Dr. Sleppian, is a saint and a martyr, a humanitarian and idealist, ruthlessly slain by mindless cult brainwashed terrorists of the prolife movement. 

Dr. Mengele is the infamous angel of death, a horrific monster and demon incarnate in human form. 

Surely, by a point by point comparison of these two Doctors we can clarify something of the difference between Good and Evil. 

Dr. Bernard Sleppian performed many different medical procedures in his life, (1) saving lives, bringing new lives into the world, and (2) terminating unborn human lives. All in accordance with the law of his country and time. He was by all accounts an intelligent, sensitive, cultured man. 

Point 1) He performed many different medical procedures in his life, not just the abortions which led to his death. 

Under point 1 for Dr. Mengele, he was a qualified and capable surgeon during wartime. No data is available about whether he used his medical skills to save lives as well as perform the experiments for which he is infamous, either during the war or after it. It is plausible to hypothesize that he did, but it is unknown to me. 

In the absence of evidence to the contrary, Dr. Sleppian appears to have done more good (in saving lives) than Dr. Mengele. 

Point 2) Terminating unborn human lives. This is why some call Dr. Sleppian evil, and why he was killed. Dr. Mengele experimented on and terminated the lives of children after they were born, Dr. Sleppian terminated the lives of human fetuses who many consider children before their birth. 

Legally, there is no difference between the two men. Both acted IAW the law of their lands and countries. Scientifically, Dr. Mengele acted in accord with the 'science' of his nation. Science is not involved in the legalization of abortion, only the legal question of personhood. Technically, Dr. Mengele's actions were not violations of the Hippocratic oath as they were not perpetrated on 'humans' according to the standards of his time and country. Dr. Sleppians are a violation of the hippocratic oath in his time and country. Ethically according to this revered standard of medical ethics, Dr. Mengele emerges as the better man. Is there another difference, something in Dr. Mengeles actions that set him apart mentally, psychologically, or emotionally from Dr. Sleppian? 

Most would say that his humanity should have been outraged by the suffering he caused, that basic decency would have made it impossible for anyone but a monster to cause the suffering he caused those children, and he could not ignore their humanity or their pain. More, as a doctor, he should have known that they were real human beings, not untermensch, that the political indoctrination of Nazi race science should not have blinded a trained scientific mind unless it wanted to be blinded. 

What does a trained scientific mind in the absence of political indoctrination perceive in a fetus? It is possible to establish a baseline on this issue. In the middle ages, science such as it was perceived a fetus as having a right to life after quickening. That is after signs of life became apparent to observers outside the womb. When scientific knowledge of when life began advanced, trained scientists campaigned to reform the laws and extend that right to life to the beginning of life as they knew it now started. 

On this baseline, it is possible to state that trained scientific observers in the absence of political indoctrination perceive fetuses as having a right to life. 

Dr. Sleppian had even more advanced knowledge of the life of the fetus, could observe its suffering, reaction to music, and other datum indicating its life and even to some degree awareness of pain and external stimulus. Yet he did not perceive it as having a right to life. 

Dr. Sleppians behavior violates a plausible baseline on what unbiased scientific observers would do. It must be attributed to political indoctrination. 

Doctors must do many things which seem unnatural to nonmedical personnel. They deal with blood, death, and human suffering on a daily basis. Freguently to help they must destroy diseased tissue and inflict real pain on their fellow human beings. In order to be effective doctors they must harden their hearts to their natural feelings under these circumstances and do what reason tells them will produce the greatest good for the patient. This capacity is admirable in a Doctor when it saves lives and alleviates human suffering. Dr. Sleppians ability to exercise this capacity when performing an abortion does not automatically make him into a monster. 

If Dr. Sleppians ability to thus harden his heart does not make him a monster, the Dr. Mengele's similar capacity in itself does not make him a monster. The poltics and science of his day told him in no uncertain terms that he was acting to aid mankind, and that the suffering he caused was necessary. His experimental subjects believed that he actually cared for them, and was concerned with them. This suggests that he was kind to the degree that his experiments did not require him to be cruel. 

On a baseline of common humanity, Dr. Mengele should not have been able to do what he did. On a similar baseline Dr. Sleppian should not have been able to do what he did. Both did so in violation of this baseline based on the political indoctrinations they received as medical practitioners in good standing in their times and country. 

There is no evidence of any difference, mentally, emotionally, or psychologically between Dr. Mengele and Dr. Sleppian. As far as the actions that got one killed and the other condemned as a monster are concerned. 

Let us look at the motives for their actions. Dr. Mengele believed firmly that he was acting for the greater good of humanity. Dr. Sleppian acted from commercial considerations, though he doubtless firmly believed in the rightness of his actions. 

Dr. Mengele gets points for nobility of motive over Dr. Sleppian. 

Looking at the facts in these two cases, there is little real factual difference between Dr. Sleppian and Dr. Mengele. Save one. Dr. Sleppian was a citizen of the US. Dr. Mengele was a citizen of Germany at the time we were at war with Germany. 

The definition of good and evil is now clear. Someone is good if they are on our side and bad if they are against us. This is Clintons definition. 

There is no other factual basis for defining Dr. Sleppian as a saint, and Dr. Mengele as a monster. On the basis of the facts, if Dr. Sleppian was a saint, then Dr. Mengele was a saint. If Dr. Mengele was a monster who deserved to die at the hand of a snipers bullet, then ditto for Dr. Sleppian. 

I have a radically middle position. I consider both Dr. Mengele and Dr. Sleppian to be human beings, and recognize that all human beings are capable of being monsters if nurture so dictates. For this reason, I am not personally inclined to condemn abortion workers as monsters not seeing myself as being so much better than they that I can make such absolute judgements. Possibly other prolifers so introduced to reason might be less inclined to use deadly violence against abortion workers. 

So, this could be considered a reasoned defense of abortion workers from passion unguided by reason. Sadly, there is so little, if any, factual difference between abortion workers and Nazi Death Camp workers, that you cannot defend one (on a factual basis) without defending the other.