood affiliate for costs associated with raising their two-year-old son, who was born “jaundiced and ill” after they unsuccessfully attempted to abort him … Coons and her boyfriend Cristobal Ruiz travelled 700 miles to a New Mexico Planned Parenthood in February 2016 to abort their third child.
After receiving an unsuccessful drug-induced abortion, Coons was told that she could receive a second procedure free of charge in Idaho”. [How’s that work – does PP provide a “free abortion” coupon?] Upon returning to Idaho, Coons, then nine weeks pregnant, realized that she could not receive a free procedure”. [Thus confirming things can get exasperatingly complicated when attempting to kill your child.] She gave birth to a son in August 2016. [How will this lad feel if ever he reads about this someday?]
Crowe summarizes, “The couple is seeking $765,000 for the cost of providing for ‘an additional unplanned child,’ as well as damages for emotional stress, criminal negligence, and breach of contract, among other charges.”
From a purely legal standpoint, I get the “breach of contract” gripe. But the suit is otherwise convoluted on multiple fronts; particularly: Why should Planned Parenthood be responsible for picking up the tab for rearing a child the parents arranged to eliminate but ultimately decided to keep?
This much seems increasingly evident: Whether considering an individual, family, community or nation, willful and prolonged indulgence in depravity carries an ugly consequence: reasoning ability grows corroded, corrupted, eventually curdled beyond salvaging. Clear thinking becomes muddled, then extinguished altogether. Cutting to the gloomy bottom line: stubborn sinfulness makes people kinda crazy.
How else to account for the aforementioned litigious duo’s head-spinningly warped judgment?
Let’s spell it out once more: when baby boy inconsiderately survived Coons and Ruiz’s slaughterous scheme, they — thankfully — gave up on snuffing him and voluntarily elected to raise him, instead. So Babycide, Inc., which bungled the intended fatal procedure, is obligated to foot the bill for his upbringing because …?
Coons/Ruiz’s contention is only slightly less unhinged than another piece of deadly daffiness trending lately: the “right” of a mother to kill her offspring as it is actively emerging from the womb; or even during its initial moments alive in the outside world if the attempted abortion hasn’t done the trick.
Regarding that latter option, a few days ago, radio host Stu Burguiere incredulously queried: What conceivable, reasonable “justification” can be patched together for executing an infant post-birth? The noxious little “inconvenience”, after all, is no longer inside the woman’s body; she doesn’t have to endure it any more. It’s near guaranteed there are households lined up to embrace as a bundle of joy what had been an uninvited intrusion into her existence — a more redemptive alternative that’s also an “a” word: adoption.
Bio-mom’s responsibilities? Vacated. Her “problem”? Solved. Whisk the tot out of the delivery room and into welcoming arms awaiting it elsewhere. Since its sight is obviously so unbearable for mom, the child can now expeditiously be removed from her presence.
But destroy it? What respectable purpose does that serve?
None, of course. No intellectually defensible rationale remains, on any level, for that terminal solution. Then again, a psyche wrecked by immersion in evil doesn’t need one. It’s moved beyond that requirement.
Back to the Idaho couple — a suggestion: hand over the tyke to a family that never would’ve contemplated his purposeful demise in the first place. One that will gladly bear the dollar-and-cents burden of his care. No fuss, no muss, the birth parents can move forward, never glancing back, focusing unencumbered on whatever it is they do value.
That said, you’ll pardon my not being surprised if they stick with the lawsuit route.
And apparently it’s not just civilians who’ve contracted a dose of degeneracy dementia. Take, for example, some of our nation’s political paladins: Vermont Senator/presidential candidate Bernie Sanders recently uncorked this to CNN: “[O]ur kids and grandchildren have the human right to grow up in a planet that is healthy and inhabitable.”
Presumably, the outspokenly abortion-supporting lawmaker (“100% lifetime pro-choice voting record”) understands that, in order to “grow up”, America’s upcoming generation has to first make it through childbirth.
Do murdered children ever “grow up”, Mr. Senator?
How’s about another Oval Office aspirant? Lamenting 2012’s hideous Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, California Senator Kamala Harris lately glowered,
[S]omebody should have required all those members of Congress to … look at the autopsy photographs of those babies. …You can be in favor of the Second Amendment and also understand that there is no reason in a civil society that we have assault weapons around communities that can kill babies …
Did I hear “babies” in that statement? Twice? The same term used for those upon which she and her party declare open season if their mamas don’t want them?
I’d call that a decided mental disconnect.
Indeed, power-wielding elected official or regular guy, when folks defy common sense obstinately enough, their common sense-o-meters suffer permanent, sometimes lethal, damage.
The wages of sin? Death, certainly (Romans 6:23). For good measure, we can throw dangerous doltishness into the mix, as well.
Image: Excerpted from: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/head-brain-man-face-human-607480/