Here’s how we can end abortion forever. We start a campaign to abort all babies that are identified as homosexual and/or suffering from some other abnormal sexual proclivity.

My eureka-moment came when I happened upon a satirical article by Stephen Lavedas, titled: “Why My Wife And I Decided To Abort Our Unborn Gay Son” (, Feb. 28). Lavedas had penned a humorous piece of satire, filled throughout with biting wit.

However, I think Lavedas missed the true potential of his piece if we were to take it seriously.

The idea of ending abortion by identifying all babies who possess the “homosexual gene” and killing them would be in effect the industrial counterpart of probable cause. Babies have no rights; a 1998 U.S. News and World Report article called a child “a high-priced consumer item with no warranty.”

And we won’t stop there; we include killing all babies who show signs of growing up to be progressive Democrats. And just to be safe, let’s have conservative families, Christian families and families who are concerned with the future of our nation living in New York and California murder their unborn children to safeguard against the spread anti-American progressivism. We convince families to do the same thing in Michigan and Minnesota to safeguard against children who might be more susceptible to becoming Muslims.

We argue that these babies would be giving their lives to end abortion.

We tell our liberal attackers that we’ve decided to embrace Hillary Clinton’s dogma that “deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.” Clinton, Obama and the most famous liberal people in America and around the world have made it clear that baby killing is the right and the “choice” of a woman. According to the governors of Virginia and New York, women don’t need a reason beyond having decided she doesn’t want the baby.

As Christians we would be advocating for selective baby killing for reasons tangential to those of progressives who claim they don’t want to bring an autistic or Down syndrome child in the world. When they attack us we’ll explain that our actions, selective though they may appear to be, are summum bonum by reducing future health-care expenses, which even the Center For Disease Control (CDC) says are astronomically higher for homosexuals than for heterosexuals.

So it might cost the lives of a few more babies before we get our victory. It’s a small price to pay when we consider the almost 60 million babies who have been murdered by their mothers since Roe v. Wade became law of the land.

As Christians, we can rationalize our support for baby killing, selective though it may be, as doing God’s work. After all, Obama invoked God’s name saying, “God bless Planned Parenthood” because they do “good work.” Hillary Clinton calls murdering unborn babies “humane.” Clinton also lauded baby killing as a “fundamental human right.”

We can invoke the exact same language Margaret Sanger used when referencing blacks, the poor and immigrants. We’ll call the babies we’re targeting “human weeds.” We’ll argue it’s forward thinking to prevent our families from knowingly having babies with genes that indicate homosexuality and undesirable abnormal behavioral genes. By killing them as they’re being born we prevent what Sanger called, “reckless breeders, spawning … human beings who never should have been born.”

We’ll claim Sanger’s words for our purposes. Sanger said: “The most successful educational appeal to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea of it ever occurs to any of their rebellious members” (Margaret Sanger, 1939).

Now, we all know the progressives and homosexual groups would literally go apoplectic at even the hint of such a movement. As a matter of fact, they’re probably figuring out ways to silence this column.

If such a movement were to be advocated, the so-called right to murder unborn children or even born children in some states would go out the window in a heartbeat. People who until now viewed baby killing as a woman’s right, would jam the courts demanding injunctions, until a judge could hear arguments for preventing the selective murder of homosexual babies.

The fight by progressives and homosexual activist groups could only be settled by a ruling that killing babies because they’re homosexual and/or because they show symptoms of becoming Democrats or far-left progressive crackpots isn’t what abortion is for. We would of course argue that they must accept baby killing on demand for whatever reason.

You can bet abortion on demand would end practically overnight. The apparatchiks want blacks, poor people and others they deem undesirable dead by the time they leave the womb; but you can make book on the fact they don’t want that for their kind.

We would expose the lie of there being a homosexual gene juxtaposed to it being sinful behavior, and we would show that baby killing on demand only matters if they’re talking about “human weeds.”

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.