In spite of my careful plans, the morning of the shooting was not easy. Although I had gone to bed late, I forced myself to rise about 4 A.M. to spend time in prayer and Bible reading, and to prepare myself for the day.

I was fully determined to act, but my usual zest, and the zeal I expected to feel were missing. The lower half of my body was gripped with a gnawing emptiness. It did not occur to me at the time, but I now wonder how Abraham felt as he walked up Mount Moriah to kill his son. It’s likely that his soul was crying out, and his body was trying to revolt – mine were.

While driving to the clinic, I decided to drive past it first, to see if everything looked normal (I was concerned that someone may have become suspicious and called the police). Just as I approached the clinic, a police cruiser drove by me in the opposite direction. I forced my fears under control as I continued down the road. After driving about an eighth of a mile, it was time to head back, but the truck did not want to turn around; it had to be forced. I could hear the undercarriage groan as I did a tight turn around in an open parking lot. As hard as it was to turn around, I knew I could not continue down the road. Obedience was the only option.

Waiting for the Abortionist

Several months prior to the day of the shooting, GQ magazine had interviewed both the pro-life protesters and the pro-choice people (including the Abortionist) who frequented the Ladies Center. This piece (published in February 1994) discussed the threat I posed to the Abortionist, and the possibility of someone, like me, shooting him as he entered the clinic.

I knew from having read this article that the Abortionist and his escort were on guard when entering the clinic. Jim Barret, an escort who took his turn driving the Abortionist to the clinic, was described as being well armed. He was quoted as saying that, if threatened, he would '… shoot first’ and '… not miss.’ As it happened, in God’s providence, he was the driver killed that day. As I stood awaiting the Abortionist’s arrival, I was struggling in fervent prayer to maintain my resolution of heart. At the end, as the moment of his expected arrival approached, I was praying fervently that the police security would not arrive first. I could still find the heart to shoot the Abortionist, but, while I knew it would be justified to kill a policeman in order to stop the murderer he was protecting, I did not want to have to do it. I made an earnest and personal request to the Lord to spare me, and the policeman, if possible.

God heard my prayers, and the Abortionist arrived two or three minutes prior to the police guard. When I lifted the shotgun, two men were sitting in the front seats of the parked truck; Jim Barret, the escort, was directly between me and the Abortionist. When I finished shooting, I laid the shotgun at my feet and walked away with my hands held out at my sides, awaiting arrest. (I did not want to appear to be threatening anyone when the police arrived.)

Arrested but Successful

I was relieved when they cuffed me. I gave a hopeful and non-resisting look to the policeman who ordered me under arrest with his drawn handgun. I did not want to be shot, and was glad to be safely in police custody.

When they later led me to the police car, a handful of people had assembled. I spontaneously raised my voice, 'One thing’s for sure, no innocent people will be killed in that clinic today.’ Not only had the Abortionist been prevented from killing about thirty people that day, he had also been prevented from continuing to kill – unlike other Abortionists who have merely been wounded and have returned to 'work.’ The remarkable thing about that day was that, unlike the children who survived to possibly work some other day, the one who intended to kill them did not.

At the police station, a specially summoned plain clothed officer sat talking with me for two or three hours. He had sat similarly with Michael Griffin. But I did not discuss what had just happened. I did not want to aid those who had sinned by swearing to uphold mass murder (as have virtually all those who have sworn to uphold the law of the land).

The arresting officer then led me out of the police station, and escorted me twenty yards to his squad car in front of a teeming mass of reporters and photographers. As I came out of the door of the station, I seized the initiative, and raised my voice in a carefully planned declaration: 'Now is the time to defend the unborn in the same way you’d defend slaves about to be murdered!’

Soon I was alone in a large one man cell, and could direct all my praise and thanks to the Lord. I repeatedly sang a song commonly used at rescues. The first stanza is, 'Our God is an awesome God’; He most certainly is. The only way to handle the pain of being separated from my family was to continually rejoice in the Lord for all that He had done.

Breaking the Shackles of Submission

Although I did not understand the meaning of all the emotions I experienced immediately after my incarceration, I understand them better now. Much of the joy I felt after shooting the Abortionist, and still feel today, is the joy of having freely obeyed the Lord after being enslaved to fearful obedience to men.

I well remember (prior to the shooting) the oppressive feeling of realizing that I was not free to defend my neighbors as I would defend myself. Wrath was ready to be poured out on me if I cast off the shackles of passive submission to the state. The fear of being persecuted for disobeying our tyrannical government made submitting to its yoke seem attractive. My mind and will recoiled from the high cost of acting responsibly. It required an act of the will to even consider obeying the Lord.

Any nation that legalizes abortion throws a blanket of fear and intimidation over all its citizens who rightly understand the issues involved. By legalizing abortion, the government has aimed its intimidating weaponry at any who dare to interfere with the slaughter. The resulting fear of the government has a paralyzing effect on both the individual and the collective mindset that is incalculable. Anyone who underestimates the power that fear of the police has over men’s minds fails to appreciate what may be the government’s most powerful tool. If you wonder why so few speak, or practice, the whole truth about defending the unborn, you need look no further for an explanation: it’s illegal to save those being led away to slaughter.

The inner joy and peace that have flooded my soul since I have cast off the state’s tyranny makes my 6 x 9 cell a triumphant and newly liberated kingdom. I shudder at the thought of ever returning to the bondage currently enforced by the state.

What is the appropriate response to news of an abortion provider being slain by someone defending the unborn? Under such circumstances, the focus should not be on the slain murderer, but on the deliverance of his intended victims. For instance, in the book of Esther, when the Lord delivered the Jews from the Persians who intended to harm them, the people didn’t mourn the death of their enemies. Rather, they established a holiday of feasting and rejoicing that continues to be celebrated to this day.

Family Neglect and Excessive Force?

Some object that by acting as I did I have neglected my family. But in spite of the emphasis the Bible places on performing familial duties, it’s abundantly clear that you must respond to the call of Christ – even if it requires you to leave your house, wife, children, and also forfeit your life. To perform a higher calling, it’s often necessary to leave lesser duties behind.

Others object that killing Dr. Britton was excessive. But many who hold this position would not object if they learned that, during the Jewish holocaust, someone had shot and killed a Nazi concentration camp 'doctor’.

The appropriate degree of defensive force is determined by the circumstances. Force that is excessive under one set of circumstances may be totally inadequate under conditions that are more demanding. Extreme circumstances normally call for extreme measures. Would you think you had done your duty if you merely wounded someone who was trying to kill your family, if, afterwards, you had to sit in jail as the murderer returned, week after week, until he had killed everyone in your family?

Under circumstances where it’s likely that merely wounding someone, rather than killing him, will result in that person later returning to murder numerous people, lethal force is justified. Genesis 14 records an incident in which Abraham, and his men, attacked and killed a group of men who had taken Abraham’s nephew, Lot, captive. God later blessed this slaughter through Melchizedek (a type of Christ), who declared that God had delivered Abraham’s enemies into his hand. Under these circumstances, lethal force was necessary. It certainly prevented those killed from later regrouping and returning to threaten Abraham or Lot.

Limited to Legal Remedies?

Many people mistakenly think that when the government sanctions mass murder that their responses should be limited to legal and educational remedies. But the appropriate response to an immediate threat to a child’s life is not to merely pursue possible educational and legislative remedies, but to do what is necessary for the child’s immediate and effective defense.

Those who believe that we should remain within the law, under these circumstances, have some difficult questions to answer. Would it also be wrong to intervene if the government was to sanction the murder of any other minority, and thousands were being slain in the streets every day? If individuals are wrong to bomb abortion clinics, would it have also been wrong for individuals to have bombed the tracks that led to Auschwitz? If this is excessive, may Christians overturn the tables in abortion clinics, and chase everyone from the premises – much as Christ cleansed the temple? If not, why not? If mass rape or enslavement should be resisted with the immediate means necessary, should not mass murder be resisted with similar means?

The Burden of Proof

It’s easy to see why someone who supports abortion would accuse me of murder: those who took sides with the men Abraham killed when he rescued Lot would have responded similarly to Abraham. Suppose that, in the process of delivering Lot, Abraham had been captured and put on trial by his enemies. In order for his trial to have been just, regardless of their prejudice against him, they would have been required to consider him innocent until proven guilty. Although his accusers could have raised objections to his actions (for instance, they might have claimed that Abraham used excessive force), they could not have proven that he was wrong. It’s so obviously virtuous for someone to risk his life in defense of the innocent that it cannot be proven to be wrong. And while Abraham could not have removed all doubt that he was justified, he could have raised plenty of doubt about his guilt. The many people Abraham saved could have borne convincing testimony to the virtue of his actions. The lethal force Abraham used would have appeared reasonable and necessary to them. They almost certainly joined with God in blessing him for his decisive action. In much the same way, the many unborn children who’s lives are being threatened today bear self-evident witness to the morality of intervening with the immediate means necessary. As in Abraham’s case, if we don’t overcome all objections, and respond in faith, the innocent will continue to suffer irreparable loss.

The Priority of Saving a Threatened Child

What practical priority should be given to stopping abortion? While many people realize that abortion is a serious problem, they still categorize it as one among many other 'social issues’ that should be given a lower priority than family or church concerns. But it is important to understand that a life threatening crisis in any area of life normally suspends all other duties. If, for instance, you are sharing the gospel on a street corner, and see a young child run into the street, if you don’t postpone your other duties until the child is safe you are guilty of gross and shameful neglect, and bring reproach on the gospel you claim to represent. And if you would put an immediate threat to your own child before all other concerns, why is it that a similar threat to your neighbor’s child is given such a low priority? Isn’t this disparity in priorities the very thing that the second great commandment, and the golden rule, were designed to overcome? Did the good Samaritan have misplaced priorities, or was the problem with those who passed by the needy man?

When Abraham learned that Lot, his nephew, had been taken captive (as described in Genesis 14), he rightly dropped everything else until Lot was safe. If he had decided that tending his flocks, making converts – or virtually any other duty – was more important than delivering Lot, he would have been guilty of a sin of omission. In much the same way, though not everyone is called to take up a weapon as Abraham did, since abortion poses an immediate threat, we must be willing to postpone our ordinary duties, and make the personal sacrifices necessary to save the innocent. God’s word requires it.

Our response to a law forbidding us to save our neighbor’s lives should be similar to the apostle’s response to a law forbidding them to save souls. They did not comply, and agree to remain within the law in the hope that educational and legislative remedies would eventually change the law; if they had the results would have been catastrophic. Nor did they foolishly advocate the overthrow of the Roman government. But in both word and deed they upheld the inalienable duty to obey God rather than men. Their obedience unto death eventually helped to change the law in question. From our vantage point it is easy to see that they were right to use the means necessary to save souls – even though it was forbidden. Someday it should be equally clear that we have an inalienable duty to save our neighbor’s lives – even though it is illegal.

Soon after my arrest, the prosecution announced they were seeking the death penalty. This forced me to decide whether I was going to resist their efforts to kill me. The threat of heightened persecution served to heighten my joy. It was difficult for me to think of resisting something that would be such a great privilege. After some thought, I decided that it was my duty to do whatever I could to save the most people from being killed, and thereby bring the most glory to God. I didn’t know for certain that my allowing them to kill me would result in fewer children being killed, but it seemed probable that this would be the result. I proceeded in the strength of this judgment.

Mock Trial

My trial was a classic example of judicial tyranny. It bore many similarities to the trials of those who protected the Jews from being murdered in Nazi Germany – prior to the end of the war. It should be remembered, however, that soon after the war many roles were reversed, and many who had condemned the defenders of the Jews were themselves condemned.

With this in mind, Michael Hirsh, a pro-life lawyer formerly involved with Operation Rescue, presented a brief to the judge in my name. With the help of Vince Heiser (another pro-life lawyer who came to my aid) we argued that we should be allowed to show that my actions were necessary to prevent mass murder. We applied the principle of justifiable homicide to defending the unborn. We also reminded the judge that he might, one day, stand trial for upholding the abortion holocaust if he would not allow us to present the truth.

Even though 47% of the population believed that the Abortionist was committing murder, the judge ruled against me, and would not allow me to voice this belief. He silenced me with a gag order. The freedom to speak the truth – which every American should enjoy – was denied me during my trial. Even though my life hung in the balance, my pro-life views were strictly excluded by the court. If I had been allowed to tell the truth, it would have inevitably resulted in my putting the Abortionist, and the government which protected him, on trial for participating in mass murder. I could have shown that not only the Abortionist, but also the government could have justifiably had force used against it. Governments that sanction mass murder should be resisted, and their innocent victims should be defended with the means necessary.

Since I was denied a truthful defense, I had none. What was I to say? Since I could not tell the truth, I had almost nothing to say. There was no use in offering lame and ineffectual arguments – doing so would only make it appear that I had been given a fair trial.

During the penalty phase, I addressed the jury for the first time, and made a short statement as my 'closing argument’: You have a responsibility to protect your neighbor’s life, and to use force if necessary to do so. In an effort to suppress this truth, you may mix my blood with the blood of the unborn, and those who have fought to defend the oppressed. However, truth and righteousness will prevail. May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected.

Soon afterwards, I was escorted to Florida State Prison’s death row. I could not avoid an automatic appeal to the Florida State Supreme Court. As soon as they upheld my death sentence, I waived all future appeals.

World Transforming Truths

The most powerful weapon for overcoming the world’s apathetic response to legal abortion is to advocate the means necessary for resisting this atrocity (as required by God’s law). Neither the world nor the worldly Christian want the searchlight of God’s word focused on their neglect of the unborn, but these are the means God uses to produce genuine repentance.

Without a lofty ethic there can be no hearty repentance; without a sight of sin there is no need of a Savior. How can you expect to convict people of neglecting the unborn, and point them to Christ for pardon, unless the requirements of God’s law are being applied to the abortion holocaust?

God’s arm is not short. If only a few show the commitment required, He can turn the tide on legalized abortion and begin a worldwide transformation. Victor Hugo has written, 'One can resist an invasion of armies, but not an idea whose time has come.’ Defending the unborn with force is considerably more than an idea whose time has come, it is a biblical duty whose time has come.

God is able to bless the application of this duty far beyond all we could ask or think (much as He blessed the use of force in the book of Esther, and brought great revival). If Christians will repent and take a bold stand on this duty, regardless of the cost, the Lord will fight for us, and win a great victory for His own glory and honor. If, therefore, you believe that abortion is lethal force you should uphold the force needed to stop it.

Virtual Vandée Editorial Note

Copyrights August 2001 A. D. by Paul J. Hill
This is a revised version of a paper published in an anthology in the 'Current Controversies’ series: 'The Abortion Controversy’ (Greenhaven Press, 2000).
Reprinted with the permission of the author, contacted by us with help of
Rev. Donald Spitz (pro-life Virginia, P.O. Box 2876, Chesapeake VA 23327, United States).
The article is quoted from The Internet page of Rev. Spitz (Army of God Home Page)
Illustrations were added.