Arguing for Infanticide, Part 3

(Announcer:) This is the Alan Keyes Radio Show: America's Wake-Up Call.

Keyes: And I'm going to live up to the name of this show today, if it takes all day. Okay? WAKE UP OUT THERE! WHAT ARE WE DOING IN THIS COUNTRY? THIS IS AN ALARM SOUNDING!

Our conscience is being destroyed, systematically, by people who claim to be our intellectual leaders, and betters, and who turn out to be nothing but contemptible little monsters, trying to turn us into their like.

And if I sound angry about this, I am. I am angry and deeply concerned for the future of my country. We will not survive this kind of deep-dyed moral corruption in our intellect. We won't. In our heart, in our moral conscience and principles.
==================

(response to caller)

People are coming forward to give intellectual respectability to killing our children -- not in some metaphoric sense; not just in the context of the abortion controversy and the murders already taking place in the womb -- but now to stand forward and say that we should just be able, new mothers, to kill their children, and we shouldn't treat them badly, we shouldn't make an adverse judgment. This is where it all leads.

And I think you are absolutely right. When are the guys in the churches, and in the pulpits, going to wake up to the fact that their silence about abortion is now leading to the point where these people can come forward and advocate, openly, murder on grounds that eventually will extend to anybody we please?

(Caller:) Does it have an end?

Keyes: I think that if we don't start to get back to where we belong, it doesn't have an end. There is no limit to the horrors that we are going to see perpetrated, because we have thrown away our conscientious belief in the one thing that can protect us from this kind of deep-dyed intellectual depravity and corruption -- and that is the great principle our founders gave us: we are, all of us, created equal. And we are endowed -- not by certain "moral traits," but by God almighty -- with our unalienable rights. Throw that idea out the window, and there is no limit to the evil that men do.

(Break)

No, this is not another show. I have dispensed, today, with the Frist countdown. We’ll resume it. But I've got to tell you, talking -- even tongue in cheek -- about the countdown to communist domination of the world pales in comparison to what I am talking about today. Why are we sitting here worrying about whether the communists are going to take over the world, or whether thugs in Beijing are going to take over the world, when we are sitting in the midst of a time when we have elites in this country who want to turn us into thugs, who want to make us no better than those we have fought, and fought, and fought, in this century, in order to determine a better destiny for the future of mankind?

So I dispense with the countdown today, because I think we are actually, in truth, in danger of something far more significant than communist domination. Because that becomes absolutely inevitable, maybe even irrelevant, if we have already been dominated in our hearts and conscience by these depraved arguments, by this depraved abandonment of every principle that makes it worth supporting this nation, that makes it the nation we love.

This hasn't just pushed a button, by the way. This isn't about pushing buttons, and getting a little upset. Because, as you know, this isn't just a talk show. This is about the truth. And the truth is that this now appears on the horizon . . . And I want you to think carefully about the timing of this. Mr. Pinker's article, which I know have here in front of me -- "Why They Kill Their Newborns: A mother who murders her baby commits an immoral act, but not necessarily a pathological one. Neonaticide may be a product of maternal wiring." This kind of filth appearing in front of us now. When did it appear?

It appeared on the second of November, two days before the election in which Christy Todd Whitman, whose support of partial-birth infanticide defines today, for the moment, the extreme in our politics, was up for re-election. And by proxy, Bill Clinton's continued veto of the partial-birth abortion bill was up for re-election. And in that context, the New York Times Magazine chooses to print this piece, which purports to stand at an even further extreme than Whitman, and present arguments that would make it intellectually respectable to consider infanticide. Do you think that was an accident? Because I don't think it was.

And that's why I said last hour: the "pro-life" individuals, so-called, who went in to support Whitman -- they may not have known what they were doing -- but I think they become part, in that process, of an effort to deeply corrupt the American conscience. They cooperated, wittingly or unwittingly, in that effort. Because they helped to legitimize the notion that Christy Whitman wasn't the extremist, a notion that is, of course, further buttressed by the appearance of an article like this, talking openly about infanticide.

Do you get it? I hope you get this, because these are the games being played with our hearts and with our heads, to prepare us for things that are not, in any sense whatsoever, games at all. We are playing here with the most awesome kind of fire. And you would think we would know better, because that fire has scorched the earth quite literally in the course of this century. So many people already have died because of this kind of progression toward evil.

(to be continued)

KEYES 2000!!!!!!

Your donation now will make it possible for Dr. Keyes to run for President in 2000.

Send e-mail to davidq@SoCA.com to find out how you can help.

Alan Keyes Showroom