Violent defense of the unborn is a legitimate tool to end abortion.

"It is certain that we should use the means necessary to defend the innocent, and since the unborn are innocent, it is equally certain that we should use the means necessary to defend them. If we knew that we, or our loved ones were about to be killed, as thousands of unborn children are each day, we would defend one another with the means necessary. We would not limit ourselves to legal and educational remedies that might possibly stop the bloodshed in the future; rather, we would take the immediate action necessary to save one another. If questioned, we would assert the moral necessity of taking this action. The law of love requires us to similarly defend the unborn, and uphold the duty to do so. "The duty the defend the innocent with the means necessary is an essential aspect of the Moral Law that is found in both the Old and New Testaments, and has been recognized and implemented throughout history. Neither the overwhelming majority of citizens, nor the government, questions the duty to defend the innocent. Not everyone agrees on the degree of defensive force that is appropriate, but the obligation to defend innocent people with the means necessary is such a clear and compelling aspect of the Moral Law that it can scarcely be denied. "[1]Rev. Paul Jennings Hill committed these words to paper after gunning down a Pensacola, Florida abortionist and his bodyguard and surrendering to police in July, 1994. Subsequently, Rev. Hill was executed by the State of Florida. His actions were the second of such magnitude in the United States. Michael Griffin, a little over a year prior to Rev. Hill's actions, gunned down an abortionist, also in Pensacola, Florida. What made Paul Hill different, is that he went to the execution chamber defending his actions. He stated, in an interview immediately prior to his execution "I think more people should act the way I acted". [2]What Rev. Hill recognized, is that believing the unborn to be fully human from the moment of conception requires an acknowledgement that they also are entitled to the same actions one would take to defend any other human being. Others had acknowledged this before, but lacked the means, courage, or sincerity to carry out the actions. Paul Hill's actions were the inspiration for others to act as well. Eric Rudolph also said that Paul Hill's actions were the motivation for his subsequent actions, although he later recognized that his bombing of Centennial Park was a "Mistake"[3]. The actions of these men saved the lives of innocent children, slated for abortion. While most would be abortive women are understandably reluctant to come forward and state that violent action saved their child's life, there is at least one notable exception. [4]These actions, in defense against imminent harm to unborn children, are objectively justified, and have saved lives. References1. Rev. Paul Jennings Hill in the foreword to his book Mix My Blood With The Blood Of The Unborn; available online at . http://www.armyofgod.com...2. Pensacola News Journal September 3, 2003.3. . http://www.armyofgod.com...4. Baby Saved From Being Murdered by Abortion by John Salvi's actions. - Life Advocate-November/December, 1998 AD Volume XIII Number 3 (Story online at . http://www.armyofgod.com... )