Kathleen Gilbert

News

Complete interview with Abigail Seidman - abortion and the occult

Kathleen Gilbert

LSN: A preliminary question: what faith are you now, if any?

SEIDMAN: I am in the process of being received into the Roman Catholic Church (attending RCIA and planning to formally join at 2011 Easter Vigil).  After a period of study and consideration starting around October/November 2009, I accepted Jesus Christ as my savior in June 2010 and attended an evangelical church for a few months before deciding that the Catholic church was where I belonged. 

Prior to my reversion to Christianity, I had been an atheist/agnostic since my parents left the Episcopal church when I was 6.  I was never a serious practicing wiccan/pagan/new-ager, although I did dabble in it as it was culturally expected.  I mainly stuck to atheism because it felt safe - it cast the pagan activities I had witnessed as silly superstitions with no true spiritual power, which was much more comforting than believing the truth about them. 

I also felt that Christianity would not welcome me if I returned (a belief assisted by my mother, who forbade me to associate closely with Christians, and repeatedly told me that Jesus would not accept me back once I had doubted him, so my only choice was to continue on the path away from him).  This was a common scare-tactic among pagans - “Christians won’t accept you after what you’ve done, so you’d better stick with us and work for the goddess’s triumph over the Christian god.” 

LSN: What aspects of life inside an abortion clinic did you notice were occult in nature? Did occult values assist the abortion process? How and to what extent?

SEIDMAN:  The clinic where my mother worked was pervaded with occult imagery and practices.  There was goddess art and statuary in the office, waiting, counseling, and recovery room areas, and new age music (occasionally including goddess chants and songs) was piped throughout.  The counselors were primarily chosen for their spiritual qualifications, and a few did not even have a degree in a relevant field (ie psychology, counseling, social work).  One was a trained chef turned sex worker (or “sacred prostitute”, as they preferred to think of it). 

After the clinic closed for the evening, the staff would all smoke marijuana together and occasionally take hallucinogens if they were available - this was viewed as a spiritual practice, not a recreational one (they were rather scornful of people who used drugs just to get high for fun rather than to ‘open their minds’ to ‘spiritual realities and higher planes of existence’). 

There were also special ceremonies involved when members of the clinic staff got intentionally pregnant in order to have abortions, which would be conducted after hours with a large group.  I was not welcome at these ceremonies since I had never had an abortion myself (at the time), so I can’t give details, but on one occasion I babysat the infant daughter of a clinic worker during one, upstairs from the clinic, and I remember hearing bits of song/chanting and that the doctor was not present (he was male and the ceremony was female only), so the abortion was obviously being performed by an unqualified person.  The women at the clinic were trained in “underground” abortion techniques in case of Roe v Wade being overturned. 

My mother hosted a menstrual extraction party at our house once in 1992, when there was a lot of fear circulating about the possibility of Bush being re-elected and appointing a lot of pro-life judges, or getting a Republican Congress to work with and chipping away at legal abortion that way.  [Menstrual extraction is a low-tech procedure that removes uterine contents by suction immediately before menses are due, and may be used as a very early abortion method.]

LSN: What was the mood like in this atmosphere?

SEIDMAN: The mood I remember as being dark and terrifying - not in an overtly scary way, but in a pit-of-the-stomach sort of way.  I always had a ‘feeling’ that there was something ‘wrong’ or ‘dangerous’ there - almost a feeling of a presence, which I now recognize as being the exact opposite of the Presence that I feel in a church. 

I now see other things that make sense - like the fact that the baby I watched on occasion upstairs from the clinic never smiled or laughed or played - she screamed most of the time except when her mother was nursing her, after which she would fall into a fitful sleep for a while.  My otherwise-difficult autistic sons, on the other hand, are very soothed by being in a church - any church - and behave, one could say, ‘miraculously’ well!  I would think children would naturally be more sensitive to spiritual things, not having learned yet to filter them out or shut that awareness down.  I know I was very aware of, and joyful about, the presence of God in church when I was little, despite my parents rolling their eyes and telling me to calm down and stop pretending.

LSN: What deities were worshipped?

SEIDMAN:  The main figure worshipped was The Goddess, goddess figures from various traditions (Hindu, Greek, Roman, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc) were seen as ‘archetypes’ or ‘faces’ of this one true goddess, who was viewed as being in opposition to (and ultimately, to triumph over) the Judeo-Christian God.  The goddess was taught to me as being more ancient, having created the world and people to live in it peacefully in a prehistoric ‘golden age’ of matriarchal rule, before the rise of patriarchy and civilization.  God was painted as a diabolical figure, jealous of the Goddess’s power, who invented the idea of rape and taught human men to practice it, bringing about the end of humans living in a natural, violence-free state. 

Women were encouraged to choose particular goddess figures as their personal role models or patrons (much like Catholics choosing a confirmation saint).  The culture was rather lesbian-separatist (and in that way different from other pagan individuals or groups that I’ve researched or been in contact with), in that ONLY goddesses were worshipped, never gods, and men were not welcome to participate in ceremonies and only barely tolerated as sexual or romantic partners. 

The clinic’s only male employee was the doctor, and he was strictly business - he showed up, he performed procedures, he left.  I got to know him fairly well over the years and he was just in it for the money, he thought the spirituality was ridiculous.  He preferred to work in a medical/professional environment (the other clinics where he worked, including the one where my first abortion was performed, were no different from any other doctor’s office in layout or procedure), but his and his wife’s addictions to spending made him work whenever and wherever he could, so he tolerated the goddess stuff.  (He was also a bit of a sex addict, so the clinic staff’s willingness to fornicate freely and have abortions whenever possible definitely worked in his favor, and most of the clinic employees had sex with him at some point, except for the sworn lesbians ....)

Interestingly, the Goddess was also known as the Great Dragon (this was said to be her “truest form”) - which I was quite surprised to find out existed in the Bible as well, although definitely not a person to be worshipped!  Seriously, I had no idea.  My exposure to the Bible and Christian theology was minimal at best until a year ago.  You could have knocked me over with a feather when I read Revelation. 

I had always been a bit afraid of Mary due to my past and wanting to repudiate anything resembling goddess-worship, so Revelation and its account of the great dragon being at war with the true Queen of Heaven, the mother of Christ, was truly a revelation for me, and toppled my final objection to becoming Catholic rather than remaining nondenominational Protestant.  I had heard Mary strongly denounced by my mother and her friends, but their rationale was that she was the ideal oppressed Christian woman and had been set up by sadistic patriarchal men as an impossible model for women to conform to, being both a virgin and a mother.  (Their ideal was to be promiscuous and childless, like Artemis/Diana.)  I have since found the spiritual motherhood of Mary to be a great comfort to me as a mis-mothered and now motherless woman (my mother has stopped speaking to me as I have become a stronger Christian and more prominent pro-lifer, and I’m fine with that as I find her presence even on the phone to be a sort of “spiritual toxin”).

LSN: Did you notice any effect of pro-life prayer on life inside the clinic?

SEIDMAN: The best example of pro-life prayer and its effectiveness can be found in a story I posted to my local pro-life group’s blog (http://prolifecville.blogspot.com/2010/10/power-of-prayer-never-give-up.html).

I also remember one clinic worker seeking to reach out and form some sort of partnership with the local CPCs, as it bothered her that women who decided against abortion were just being pushed out the door with no further assistance.  She struck up some friendships with CPC staff and had tours of each others’ facilities arranged; and eventually came to an agreement with the CPC that in the event of a woman changing her mind about abortion during the counseling process, she would be set up with an immediate CPC appointment and given directions there by the abortion clinic staff (the CPC naturally refused a reciprocal agreement to make abortion appointments for women who were not swayed by their arguments for life).  I don’t know what became of this in the long term, as she is no longer employed there; but I do know that the clinic’s new location (it was forced to move due to the former building being bought and demolished for new construction) is back-to-back with the CPC.  Coincidence?

I also had some positive interactions with one sidewalk counselor in particular, who is now older and doesn’t get out to the clinic but is apparently still active in local pro-life fundraising - I hope to meet her again when I travel to Toledo next fall to speak at their 40 Days For Life kickoff rally.  She had an adopted son who was my age and I could tell that she really felt for me as a teenage girl being misled and abused by my mother and her friends.  It was as though she could see past the cold front I put up right into my heart that wanted to be free from the twisted world I was growing up in.

LSN: How widespread do you believe the behavior you witnessed to be among abortion clinics?

SEIDMAN:  I really can’t say.  I think the independent and/or feminist-oriented clinics would be more likely to be similar to what I experienced.  The owner of the clinic I’ve described was a good friend of the late Dr. George Tiller and the descriptions of his clinic that I’ve read sound like there was more going on there than just business, too.  Many if not most clinics are strictly business (including, in general, Planned Parenthood affiliates), but that does not preclude individuals or groups who work in those clinics, or abortion advocates in general, being involved to some degree in the occult.  I believe many of them are, although many are also atheists, or liberal Christians. 

I do believe that the occult believers are the “core” of the pro-abortion movement, just as the born-again Christians are the “core” of the pro-life movement, and I see no harm in striking at its heart, and informing “pro-choice” people (particularly the well-meaning but misguided Christians) of who and what they are truly associating themselves with.

LSN: Please tell me anything else you find surprising about your experience vis a vis the occult, or something you think the typical pro-lifer would not guess to be so.

SEIDMAN:  I think the thing that pro-lifers have found to be the most surprising, in my discussions with them thus far, is that the paganism/wicca/goddess-worship IS taken seriously by many liberals, pro-choicers, feminists, etc.  It’s not just a boogeyman.  Whether or not one believes that these spiritual beliefs and practices have any power, the fact is that there is a significant population of people who do, and who believe in it just as wholeheartedly as we believe in Christianity or other faiths. 

I’ve had a bit of disbelief from Christian pro-lifers who seem to not be able to comprehend someone honestly believing in another religion and not just rebelling against Christianity (which they, of course, know to be true - doesn’t everybody?) - they tend to be the ones who were raised Christian and sort of kept in the “Christian bubble”, and just really aren’t aware that there are people, even in modern America, who did not come from the same sort of background, people who may not have even been exposed to Christianity except in the vague cultural sense (celebrating Christmas as a secular holiday, etc).  There needs to be more educational work done about this, because I know the “core” of pro-lifers does tend to be lifelong Christians (especially the younger set), and many of them are just a bit naive or sheltered. 

I have written and spoken a bit on effective outreach to atheists. and the information has been mostly well-received (and used to positive effect by a team of sidewalk counselors in Fairfax, VA).  I plan to work on a guide to outreach for pagan believers too, since there are a great many pagan-friendly arguments for life, and also the scientific approach can work with nearly anyone (and the science is definitely on the pro-life side!). 

To me at least, religious conversion is secondary to conversion to pro-life beliefs.  I was pro-life for many, many years before accepting Christianity, and although I wasn’t a strong activist during that time, I did donate to secular pro-life groups like Feminists For Life, and voted for pro-life candidates whenever possible, as well as privately voicing and arguing my stance among friends.  I would rather see a hundred pro-life atheists in the world than one pro-abortion Christian.



Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

News

Planned Parenthood closes Iowa abortion facility because of low business

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

DUBUQUE, Iowa, May 3, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Planned Parenthood closed an Iowa abortion facility on Friday, noting low business that left the facility unsustainable from a financial standpoint.

Although Planned Parenthood of the Heartland announced in January that it planned to close the Dubuque, Iowa, office, pro-life sidewalk counselors were overjoyed on Friday to read the sign in the window that read: “Our office is closed, effective April 28, 2016.”

The office did not perform surgical abortions but did provide medication abortions to the community of about 58,000.

“Rejoice with us for the lives of unborn children saved!” Iowa Right to Life said in a statement after the closure.

As with numerous other closures, Planned Parenthood, which styles itself a provider of “care no matter what,” emphasized it was closing its doors to preserve its bottom line.

“After assessing the shifting health care landscape, changing demographics, and the challenges of operating in areas with low patient volumes, we made the tough decision to close the Dubuque Health Center,” the group said in an announcement. “This change allows us to expand hours and see more patients in Cedar Rapids, where there is unmet demand due to lack of clinician hours.”
“While we regret making this change, we know it is a necessary step in order to continue our mission to provide, promote and protect reproductive and sexual health through health services, education and advocacy. Patients have been notified, and if they wish, they can receive a broader array of services at our health center in Cedar Rapids, where we have expanded hours to accommodate more patient,” Planned Parenthood said.

American Life League’s vice president, Jim Sedlak, remembers speaking to the county right to life group nine years ago.

“I told them at the time that they needed to protest outside Planned Parenthood at least once a week,” he said. “They told me they would do better than that. Over the last eight years, these dedicated pro-lifers were outside Planned Parenthood every hour it was open. And now...it’s closed for good.”

That aligns with advice that David Bereit, the founder of 40 Days for Life, once told young people who wanted to know how to end abortion.

Be loving and compassionate, he said.

Your peaceful, loving presence out there flies in the face of all the stereotypes they want to throw onto us,” he added. “When you show them love instead of condemnation, when you show them peace and joy instead of anger and judgment, that will begin to break down the walls.”

Iowa Right to Life credited just such tactics with closing an office in Red Oak that performed webcam abortions. “Planned Parenthood shut down in Red Oak in large part because of the constant, prayerful presence outside their clinic,” the group said.

Upon hearing of the latest abortion facility shuttering, the Dubuque County Right to Life said that Planned Parenthood isn't the only group that will move its base of operations. “We will probably put our efforts in Cedar Rapids and will continue to spread the pro-life message,” said Executive Director Marian Bourek.



Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

News, , ,

Ted Cruz confronted by mom who supports aborting disabled babies…just like hers

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

MARION, Indiana, May 3, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Senator Ted Cruz was met on the campaign trail by a mother who strongly opposed a state pro-life law that would have protected children with birth conditions – like her own.

Andrea DeBruler, a 41-year-old nurse, confronted the presidential hopeful in the city of Marion as Cruz campaigned with Gov. Mike Pence.

DeBruler first asked Cruz, then Pence, about House Bill 1337, which bans abortions performed due to the child's race, sex, or disability, such as Down syndome.

DeBruler held up a picture of her daughter, Jania, who was born with cerebral palsy. “This was a choice,” she said.

She asked Sen. Cruz if he supported the bill, which made Indiana the second state in the nation to ban abortion for Down syndrome, after North Dakota.

“I'm not Governor Pence,” he replied. “But I'll tell you this: I believe in protecting human life.”

Pence, who endorsed Cruz in today's make-or-break Indiana primary, listened to her objections.

“I'm not here as a Republican, I'm not here as a Democrat. I'm here as a woman, a woman with choices, choices that you guys should not make,” DeBruler said.

After hearing that she felt many families lacked sufficient resources to care for children, especially in an area like Marion, Gov. Pence offered to connect her with social services.

“God bless her,” he said, looking at Jania's picture, “and God bless you.”

Though it may be unusual to encounter a woman arguing for the right to abort her own child, the governor handled it calmly. Pence had specifically reflected on “precious moments” he spent with “families of children with disabilities, especially those raising children with Down syndrome” when he signed the bill into law in March.

"We are truly thankful for the passage of this historic legislation by the Indiana House and applaud the new civil rights protections this bill creates for unborn children, as well as the new provisions this bill establishes for the humane final disposition of aborted babies," Indiana Right to Life President Mike Fichter said at the time.

DeBruler told the UK media outlet The Independent that H.B. 1337 “means you can no longer have an abortion based on deformity. I’m against this law, because I think it should be a woman’s choice” to abort for any reason.

Congressional Democrats made similar statements during hearings last month for Rep. Trent Franks' federal Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA), with Congressman John Conyers saying the bill is “patently unconstitutional,” because a woman has the right to abort a child before viability for any reason.

Both leading contenders for the Democratic nomination expressed their displeasure with the law, which protects unborn children from racial or sexual discrimination, as well as discrimination on the basis of an inborn trait like mental capacity.

When Gov. Pence signed the law, Sen. Bernie Sanders tweeted:

Hillary Clinton later said, “I commend the women of this state, young and old, for standing up against this governor and this legislature.”

DeBruler told The Independent, despite her comment about not being a Democrat or a Republican, she is in fact a Democrat and will vote for Hillary Clinton in today's primary. 



Advertisement
Featured Image
This year, as Notre Dame prepares to confer an honor on Vice President Joe Biden, the silence from the Catholic hierarchy is deafening. Drop of Light / Shutterstock.com
Phil Lawler

Opinion,

The moral challenge to Cardinal Wuerl in pending Notre Dame outrage

Phil Lawler

Ask Notre Dame not to honor pro-abortion Vice President Joe Biden. Sign the petition!

May 3, 2016 (CatholicCulture) -- In 2009, when the University of Notre Dame invited President Barack Obama to deliver a commencement address, dozens of American bishops lodged loud public protests. Yet this year, as Notre Dame prepares to confer an even greater honor on Vice President Joe Biden (together with former House Speaker John Boehner), the silence from the hierarchy is deafening.

Back in 2009, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Houston said that Notre Dame’s invitation to President Obama was “very disappointing,”, while then-Archbishop Timothy Dolan termed it a “big mistake.” The late Bishop John D’Arcy, then leader of the Indiana diocese in which the university is located, spoke of “the terrible breach which has taken place between Notre Dame and the Church.” For the first time in his 25 years of service to the Fort Wayne-South Bend diocese, Bishop D’Arcy declined to attend the Notre Dame commencement exercises; instead he addressed a protest rally organized by pro-life students, faculty, alumni, and staff.

These prelates and others explained their dismay by referring to the statement “Catholics in Political Life,” released in 2004 by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. In that document, the bishops reflected on the need to maintain a consistent public witness in defense of human life, and therefore to distance themselves from public officials who support legal abortion. The statement set forth a clear policy that Catholic institutions should not give public honors to “pro-choice” politicians:

The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.

By giving President Obama an honorary degree and offering him an opportunity to speak at graduation, Notre Dame clearly violated that policy. University officials could offer only garbled partial defenses, claiming that they were honoring Obama not because he supports unrestricted abortion, but because he is President of the United States.

This year the university cannot offer even that lame defense of the decision to award the Laetare Medal to Vice President Biden. Unlike Obama, Biden is a Catholic, and by granting him this award the university is explicitly saying that the Vice President has “illustrated the ideals of the Church and enriched the heritage of humanity.” In other words, Notre Dame is honoring Vice President Biden as a Catholic political leader despite his unwavering support for abortion and same-sex marriage.

Give credit to Bishop Kevin Rhoades, the current leader of the Fort Wayne-South Bend diocese, for raising a lonely voice of protest. “I believe it is wrong for Notre Dame to honor any ‘pro-choice’ public official with the Laetare Medal, even if he/she has other positive accomplishments in public service,” Bishop Rhoades said. But if any other bishops have joined him in that rebuke to Notre Dame, I must have missed their public announcements.

Some observers, of liberal political sympathies, have argued that it is wrong to honor John Boehner, too, because the former Speaker disagreed with the US bishops’ stand on immigration. This is a tired old argument, conflating disagreement with the bishops on a prudential political decision with defiance of Church teaching on a fundamental moral principle. But it is noteworthy that Notre Dame officials saw fit to make a joint award, no doubt in a cynical effort to dodge political criticism by choosing one honoree from each side of the political spectrum.

“We live in a toxic political environment where poisonous invective and partisan gamesmanship pass for political leadership,” said Father John Jenkins, the president of Notre Dame, in announcing the Laetare Award recipients. (Notice the pre-emptive suggestion that those who criticize the school’s choices may be engaged in “poisonous invective.”) He went on to make a tortured argument that although Notre Dame is honoring two politicians, it is not honoring them for what they have done in their political careers:

In recognizing both men, Notre Dame is not endorsing the policy positions of either, but celebrating two lives dedicated to keeping our democratic institutions working for the common good through dialogue focused on the issues and responsible compromise.

By now we all know the familiar dodges. The politician claims to oppose abortion personally, but to feel a delicate reticence about imposing his views on others. He says that we must be willing to compromise (even on life-and-death decisions). He insists that he is not “pro-abortion” but “pro-choice.”

That last bubble of rhetoric was unceremoniously burst by Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, DC, when he celebrated Mass at Georgetown after Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richard had delivered a lecture there. “The word ‘choice’ is a smokescreen,” he said, “behind which those killing unborn children take refuge. Every chance you get, blow that smoke away!”

Now Cardinal Wuerl himself has a chance to “blow that smoke away.” As things stand, he is scheduled to celebrate Mass at the Notre Dame commencement, and to receive an honorary degree. He could pull out; he could absent himself from the ceremonies, to ensure that he does not become part of an event that pays homage to a “pro-choice” Catholic politician.

And there is a precedent. Back in 2009, the Harvard legal scholar (and former US ambassador to the Holy See) Mary Ann Glendon was chosen to receive the Laetare Award. But when she learned that President Obama would be speaking, she announced her decision to decline the award. Clearly annoyed that her presence might be used to quiet the critics of the honor for Obama, Ambassador Glendon wrote that she did not want to be used as a counterweight, nor did she see the Notre Dame commencement as an appropriate venue for a genteel debate about legal abortion:

A commencement, however, is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame’s decision—in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. bishops—to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church’s position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice.

Could Cardinal Wuerl do this year what Ambassador Glendon did in 2009? Even at this late date, his withdrawal would send a powerful message of support for the right to life: an unmistakable rebuke to politicians who hide behind the smokescreen that the cardinal himself identified. To be sure, if he did withdraw, the cardinal would be caught in an avalanche of public criticism; he would suffer for his public witness. But there is a reason why cardinals wear red.

Phil Lawler has been a Catholic journalist for more than 30 years. He has edited several Catholic magazines and written eight books. Founder of Catholic World News, he is the news director and lead analyst at CatholicCulture.org. Reprinted with permission from Catholic Culture.



Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook