She chose her broadcasting career over baby’s life, now runs radio show for post-abortive women
PEACHTREE CITY, Georgia, May 21, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Thirty-five years ago, in 1978, everything seemed to be going Kim’s way.
The 23-year-old, blond-haired beauty had recently put herself through broadcasting school. Now she was being offered the job of her dreams, which would lead to her having her own program in a big city. She also had a man by her side with whom she planned to enjoy all the good things that life offered.
But just three months into her new career, Kim found out that she was pregnant. Her partner wanted nothing to do with a baby, telling her that he was not ready to become a father. Kim’s close friends told her that since he would not support her, she would just have to “take care” of herself – i.e. get an abortion.
Kim Ketola told LifeSiteNews.com in a recent interview that she viewed the pregnancy as a threat to her future.
“I did not in any way see how I could [have the baby and] withstand the shame of being a single mother and being someone who had been in love with a man who would treat me that way,” she said.
Kim didn’t agonize over the moral questions raised by abortion. She simply assumed that abortion must be moral since it was legal.
Kim remembers that while the abortion procedure was not traumatic or painful physically, it was “very traumatic spiritually.” After the procedure, she realized on some deep level that she was guilty of having “taken a life.”
“I believed I was going to hell. I believed that God hated me,” she said.
Grief and sorrow became Kim’s constant, but unacknowledged companions. She tried to bury her spiritually devastating abortion experience in her demanding career. The betrayal she felt from the man who had promised to be there for her in times of need destroyed the young couple’s once flourishing relationship.
A marriage five years after the abortion lasted less than a decade before ending in divorce. Kim remarried. Her second husband was interested in God and together they began attending a scripture-based pro-life denomination.
“As I would hear the sermons, it was just shattering because what my heart had known and sensed to be true … I was now hearing confirmed in scripture,” she said.
“Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you” (Jeremiah 1:5), she heard on one occasion. “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb,” (Psalm 139:13) she heard at another time.
But while the words of scripture beckoned her to begin a healing journey, Kim still had a long road ahead.
“There was no ‘child’ until that point. It was just too terrible to think about a baby or to try to picture a little one,” she said.
After being with the denomination for eleven years, Kim attended a discipleship retreat where a woman openly shared her abortion experience. At that moment, Kim knew that the time had come for her to acknowledge what she had denied and kept buried for so long.
Click "like" if you want to end abortion!
“Someone confessed an abortion and that made it safe for me to share my secret,” she remembers.
Kim learned at that retreat that Jesus had died for her and all her mistakes, including her abortion. She learned that nothing she had done was so terrible that God wasn’t big enough, merciful enough, and loving enough to forgive.
“God released me. As that shame receded, something really beautiful happened: Christ affirmed for me that my child is safe with him in Heaven.”
She name her child Emmanuel, meaning “God is with us”.
For the first time, Kim was able to publicly grieve over her child lost through abortion. And then, from her new vantage point, she took a hard look at her broadcasting career, pursued at the expense of her God-given child, and saw it as so much sawdust.
Help over the radio waves
Kim went on to work with Ruth Graham, who ran post-abortion healing workshops, in 2007. She wrote a book about her journey titled Cradle My Heart: Finding God’s Love after Abortion, published last year by Kregel, which tells her story and those of 10 other women.
Then, last year, when Kim moved to Georgia, some friends encouraged her to use her three decades of broadcasting experience to reach out over the airwaves to women hurting from abortion. With no budget and no backers Kim approached a radio station manager to ask for an hour a week. She was surprised when the station manager responded “Yes.”
Cradle My Heart Radio with Kim Ketola was first broadcast last September. In the past eight months, Kim has featured first-person stories of healing after abortion with expert commentary from leading Christian voices, including Cecil Stokes, producer of pro-life film October Baby, Ryan Bomberger of the Radiance Foundation, pro-life nurse and blogger Jill Stanek, Pat Layton, founder of Life Impact Network, Reggie Littlejohn, founder of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, abortion worker turned pro-life activist Abby Johnson, and Rachel’s Vineyard founder Dr. Theresa Burke.
Cradle My Heart Radio is live on 11 stations and streamed over the Internet on Sunday evenings at 9 ET. Kim’s begins every program with the tag line: “A safe place to connect with others. Finding God's Love After Abortion. This is Cradle My Heart Radio.”
On the show, Kim encourages listeners to call in and share their abortion related stories, ask questions, and make comments. “We are live and interactive so people will know that there is a safe place to go and to call,” she said.
Kim sees the radio show as a “beautiful ministry” to women hurt by abortion who just might hear the words they need to see the dawning of a new hope in their lives shattered by abortion. With about an estimated one-third of American women having an abortion during their reproductive lifetime, Kim knows that her program is not falling on deaf ears.
“What I know is that there are a lot of people who have stories to tell and some of them are very different from my story,” she said.
Kim does not see her program as a one-woman show. She relies on the pro-life movement to be there for the hurt and broken women who call in. She tells callers thinking about abortion that local pregnancy help centers offer the best information. She has a list of locations and numbers at hand. “The pregnancy help movement are the hands and feet of the pro-life movement,” she said.
Listeners tuning in on Sunday evenings will hear Kim say that abortion never solves problems, it just creates bigger ones. Kim said that if she knew a young woman had tuned in who was in the same situation she faced 35 years ago — on the threshold of a big career, in an uncommitted relationship, and pregnant — she would know exactly what kind of advice to give this woman.
“Pregnancy is nine months of your life,” she would say. “Once you are pregnant, there is nothing that can turn back the hands of time: You are a parent. Your only choice at that point is whether you’re going to make a loving decision for the good of your child or whether you’re going to act selfishly, out of fear and self-protection.”
“If you make a loving decision on behalf of your child, it may involve releasing that child for adoption, which is a difficult and painful choice. Or it may involve getting married when you weren’t planning to. Or it may involve single motherhood.”
“While all of these options have their own difficulty, none of them involve taking the life of another human being. You will never have to live with the guilt and the grief of having taken what belongs to God into your own hands and having to live with that for the rest of your life.”
“Yes, I understand the fear in your heart. But perfect love drives out fear. If you love this child, you can do the loving thing and have a decision that you can live with for the rest of your life."
Donald Trump says he will promote LGBT ‘equality’ as president
CONCORD, New Hampshire, February 8, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Does Donald Trump support the gay agenda or oppose it? On the eve of the New Hampshire primary, observers are still scratching their heads about where the GOP frontrunner actually stands.
Trump has repeatedly and consistently said he supports the natural definition of marriage, but can a President Trump be relied on to promote it resolutely and cogently? It is this question that has many marriage activists expressing concern about his increasingly likely hold on the GOP nomination.
In fact, the National Organization for Marriage has gone so far as to say that Trump has “abandoned” the pro-marriage cause.
Trump himself underscored the problem on the weekend when he told a New Hampshire television station that from the White House he would push “equality” for homosexuals even further forward.
A cable news reporter self-identifying as a lesbian asked him last Thursday after a rally in Exeter, "When President Trump is in office, can we look for more forward motion on equality for gays and lesbians?"
“Well, you can and look - again, we're going to bring people together. That's your thing, and other people have their thing,” Trump told Sue O’Connell of New England Cable News. “We have to bring all people together. And if we don't, we're not gonna have a country anymore. It's gonna be a total mess.”
Following the comments, Trump appeared Sunday on ABC’s This Week program with George Stephanopoulos and would not commit to appointing Supreme Court justices who’d overturn Obergefell, though that would be his “preference.”
“We’re going to look at judges. They’ve got to be great judges. They’ve got to be conservative judges. We’re going to see how they stand depending on what their views are. But that would be my preference,” he told Stephanopoulos. “I would prefer that they stand against, but we’ll see what happens. It depends on the judge.”
Trump’s comments follow his statements during a Fox News Sunday interview last week, when he said, “If I'm elected, I would be very strong on putting certain judges on the bench that I think maybe could change things, but they've got a long way to go.”
“[Marriage] should be a states rights issue,” Trump continued. “I can see changes coming down the line, frankly.”
When asked by Fox if he “might try to appoint justices to overrule the decision on same-sex marriage,” Trump replied, “I would strongly consider that, yes.”
The real estate mogul criticized the Supreme Court for the Obergefell decision imposing homosexual “marriage” on all 50 states last June, but then later in August, Trump voiced support to NBC News for banning companies from firing employees on the basis of sexual orientation. “I don't think it should be a reason” to fire workers, he said at the time on Meet the Press.
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and a number influential evangelicals have endorsed Senator Ted Cruz in the race for president. The Texas senator has not only committed to appointing pro-marriage justices, but says the president and the states can rightly defy the “fundamentally illegitimate” ruling just as President Lincoln defied the Dred Scott decision.
NOM has also been highly critical of Trump, saying he has “abandoned” their cause. The organization said in its January 27 blog post just prior to the Iowa Caucus that “Donald Trump does not support a constitutional amendment to restore marriage to our laws. Worse, he has publicly abandoned the fight for marriage. When the US Supreme Court issued their illegitimate ruling redefining marriage, Trump promptly threw in the towel with these comments on MSNBC: ‘You have to go with it. The decision's been made, and that is the law of the land.’”
NOM had said the week before that Trump “has made no commitments to fight for marriage, or the rights of supporters of marriage to not be discriminated against and punished for refusing to go along with the lie that is same-sex 'marriage.'”
New Hampshire voters have been tracked as showing support for homosexual “marriage,” as a poll last February showed 52 percent of Republican NH primary voters saying opposing gay “marriage” is unacceptable.
The latest CNN/WMUR tracking poll shows that overall 33 percent of likely Republican primary voters support Trump, giving him a growing 17-point lead over the nearest GOP contender. RealClearPolitics polling average in the state puts him at 31.0 percent support, with Marco Rubio second at 14.7, John Kasich third at 13.2, and Ted Cruz fourth at 12.7.
The unravelling of Chris Christie
February 8, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- I'm a member of the clergy and for the past eight years have lobbied the powerful in Trenton, covering the administrations of both Governors Jon Corzine and Chris Christie. I did much of my work on behalf of the New Jersey Family Policy Council, associated with Tony Perkins' Family Research Council. I am currently the President of the Center for Garden State Families.
Those of us who are engaged in the fight to secure the right to believe, speak, and practice the Christian faith in America were all heartened by the election of a Pro-Life Governor in 2009. Not only did Chris Christie run as an open Pro-Lifer, but he adopted a position in support of natural marriage in the course of the campaign. And when legislative Democrats attempted to pass same-sex marriage in the lame duck session, so they could have outgoing Governor Corzine sign it into law, Chris Christie rallied opposition and stopped it. Those were the early, hopeful days; but as Governor, Chris Christie has presented himself in an inconsistent, even scatterbrained way, often making decisions that go against earlier stated beliefs.
One of his first decisions was to make a liberal Democrat the state's Attorney General. Once approved by the Senate, and she was, the Attorney General could not be fired by the Governor, as was the case with other cabinet officers. This gave a liberal Democrat enormous power and she used it to join up with liberal Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley in filing a brief against Christians in a case called Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. Just one day after being sworn in, the newly appointed state Attorney General took the most aggressive legal posture available to defend former Governor Corzine’s one-gun-a-month handgun rationing law, moving to dismiss an NRA lawsuit to overturn the law, and later vigorously opposing the NRA’s motion for a preliminary injunction in the case. Because of this appointment, New Jersey did not join in the lawsuits to overturn ObamaCare.
Governor Christie appointed a radical "sexologist" to run the NJ Department of Children & Families. This appointee would later resign when it emerged that she had held the top job in an organization that had supported a study advocating the normalization of some forms of adult-child sex.
His judicial appointments were also confusing. While claiming to oppose same-sex marriage, Governor Christie nominated an openly gay Republican to the state Supreme Court who supported it. Even Democrats wouldn't support this plainly unqualified appointment, and he never served. The Governor supported the advancement of a liberal Democrat to the job of Chief Justice, while refusing to support the re-appointment of a Republican and the Court's most conservative member. He also appointed a controversial defense attorney who had defended a number of Islamic extremists who had violated immigration law.
In 2013, many of those in the Christian community opposed legislation that banned young people from receiving counseling and therapy to lead them away from homosexuality. As an ex-gay myself, I could have personally attested to the benefits of such counseling, much of which is no different than what is found in contemporary twelve-step programs. However, the Christian community opposing the ban was not afforded the opportunity to meet with the Governor. Only the homosexual community with its pro-ban agenda was given that benefit.
Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.
I don't blame the Governor for this, but I do blame his staff. As President Ronald Reagan said, "personnel is policy," and Governor Christie's choices in personnel have not advanced the policies he campaigned on, and often it was the direct opposite.
New Jersey ended up being just the second state in the country that only allows young people to receive counseling that advocates homosexuality, but bans by law counseling that advocates heterosexuality. When he signed it into law, Governor Christie embraced the made-up "science" of the propagandists, when he cited un-specified "research" that "sexual orientation is determined at birth." This is the so-called "gay-gene" trope that has baffled those engaged in the Science of Genetics because it has never been discovered.
As a candidate for Governor, Chris Christie talked the talk and raised the expectations of Christians in New Jersey. As Governor, and especially in his appointments, Christie undermined our confidence in his leadership. Christians should ask tough questions before extending our faith in him again.
Pro-life investigator hits back with new footage after judge blocks release of abortion sting videos
SAN FRANCISCO, February 8, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- A new video from the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) shows two National Abortion Federation (NAF) employees saying that abortion clinics would be interested in kickbacks from profits on fetal tissue and body part sales.
The video comes three days after a San Francisco imposed an injunction sought by NAF against CMP videos that one of the abortion group's attorneys said meant that "NAF's members can sleep a little easier tonight."
CMP accused the pro-abortion organization of hiding behind the court.
According to U.S. District Court Judge William H. Orrick, however, NAF "made...a showing" that release of CMP videos would harm rights to privacy, freedom of association, and liberty of NAF members.
"Critical to my decision are that the defendants agreed to injunctive relief if they breached the agreements and that, after the release of defendants’ first set of Human Capital Project videos and related information in July 2015, there has been a documented, dramatic increase in the volume and extent of threats to and harassment of NAF and its members," wrote Orrick.
Additionally, the judge found that CMP's videos “thus far have not been pieces of journalistic integrity, but misleadingly edited videos and unfounded assertions," and that nobody from the abortion industry “admitted to engaging in, agreed to engage in, or expressed interest in engaging in potentially illegal sale of fetal tissue for profit" in the CMP videos.
However, in a new video released today that is unrelated to the injunction, a NAF employee told undercover journalists that kickbacks "definitely [sound] like something some [of] our members would be really interested in," with another chiming in that money from private purchasers to abortion clinics were "a win-win" for clinics.
The undercover investigators, who had purported to be part of a biotechnology company with an interest in fetal parts, were offered the chance to be at a NAF conference. “We have an exhibit hall and then we also have the general conference. But I mean, this is a very great way to talk to our members. We have a group purchasing program through our membership,” the journalists were told. “So it seems like this would be a really great option to be able to offer our members, as well.”
This is the second ruling against CMP in recent weeks, and the second by Orrick since July. The San Francisco judge issued a restraining order against CMP related to NAF's 2014 and 2015 meetings in San Francisco and Baltimore that Friday's ruling extended.
The other recent ruling came in the form of an indictment of CMP's David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt. Merritt and Daleiden turned themselves into Houston authorities for booking and processing last week. After being released on bail, Daleiden spoke at a LifeSiteNews/Christian Defense Coalition press conference after which more than 100,000 petition signatures backing Daleiden were dropped off to the Harris County, Texas District Attorney's office.
According to Orrick, who says he reviewed the more than 500 hours of recordings from CMP, "It should be said that the majority of the recordings lack much public interest, and despite the misleading contentions of defendants, there is little that is new in the remainder of the recordings. Weighed against that public interest are NAF’s and its members’ legitimate interests in their rights to privacy, security, and association by maintaining the confidentiality of their presentations and conversations at NAF Annual Meetings. The balance is strongly in NAF’s favor.”
NAF did not respond to a request for comment about the allegations by Orrick and a NAF spokesperson that CMP's videos have caused threats and other security concerns against NAF members.