Testimony of an Abortionist

The abortionist, a woman with a medical degree (I cannot call her a health-care worker, since she, without care, subjects other women to a procedure that is physically, psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually unhealthy), says the following about her life’s work (http://www.bostonmagazine.com/ArticleDisplay.php?id=495):

"Doing them over and over and over again can be really taxing. All of us who provide abortions believe in what we're doing and think it's a good thing and a right that needs to be available. But when you're in the clinic and in that group of people doing it, it can be tough, and you can get really tired. I don't think it'll ever make me stop doing terminations, but it can move people to tears. And it's not just me -- it extends to the nurses and the people who help us in the operating room. It's not unusual that you'll have only a couple of nurses who will help you out with it. There are nurses that will say, "No, I won't help you take care of this patient." I even know people who feel they can't tell their families what they do; their families think they work on labor and delivery."



Who feels bad when they are doing good? Do people who serve food to the poor have to force themselves to go to work, to get past all of the negative feelings helping the less-fortunate evokes? Should I seek counseling for the grief I must be repressing every Sunday when I drop a few dollars in the collection plate?

If it is so good, why do so many post-abortive women who were given legal and societal free rein to kill their unwanted children feel so bad? Back in the day, which is a long while for me, they used to call this “cognitive dissonance.” The truth of our behavior cannot be denied, so we adopt shaky belief systems to try to support what we have already done, to make it honest and make it right. But we fail – this is dissonance, when reality and what we want to believe do not harmonize.

Surely we forget world history, and dead persons are as unalive to us as the unborn.

Dare to compare:

Otto Ohlendorf was a young German intellectual who spent a year as chief of Einstazgruppe D. The Einsatz groups were ordered to follow the German combat troops in Nazi Germany to carry out one phase of the “final solution.” At his Nuremberg trial, Ohlendorf cooly testified that his group killed 90,000 men, women, and children in the year of his command. The disturbing consequences of committing themselves to this “work” were not completely lost on the man who oversaw the killings:

“Then they were shot, kneeling or standing, by firing squads in a military manner and the corpses thrown into the ditch. I never permitted the shooting by individuals, but ordered that several of the men should shoot at the same time in order to avoid direct personal responsibility. Other group leaders demanded that the victims lie down flat on the ground to be shot through the nape of the neck. I did not approve of these methods.”

“Why?” asked [the interrogater].

“Because,” replied Ohlendorf, “both for the victims and for those who carried out the executions, it was, psychologically, an immense burden to bear.”


It was a Dr. Becker who would help Ohlendorf with this problem by constructing the gas vans that would separate the men from their foul deeds. Still, the operators weren’t doing it properly, and people died of suffocation instead of gas poisoning, leaving corpses twisted in agony for the men to dispose of. This wasn’t enough, Becker said, to prevent “the immense psychological injuries and damage to their health which that work can have for these men. They complained to me about headaches which appeared after each unloading.”

In a “humanitarian” effort to reduce the stress felt by the men ordered to kill other human beings, Dr. Becker ordered a change in technique: “My directions now have proved that by correct adjustment of the levers death comes faster and the prisoners fall asleep peacefully. Distorted faces and excretions, such as could be seen before, are no longer noticed.”

Heinrich Himmler was so distressed about the reluctance of some medical staff to participate in experimentation, a euphemism for the torture and murder of innocent persons for the “good” of medical science, that he penned a memo insisting that non-Christian physicians be found who would act to further the cause of science without worrying about ethics, morals, responsibilities, cruelty or compassion. The social needs of the state, according to Himmler, vastly outweighed the needs of individuals.

Himmler successfully repressed his negative feelings, if he ever had them, and expressed no self-doubt or reluctance to carry out what he saw as his duty, his right, and his responsibility. But were Becker and Ohlendorf more compassionate simply because they were aware that killing these people was disturbing to the men who had to do it?

Read the lie in the abortionist’s own words:

"I have the utmost respect for life; I appreciate that life starts early in the womb, but also believe that I'm ending it for good reasons. Often I'm saving the woman, or I'm improving the lives of the other children in the family. I also believe that women have a life they have to consider. If a woman is working full-time, has one child already, and is barely getting by, having another child that would financially push her to go on public assistance is going to lessen the quality of her life. And it's also an issue for the child, if it would not have had a good life. Life's hard enough when you're wanted and everything's prepared for. So yes, I end life, but even when it's hard, it's for a good reason."



Oh, well. As long as you are ending lives for good reasons, please – carry on. You have many supporters in history, including the best minds Nazi Germany had to offer.

“Life is hard enough when you’re wanted and everything’s prepared for.” Darn, that’s true, isn’t it? Well, you will just have to kill us all. We will all suffer. We will all eventually die. It is so darned hard – why have any of it? Certainly, why should any impoverished child, particularly one born in the United States with its limited opportunities, be given any chance in life to rise from poverty? Kill us all and be done with it. For that matter, you sound a little sad yourself. You should be more careful to make sure we don’t think you are having an unhappy life after all.

Oh, wait – which ones of us will we kill? Some people will have to survive if only to kill the ones who will not be happy in life because of some monetary short-fall. We must prioritize, too. I have less money than George W. Bush. Oh, crap. Someone kill me already. But the illegal immigrants who work all over the Valley of the Sun where I live generally have less money than I – kill them first.

How many parents out there were completely prepared for the birth of their children? If you weren’t, please send them back to the abortionist. She will take care of the problem for you, and kill them. Or perhaps she should kill you, for daring to give birth without preparation and money. Shame on you. You should be exterminated.

Don’t bother to send money for the tsunami victims in Asia – many of them were poor by U.S. standards, and the poor cannot be happy; ergo, the poor should not have been alive in the first place.

Good heavens, kill all the single mothers immediately. That will take them off the welfare rosters. And since they had their children while in poverty, kill the children with them, or we will just be faced with more mouths to feed. Don't bother to ask them if they want to live, after all, since that will just confuse the issue with people who feel entitled to a life they cannot afford to sustain. It's a lot of people, but Himmler, Ohlendorf, Becker and others have paved the way for you, and left instructions for clean, efficient mass murders to take care of this problem.

While you are at it, release all of the women in prison who have killed their children after they were born. They were only exercising their right to be free of responsibility. By the same token, release all the men who killed their wives or girlfriends – including Scott Peterson. Why would you impose a prison sentence on him anyway? He was only exercising his own right to be free from the responsibilities of his choices. Of course, he stepped on your toes, Ms. Abortionist, and you were unable to collect any money from the death of his unborn son. Perhaps we should leave the extermination of unwanted life to the professionals.

While you are at it, take another page from the Nazi instruction manual, and sterilize all of the men who impregnated women without benefit of a credit check, bank statements, and personal wealth. They simply should not be allowed to do this! How can the state survive when we allow willy-nilly random reproduction and the growth of the poor population?

The next time you feel a little worn out, or even tearful, from mauling womb after womb, ripping apart child after child, and ruining life after life, Ms. Abortionist, open your version of a bible, and find reassurance that you are simply ending life for the good of society in these words:


“The...state...must see to it that only the healthy beget children; that there is only one disgrace: despite one’s own sickness and deficiencies, to bring children into the world; and one highest honor: to renounce doing so.”

~ Adolf Hitler, mass murderer and lunatic, Mein Kampf