OK. I will admit there were some atrocities recorded in the Old Testament, and the majority of them were perpetrated by the "people of God" -- or the children of Israel -- whichever you'd prefer. So please spare me the sniveling liberal rhetoric that usually follows in the days after I post a column that most liberals would disagree with.

Yes. The Bible is full of murderers. History itself is filled with other fatal oddities, such as earthquakes, tidal waves, plagues, the deaths of innocents, tornadoes, wars -- that sort of thing. None of it has ever made much sense to me, but after years of asking why and not finding a completely legitimate answer, I hope to know more once I reach the afterlife -- which for some of us means spending eternity with our heavenly Father.

Now that I've got that out of the way, I'd like to discuss another atrocity -- partial birth abortion. Not a touchy-feely subject, I know, but one that must be discussed nonetheless.

The subject comes to mind because of the recent conviction and sentencing of a former Ohio policeman in the deaths of his pregnant lover and their unborn child. Notice I said their "unborn" child. The man was convicted of two deaths, even though the child was living inside of the womb.

The prosecutor in the case said the man in question deserved the death penalty for his conviction on the charge of aggravated murder in the death of the fetus. The jurors and the judge disagreed with that recommendation, so the defendant will now spend at least 57 years behind bars for his crime.

I agree that the man committed a horrible crime. I agree that he probably should have faced the harshest punishment possible for his deeds. My question is simple. Why is it a crime for a man to cause the death of a "fetus" while it is still in the womb, when physicians do the same thing day-in and day-out in clinics across our nation? It's a gory reality that abortion, in its simplest form -- and especially in the late-term act called partial-birth abortion -- is nothing more or less than knowingly taking the life of a living being. Period.

So why the uproar over the death of this particular unborn baby?

Who knows? I guess we'll never know why taking the life of an innocent baby is considered murder in one instance but not considered murder in another. It seems to depend on what implements of death you choose to use and how sterile the environment is where the act is committed. It also must surely have something to do with the credentials on one's wall.

Like I said before, I hope to understand it better once I reach the afterlife.

'Cause it sure don't make no sense right now.