The Morality of Jackals

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Killing children for ‘research’ or to save the life of another?

The Jackal is in the dog family (Canis Aureus) and is a ravenous medium sized canine that scavenges and is capable of eating just about anything.

In a “Fallout: New Vegas Official Game Guide” to one of the latest modernistic video games is a definition for those who call themselves the Jackals. It is like a page taken out of today’s moral scene in the once great United States of America. To wit:

Ted Cruz 2016


“The Jackals are no more than a handful of scarred and tattooed reprobates, scraping out a living by preying on anything weaker than them.”

This definition can be transferred to the abortion industry with no offense done to the English language and certainly no excessive treatment done to whom it applies or belongs.

Mike Godwin helped to coin the term known as the ‘Godwin’s Law’ in 2010, stated simply, it is that any discussion about something controversial will eventually, if given enough time, end up being compared to something Hitler or the Nazi’s have done.

Woodrow Wilcox


It is when an atrocity goes beyond what the Nazi’s have done that you have something that falls into the ‘morality of jackals’ category.

Speaking of the recent videos (5) in which are seen agents of Planned Parenthood negotiating the price of organs derived from crushed, and in some cases harvested from completely whole babies for sale, Jill Stanek a former nurse and present chairwoman for the Susan B. Anthony List said,

“These videos are actually giving us a glimpse into the abortion world and the callous treatment for profit motive they have on committing abortions, but then making as much money from the victims of abortion that they can, which is something even the Nazis didn’t think of.”

We have hidden these more than four decades behind the well-known phrase “It’s the law of the land.” It has become a paper thin veil for the most contemptable practice on the planet known as abortion, but it is subterfuge, misguided claptrap and deep immorality by any other name.

We think we are far removed from culpability because it was nine judges or dozens of elected representatives who made the decision to waste human lives in the name of hedonism, but we are all complicit.

Who elected these reps and who appointed these judges and exactly who will be asked to give account in the last day? If that question should be too broad for your sense of reasonability then at least ask; who voted to keep Planned Parenthood in bundles of taxpayer’s cash for their operations?

On Monday August 3, 2015 the attempt to defund Planned Parenthood was beaten down by a vote of 53-46. Democrats made up the largest body of yea votes, but were joined by two Republicans as well.

You can see the entire list of names courtesy of author Tim Brown of the Freedom Outpost website in an article entitled “Here are the Senators with the Blood of the Innocent on Their Hands” posted in Bradlee Dean’s Sons of Liberty website.

Can we hide behind the names in that list?

We can no more hide behind these names than abortionists and their supporters can answer the long list of questions they have danced around or ignored for nearly an entire generation. Questions like:

  • What will the recipient of harvested organs think on the day they discover that a baby was murdered to give them a chance to live?
  • When in the history of mankind, other than in our own callous generation, has the ‘rights of women’ been used to excuse the removal of another’s rights? And when has pregnancy ever been called a ‘health issue’ anywhere except here in concupiscent, hedonistic and morally depraved modern day America?
  • Doesn’t abortion defy the idea that all men are created equal and what chance does an unborn baby have for the pursuit of life and liberty? If not immoral, is it at the least, un-American?
  • If the unborn child is part of a woman’s body then why are we allowing the sale of that woman’s body parts?
  • What law of God, biblical or moral taken from any system of ethics in our entire world can compare to the decision known as Roe V. Wade? Does the “law” make anything moral?
  • Isn’t the so called ‘war on women’ actually a veiled reference to the war against everything evil as it pertains to abortion? Isn’t it about life and death rather than women?
  • No one is born as chattel or as property or a slave, parents do not ‘own’ their children as attested by the fact that children cannot be willed to anyone. Why then does the abortionist believe they have the right to life and death over something they have never owned? Only slaves were owned and their masters could kill them with impunity. Is a child the slave of its mother?
  • In almost every state in the nation a person is determined to be legally and clinically dead when brain waves become non-existent. Why are we killing babies whose brainwaves are active and perfectly healthy and calling that – ‘health care?’
  • How does ‘proximity’ fit into or help mitigate the act of murder? If someone decides to kill you in Kentucky is it any less murder if you are killed in nearby Tennessee? Isn’t it amazing that if a child is a few inches removed from the womb it is murder, but only inches before that it is a legal abortion?

Some forty years ago I read a passage in the great prophetic book of Revelation that left me stunned. It referred to some people in the very worst of terms and I was inclined to think that it seemed out of character with much of Christ’s message of love and kindness. Specifically, it was the use of the word “dogs” used in the King James and other major versions of the Bible that I found hard to comprehend.

Nearly a generation later I have finally come to understand that it is not at all extreme or excessive. In today’s world it describes those who have the mentality of Jackals in no uncertain terms. It also promises that they will have no part in the future redemption of mankind.

Speaking of those who will one day gain entrance into the Holy City and have the right to the Tree of Life, he said some would not be allowed in and he did not mince words in describing the nature of the rejected. To wit:

“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” (Rev 22: 13-15)

After half a lifetime of pondering this passage I can say I finally understand why the dogs of this world who don’t allow humans to enter their world, will not be allowed into the next. This is not the language of extremism, but it is the language of justice.

For the moment abortionists have the keys to the gateway or the entrance into our world; they will one day meet with the one who holds the keys to heaven and hell itself.

“I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.” (Rev 1: 18)

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Similar Posts:

Michael Bresciani is the publisher of American since 2005. The website features the articles and reports of Rev Bresciani along with some of America’s best writers and journalists, news and reviews that have earned the site the title of – The Website for Insight. Millions have read his timelyreports and articles in online journals and print publications across the nation and the globe. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
Michael Bresciani
View all articles by Michael Bresciani
Leave a comment with your Facebook login
Print Friendly


  • DCM7

    There are many rationales for abortion being legal, which are fallacious and often contradictory. When it comes right down to it, though, the real rationale is the popular lie that this life is all anyone has, and they need to grab whatever they can while they’re here and step on whoever they need to in order to get it.

    • Bob Ellis

      That was pretty much my outlook when I was pro-abortion. It was “Plan B birth control” to use if needed, to keep my sexual appetites consequence-free. Thank God I never had opportunity to use it; I’d hate to have the death of my son or daughter on my conscience.

      • franklinb23

        Generally, I oppose abortion and think there needs to be stricter laws regarding its use. However, I’m not sure I see that aborting an unborn baby in the second trimester (or even early in the first) is quite the same as terminating a pregnancy within a day or two after conception (which is sometimes when the “morning after” pill is used).

        Do you think there’s an ethical difference between the two?

        I think legal protections should extend to the unborn quite early in the pregnancy: discernible heart beat or brain or lung activity. Absent any of those signs, can we state that it is a “person” with a soul? I’m not so sure about that. I believe even the early Church fathers debated on when this ensoulment occurs.

        • Bob Ellis

          There is really no difference whatsoever in killing an unborn child at two days, two months, or two years.

          An unborn child usually has a heartbeat and developing nervous system before most women know they are pregnant-and by the time the overwhelming majority of abortions occur.

          An unborn child is a genetically unique human being at the moment of conception. At the moment of conception, the unborn child has all of the genetic information it will ever need for the rest of its life; though it will not be fully developed for approx. 20 years, we don’t allow the killing of children at 5 or 15 for convenience. So obviously the level of development is not a legitimate justification for killing an unborn child.

          And while an unborn child in the early stages of development is dependent on its mother for life, a born child is dependent on its parents for life until it is at least a couple of years old. Shall we allow killing toddlers for convenience? They can be pretty darned frustrating at that age…but it’s still murder. My mother, who had multiple strokes and could not feed herself or do anything for herself for the last year or so of her life, was completely dependent on others for her life, yet killing her would have been murder, just as killing an unborn child is murder. Dependence is also not a legitimate justification for killing an unborn child.

          No, we don’t know exactly when a new human being is endowed with a soul. But thanks to our pursuit of science, we now know vastly more than we did 2,000 years ago-even 100 years ago. We might guess that it’s when the brain really begins to function, which is around 8-10 weeks (again, at the stage when the vast majority of abortions are performed). It may also be logical to assume it’s when the brain begins to form, which is at about 5 weeks-before most women know they are pregnant. Since the unborn child is genetically complete, whole and unique at the moment of conception, and is scientifically recognizable as “life” at that moment, it would also be logical to conclude that the soul is endowed at the moment of conception.

          But we can’t know any of this for certain, since the soul (like the “mind”) transcends today’s science and is not measurable or tangible. The wise axiom with all important things has throughout history been “Err on the side of caution.” It would therefore follow that a wise society, in the absence of firm evidence, err on the side of caution and protect innocent human life from the moment of conception on.

          Especially since, as clinical data shows, the overwhelming majority (over 97%) of abortions occur purely for convenience.

          A society that allows murder for the convenience of the murderers is evil, and horrific beyond description.

          • Rev Michael

            Thanks Bob for this word.

          • DCM7

            In short, virtually all abortions are without any justification whatsoever… but those who want them, and those who want to profit from them, really don’t give a rat’s fanny.