If the US Supreme Court decided that Americans have the Constitutional right to choose to kill illegal aliens, that would solve the immigration problem. Illegals would be flooding across the Rio Grand -- in the opposite direction. But what would that decision do to our national character? And what has the so-called right to choose to kill womb dwellers done to our character?

Doctors used to heal, now many of them kill. Each year in the USA around 3 million human lives are ended by doctors who use suction to yank their bodies apart and pull them from their mother's womb. And yet only a tiny percentage of Americans seem to care.

If someone does dare to speak out about this terrible injustice, he or she is viciously criticized for exercising his Constitutional right of freedom of speech. I read that since 1973 as many as 60,000 brave Americans have even been put in jail for peacefully protesting in front of the clinics where these killings are committed. Their right of freedom of assembly has been denied.

Those who support these killings call themselves "pro choice" and yet they want to silence those who choose to speak out against what they sincerely believe to be the slaughter of precious human beings. In my heart I see no difference between killing an unborn, a new born, a toddler, or a teenager. Should I be silent?

What if the US Government makes it legal once again to kill native Americans? Should I be silent? If the Supreme court authorizes the right to choose to kill the homeless, should I be silent?

People who protest the execution of convicted murderers are favorably pictured in the media while people who protest the killing of innocent babies are pictured as fanatics. Is that fair? At least the murderer did something to deserve death. The unborn child has done nothing. So which killing is the greatest injustice? If the state shouldn't kill convicted criminals, why should doctors kill the innocent in the womb?

When is it morally right for a doctor to kill an unborn baby?

_____A) Anytime.

_____B) When the US Supreme Court says so.

_____C) When the child inconveniences the mother.

_____D) When the parents wanted a girl instead of a boy.

_____E) None of the above.

When immorality is accepted in society as normal, those who live moral lives will be considered abnormal.

When self-destructive behaviors win men's approval, those who are struggling to overcome their self-destructive tendencies will be disapproved of.

When tolerance is touted far and wide, those who courageously stand on Biblical principles will be called intolerant.

When traditional values are stricken from public life, those who defend them will be described as radical.

When insanity encompasses our culture, those who's lifestyles are sane will be the ones the world labels insane.

"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake."

Are you prepared to be disapproved of by our culture and to be called abnormal, intolerant, radical, and insane? Or will you just blend in?

Drifting is dangerous. It is not random as many suppose. There are strong currents of self-destruction slowly moving the drifter farther and farther away from the dock of peace and happiness into the rough, dark waters of misery and pain. The drifter, often unknowingly, blindly obeys unseen forces -- compulsions, peer pressure, evil desires, mental viruses, orientations, and feelings. Drifting is bondage, not freedom.

To be directed is to steer your life -- to go against the currents, against the unseen destructive forces. The directed person is awake, aware of the invisible compulsions toward evil both in society and within himself. He or she sees peace, joy, love, and righteousness and aggressively aims his life in that direction. He or she fights consistently and overcomes the bondage of self-destructive currents.

Anybody can drift with society and inner desires and thus be enslaved. Only the most courageous and self-directed people will stand up within and fight the current! Drifting or directed -- which are you?