Posted on 03/22/2018 8:34:06 AM PDT by Morgana
Dr. Kathi Aultman spent years aborting “unwanted fetuses” and delivering “wanted” babies into their parents’ arms.
But when she performed an abortion on a mother whose husband pressured her to abort the child, Aultman felt troubled.
In a recent interview with CBN News, Aultman described how the experience and several others eventually convinced her to leave the abortion industry and become a pro-life advocate.
Aultman began her OB-GYN career in Florida with a strong desire to help women.
“It was no question in my mind that a woman should have the right to choose whether she wanted to be pregnant or not, and that was the most important thing. And I didn’t consider the fetus in the equation at all,” she said.
Later, she worked at Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America.
Aultman told a U.S. Congressional committee in 2017 that she referred to unborn babies as “fetuses” when killing them in abortions but “babies” when they were wanted; and she regretted the incongruity. She also said she was fascinated by the “tiny but perfectly formed limbs, intestines, kidneys, and other organs” of aborted babies.
Slowly, more things about her abortion practice began to bother her. She said she struggled when she worked in the neo-natal intensive care unit, caring for very premature babies who were the same size as babies who she aborted.
She told CBN of more troubling experiences:
One involved a young girl who had three abortions, all performed by Aultman.
“I went to the clinic manager and I said I don’t want to do this,” Aultman shared. “She’s just using abortion as birth control. And they said I didn’t have the right to make that decision, that it wasn’t a judgment that I should be making and I needed to do the procedure.”
During her interview with CBN News, Aultman carefully explained two other scenarios that made her see things differently.
“The next woman came in with a girlfriend and the girlfriend asked, ‘do you want to see the tissue?’ and she snapped at her and just said, in a really angry voice, ‘I don’t want to look at it, I just want to kill it!’ And I thought, what has this baby ever done to you?” she said.
She then told of a third woman who had four children. Her husband wanted her to abort their fifth child.
“Her husband didn’t feel they could afford another, and she cried the entire time,” commented Aultman. “I think the callousness and hostility of the first two compared to the sorrow and the devastation of the third woman – I think that comparison made me understand that just because the child wasn’t wanted, that was no longer justification enough for me to do the procedure.”
Aultman said she had a religious conversion in 1993 and became a Christian. Later, when she was reading an article about the Holocaust and abortion, she said the reality of abortion finally struck her.
“I probably murdered more people than Ted Bundy or any of the mass murderers if you consider all the abortions that I did,” she said.
She sought out counseling to help her heal from her past actions. She said she finally realized that Jesus forgave her, but she needed to forgive herself.
“I’m just thankful every day that we have a Savior, that He does forgive us and that He can take what the locust has destroyed and restore it,” she said. “I’m so thankful that He’s using me to save babies now when once I used to kill them.”
Now, she is a pro-life advocate. Last year, she testified in front of Congress in favor of the Heartbeat Protection Act, which would prohibit abortions from the moment an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable.
“I don’t believe a woman can remain unscathed after killing her child,” she told lawmakers in 2017.
Pray for her and other doctors like her. Conversion can and does happen but only if you pray pray pray.
Aultman, in the first clause of her statement summarizes the semantic trickery Liberals/Progressives knowingly used to implement their takeover of the minds of American citizens before 1973 in order to impose their population control method of destroying babies in order to facilitate the goals of socialism for America.
Please note especially the first paragraph highlighted and quoted below from the Liberty Fund Library "A Plea for Liberty: An Argument Against Socialism and Socialistic Legislation," edited by Thomas Mackay (1849 - 1912), Chapter 1, final paragraphs from Edward Stanley Robertson's essay, "The Impracticability of Socialism":Note the writer's emphasis that the "scheme of Socialism" requires what he calls "the power of restraining the increase in population"--long the essential and primary focus of the Democrat Party in the U. S.:
"I have suggested that the scheme of Socialism is wholly incomplete unless it includes a power of restraining the increase of population, which power is so unwelcome to Englishmen that the very mention of it seems to require an apology. I have showed that in France, where restraints on multiplication have been adopted into the popular code of morals, there is discontent on the one hand at the slow rate of increase, while on the other, there is still a 'proletariat,' and Socialism is still a power in politics.An examination of the history of nations reveals the long and arduous struggle by human beings for individual liberty--from kings, from masters, from whatever description fitted those other human beings who gained power and exercised it over their fellow citizens.
I.44
"I have put the question, how Socialism would treat the residuum of the working class and of all classes—the class, not specially vicious, nor even necessarily idle, but below the average in power of will and in steadiness of purpose. I have intimated that such persons, if they belong to the upper or middle classes, are kept straight by the fear of falling out of class, and in the working class by positive fear of want. But since Socialism purposes to eliminate the fear of want, and since under Socialism the hierarchy of classes will either not exist at all or be wholly transformed, there remains for such persons no motive at all except physical coercion. Are we to imprison or flog all the 'ne'er-do-wells'?
I.45
"I began this paper by pointing out that there are inequalities and anomalies in the material world, some of which, like the obliquity of the ecliptic and the consequent inequality of the day's length, cannot be redressed at all. Others, like the caprices of sunshine and rainfall in different climates, can be mitigated, but must on the whole be endured. I am very far from asserting that the inequalities and anomalies of human society are strictly parallel with those of material nature. I fully admit that we are under an obligation to control nature so far as we can. But I think I have shown that the Socialist scheme cannot be relied upon to control nature, because it refuses to obey her. Socialism attempts to vanquish nature by a front attack. Individualism, on the contrary, is the recognition, in social politics, that nature has a beneficent as well as a malignant side. The struggle for life provides for the various wants of the human race, in somewhat the same way as the climatic struggle of the elements provides for vegetable and animal life—imperfectly, that is, and in a manner strongly marked by inequalities and anomalies. By taking advantage of prevalent tendencies, it is possible to mitigate these anomalies and inequalities, but all experience shows that it is impossible to do away with them. All history, moreover, is the record of the triumph of Individualism over something which was virtually Socialism or Collectivism, though not called by that name. In early days, and even at this day under archaic civilisations, the note of social life is the absence of freedom. But under every progressive civilisation, freedom has made decisive strides—broadened down, as the poet says, from precedent to precedent. And it has been rightly and naturally so.
I.46
"Freedom is the most valuable of all human possessions, next after life itself. It is more valuable, in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health; but good laws, justly administered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the only thing that law can secure. Law cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of equality, all that law can do is to secure fair play, which is equality of rights but is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Individualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with that Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we may, is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, and that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the abnegations of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove." EDWARD STANLEY ROBERTSON
By whatever semantic maneuver those power holders chose to identify themselves, no matter how benevolent they purported to be, the end was the same: some individuals in the society or group were denied their Creator-endowed rights to be free.
In America, in the Year 1776, a genius group of freedom loving individuals declared a set of principles by which, if accepted, a society of like-minded individuals could enjoy "the pursuit of happiness."
Eleven years later, they "constituted" a form of self-government to assure that the goals of their Constitution's Preamble were to become reality for the nation.
The Preamble began with the words,
We, the People. . . .
The goal, of course, was the expansion, or enlargement, of liberty for individuals in the society--not the enlargement of government!
Perhaps Donald Trump's greatest achievement to this point can be described as one man's effort to "expand liberty" for individuals and to "contract government power," thereby allowing just a little individual freedom to flourish as it did in America both prior to 1776 and thereafter.
By the way, has anyone here read Burke's Speech on Conciliation. . . . lately? If not, please read his description of how the "spirit of liberty" among the colonists, even before 1776, had resulted in the American colonies literally "feeding" the Old World!
The word, "liberty," should, once again become the watchword for American citizens.
Chronologically and logically, Life comes first.
Only the living can love liberty.
She wanted to ‘help’ woman? She should have jumped off a overpass into traffic.
After she made all her money from government funded Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America aka Murder Inc.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." - Thomas Jefferson
How sad that Progressive ideology's coercive impact on many generations of American youth has robbed them of this fundamental and essential fact--a fact that could have made them understand that the Creator/Source of life and liberty, is also the Source for laws for human happiness, the blessings of liberty, and is the Divine Providence who oversees his creation.
In one afternoon most likely.
“In one afternoon most likely. “
Naw we figure Bundy admited to murdering 36 but we think he did about 100+ women. The average abortionist can do about 20 abortions a day. Took her a week to do 100+ give or take.
An abortionist has come to terms with the job description.
““It was no question in my mind that a woman should have the right to choose whether she wanted to be pregnant or not, and that was the most important thing. And I didn’t consider the fetus in the equation at all,” she said.”
And there it is.
How is it that women have this ability to make human life, and then have the capacity to categorize it as an abstraction?
To me, its a form of gender-based sociopathy. The choice is mine, and mine alone, whether a human being lives or if it dies? Never once did the moral weight of it flutter in through the transom of your moral offices and light itself inconveniently before your consideration until pressure was applied by a man somewhere?
I remember the conversations about how much nicer a world it would be if women were in charge.
God bless her.
I am so glad that nobody is beyond redemption.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.