Blacks: Did you know this, concerning racism?

[Philothea53]

“Planned Parenthood is today more eugenic than Sanger intended. Sanger, after all, despised abortion. She denounced it as “barbaric” and called abortionists “bloodsucking men with M.D. after their names.” Abortion resulted in “an outrageous slaughter” and “the killing of babies,” which even the degenerate offspring of the unfit did not deserve.”

This is a small excerpt from the article I have linked below. It is somewhat lengthy article(3 pages) but it is well worth a read if you are interested in Sanger and the euginics movement.

article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODUxZmVmZDM0ODY0MTFhOWJhOGIwOTYwYjRmMDQ2ODk=&w=MA==

Although she was against abortion, she was extremely eugenic. It just happens that her way was to not allow the reproduction of those she deemed unfit. She advocated mass sterilizations and even rounding them up and keeping them away from society until they died off. Planned Parenthood’s methods are different only because that is where the money is.

 

[LittleDeb]

“Planned Parenthood is today more eugenic than Sanger intended. Sanger, after all, despised abortion. She denounced it as “barbaric” and called abortionists “bloodsucking men with M.D. after their names.” Abortion resulted in “an outrageous slaughter” and “the killing of babies,” which even the degenerate offspring of the unfit did not deserve.”

This is a small excerpt from the article I have linked below. It is somewhat lengthy article(3 pages) but it is well worth a read if you are interested in Sanger and the euginics movement.

article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODUxZmVmZDM0ODY0MTFhOWJhOGIwOTYwYjRmMDQ2ODk=&w=MA==

Excellent article! Although on the one point the author does have that quote about Sanger a little out of context. It was her belief about illegal abortion that it was barbaric and that the doctor’s were bloodsucker’s. It was part of her push to have it legalized so that those who were “in it for the money” would get out. She wanted it fully subsidized by the government as part of the forced sterilization movement. The other quote about abortion killing babies was a thought process she abandoned very early in her eugenics career. She considered that position left over from her (paraphrased) ‘bleeding heart Catholic mother.’ Sanger herself had an aversion to babies.

The author also has one fact listed that is likely a myth. PP likes to say that Sanger was a nurse, I think to try to raise her credibility. She is on record having attended nursing school, but dropped out. I have yet to see proof of her nursing certification. She is only ever recorded to be a nurse’s assistant, (edit to add:and that was for a mere 3 months) but never a nurse herself. But it is a common myth spread by PP. It doesn’t appear that those from the current PP ever bothered to find the proof.

On the whole though, the article is fairly accurate and well written. A reliable book on this subject is Margaret Sanger, Father of Modern Society; by Elasah Drogin. Excellent book with lots of contextual quotes.

 

[RWMorris]

… I am less concerned about the sanctity of life and much more concerned about improving the lot of the living unfortunate as this is demanded by my own ethical beliefs of utilitarianism …

A classic self-refuting statement. You couldn’t make up one better than this.

It was her belief about illegal abortion that it was barbaric and that the doctor’s were bloodsucker’s.

It is amazing how that one word, illegal, negated several prior posts. It demonstrates how important context is in a debate.

You know I don’t understand this ceaseless and obsessive vilification of Margaret Sanger. She is DEAD, and has been for some time. If indeed she was a racist, she shared that opinion with millions of her fellow Americans…

She may be DEAD, but her villainous, vile ideas are alive and well. The only difference between her and some of her more infamous eugenicists forefathers, was power. They had it, she didn’t. How many more millions would have suffered if she had possessed power. I use the term, more, because the power of her, and her forefathers’ ideas have already brought death to tens of millions.

Yes, she was a racist. But unlike the “millions of her fellow Americans”, most of whom recognize their sin and are willing, and actively trying to change, she saw her idea as a benevolent force for the betterment of mankind.

Her racism is the most dangerous kind. We must never cease to to vilify Margaret Sanger’s ideas. We must never forget.

Any bold was added for emphasis.

 

[DL82]

I remember hearing a Pro-Life speaker saying they did some research in the 1990s where someone from her office called up Planned Parenthood and said they wanted to make a $10,000 donation, but they specifically wanted it to go towards counselling black women to have abortions. The caller pretended to be really racist, and the worker at Planned Parenthood just glossed over her racism and said ‘sure, you can set any conditions on the donation you like’, she tried to turn the caller’s words around, saying ‘we’ll make sure the money goes to help African American women if you like’.

 

[lovesMary]

The irony of the this is that the opposite has occured from the eugenics goals Ms Sanger envisioned. Capable, more highly functioning members of society practise artificial birth control effectively, and their numbers are declining. Meanwhile, the more irresponsible segment of society, including the Black underclass, tends to have larger families.

Within all racial groups, the irresponsible people are breeding without a care in the world, while middle and upper class taxpayers curtail their family sizes. This is all fueled by the fact that duel incomes are now the norm, making it impractical for working families to have more than 2 children. Meanwhile, social programs paid for by those hardworking people ensure that the underclass is free to have larger families without worrying about the wolf at the door.

 

[RWMorris]

The irony of the this is that the opposite has occured from the eugenics goals Ms Sanger envisioned. Capable, more highly functioning members of society practise artificial birth control effectively, and their numbers are declining. Meanwhile, the more irresponsible segment of society, including the Black underclass, tends to have larger families.

Within all racial groups, the irresponsible people are breeding without a care in the world, while middle and upper class taxpayers curtail their family sizes. This is all fueled by the fact that duel incomes are now the norm, making it impractical for working families to have more than 2 children. Meanwhile, social programs paid for by those hardworking people ensure that the underclass is free to have larger families without worrying about the wolf at the door.

Mary, be careful with your assumptions about the “irresponsible” and “the Black underclass”, and “more highly functioning members of society”. I don’t believe the facts will support them.

 

[lovesMary]

Mary, be careful with your assumptions about the “irresponsible” and “the Black underclass”, and “more highly functioning members of society”. I don’t believe the facts will support them.

My comment was not meant to fit into a politically correct box.

The facts support the fact that the birthrate is higher amongst the lower classes, and yes, people on welfare have more disorganized lives, tend to not plan for the future, tend not to take personal responsiblity for their choices, and are definately not the folks who are keeping civilization afloat through positive contributions to the common good.

This isn’t to denigrate them as human beings, nor is it to deny the fact that some people justly use the welfare system as a leg up to a better life. But the fact remains that, our social welfare system, coupled with artificial birth control and abortion, has enouraged the underclass, Black and White, to demographically increase their numbers proportionately over that of people with a more responsible approach to life.

 

[RWMorris]

… But the fact remains that, our social welfare system, coupled with artificial birth control and abortion, has enouraged the underclass, Black and White, to demographically increase their numbers proportionately over that of people with a more responsible approach to life.

If those “with a more responsible approach to life” are aborting themselves out of existence, well … what can one say?

 

[Leebo]

The irony of the this is that the opposite has occured from the eugenics goals Ms Sanger envisioned. Capable, more highly functioning members of society practise artificial birth control effectively, and their numbers are declining. Meanwhile, the more irresponsible segment of society, including the Black underclass, tends to have larger families.

Within all racial groups, the irresponsible people are breeding without a care in the world, while middle and upper class taxpayers curtail their family sizes. This is all fueled by the fact that duel incomes are now the norm, making it impractical for working families to have more than 2 children. Meanwhile, social programs paid for by those hardworking people ensure that the underclass is free to have larger families without worrying about the wolf at the door.

I think very few Christians appreciate the sacredness of life the way it is taught by the Catholic Church. Alot of Catholics don’t recognize what their own Church teaches. I am just coming to understand myself. If you are strong in your faith then you will believe that God will provide for your family, as he has promised, no matter how large it becomes. Each child is its own special gift from God.

Income is now probably the most common reason for the use of contraception by married couples. “We just can’t afford any more children”. It is one of the advances secuar society has succesfully made against the protastant churches. If I am correct I believe it wasn’t long ago that birth control was not allowed in any of the Christian protastant churches.

It is compromise like this that weakens our faith. Another compromise made under the guise of “financial responsability” is the working mom. The absentee father gets alot of press, but what about absentee mothers. Mothers have been hounded into the work place in part by the feminist movement which has degraded and slandered the housewife almost out of existance. A women should not be expected to actually raise her own offspring. That would infringe on her liberty. Leave the child rearing to the professionals in daycare… and shame on any mindlessly stupid women who actually stays home to raise her own children

One final point. Living outside our means. Ok, this is obvious, but our standard of living is way more expensive than it has to be. It is a quality of life that we have come to think of as an entitlement. I will link some more info on this after a little research.

All the ills in our society can’t be laid at the feet of this one women, we have as a society been complicit in this disaster.

 

[lovesMary]

I agree we are too materialistic, that’s the other side of the coin. But, in my opinion, to state that “God will provide” is naive, and presumptuous.

God does not ‘provide’ for many good people on this planet. Many hungry people in this world are subject to the whims of despotic governments, depleted topsoil, poor precipitation, lack of economic activity, exploitation by multi-national corporations… the list goes on and on.

One cannot presume that God will magically provide for their own family, no matter what their personal choices may be. Since the Fall of Adam, humans have had to work hard for a living, and take the good with the bad, often enduring wars, famines, and other calamities.

 

[Leebo]

I agree we are too materialistic, that’s the other side of the coin. But, in my opinion, to state that “God will provide” is naive, and presumptuous.

God does not ‘provide’ for many good people on this planet. Many hungry people in this world are subject to the whims of despotic governments, depleted topsoil, poor precipitation, lack of economic activity, exploitation by multi-national corporations… the list goes on and on.

One cannot presume that God will magically provide for their own family, no matter what their personal choices may be. Since the Fall of Adam, humans have had to work hard for a living, and take the good with the bad, often enduring wars, famines, and other calamities.

Isn’t our job as a Christian to make sure the hungery get fed? It sounds like your saying our job is not to have children so they don’t have to be fed.

I believe the point I made is consistant with both the Bible and traditional teaching of the Church. (please anyone correct me if I’m wrong)

That being said, you are making a valid point. “God will provide” can be intrepeted any of number of ways including naively.

I do understand that it is not as simply as it sounds, but I don’t think it is as difficult as society would have us believe, especially in this country.

Here is some info I promised in my last post:

The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau, taken from various gov*ernment reports:

Forty-three percent of all poor households actu*ally own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Only 6 percent of poor households are over*crowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.

Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

Yes, I think we have become quite materialistic. (BTW I am not exluding myself)

 

[lovesMary]

The ‘poor’ in this nation don’t suffer hunger and lack of TVs, but who can deny the utter spiritual and intellectual poverty existing in our inner cities and neglected rural areas? Many of these people are hooked on crack or meth, brought up in ignorance and filth, with no concept of healthy family life. The out-of-wedlock births are astronomical.

 

[distracted]

I read the whole thing, it sounds like he supports planned parenthood to me, I wonder if he would support it today? I wonder if he would support abortion today. No matter, he was duped by Sanger.

url]

as so many are… the word Choice sound so wonderful… don’t want to have an abortion? don’t have one… but don’t “deprive” others of their freedom to choose… How UN-American!! And that is the unforgivable sin in this country… to be un-american… anti- freedom…

Right…

If a person wants to kill his child… no matter waht age, hey, let him… it’s a free country…

 

[distracted]

The irony of the this is that the opposite has occured from the eugenics goals Ms Sanger envisioned. Capable, more highly functioning members of society practise artificial birth control effectively, and their numbers are declining. Meanwhile, the more irresponsible segment of society, including the Black underclass, tends to have larger families.

define “irresponsible”… To me it is irresponsible (etc) to put $ before other values… as most americans, i feel, do… and probably most other people as well… People who are poor may be poor because they do not value money and worldly success… Maybe they are the wiser and more “highly functioning” in our society… those who are working 60 hours a week have not time to pray… and focus on things that are more important… than the things of this world…

the irresponsible people are breeding without a care in the world, while middle and upper class taxpayers curtail their family sizes.

again, i feel you are being judgmental and condescending… You seem to assume that people who have more children do so for questionable reasons… You seemto not consider that maybe some people have children becasue they love children… :hypno:

this is all fueled by the fact that duel incomes are now the norm, making it impractical for working families to have more than 2 children.

Yeah, right. The reason these kinds of people don’t have children - again, not ALWAYS… is likely due to the fact that they don’t want anything to slow down their economic “rise” in the world… children take a lot of time and $ and energy that some people would rather expend on obtaining material weath… (etc)…

paid for by those hardworking people ensure that the underclass is free to have larger families without worrying about the wolf at the door.

we are at below replacement level in population growth… in other words, there is no growth… largely due to the aforementioned…
Is no family supposed to be over 1.2 children??
Nazi Germany… the holocaust, began with abortion… abortion begins with a mentality such as you ascribe to…

 

[Philothea53]

I remember hearing a Pro-Life speaker saying they did some research in the 1990s where someone from her office called up Planned Parenthood and said they wanted to make a $10,000 donation, but they specifically wanted it to go towards counselling black women to have abortions. The caller pretended to be really racist, and the worker at Planned Parenthood just glossed over her racism and said ‘sure, you can set any conditions on the donation you like’, she tried to turn the caller’s words around, saying ‘we’ll make sure the money goes to help African American women if you like’.

Actually this just happened rather recently. Black community leaders, led by Dr. alveda King are calling on politicians to accept no money from Planned Parenthood, NARAL or any other abortion group.

Here are some links to the story. The first one is a cached copy. For some reason (?) the original is gone.

Planned Parenthood Agreed to Accept Race-Motivated Donations

Undercover Investigation Reveals Planned Parenthood’s Racism

Pastors Accuse Planned Parenthood for ‘Genocide’ on Blacks

An open letter from Dr. Alveda King to African-American Leaders

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Well, this is a Catholic website. I don’t think it should be considered obsesssive to point out the views of the person who started the organization which has a basic philosophy directly opposed by the teachings of the church.

PPH today has naturally progressed into something much worse than what she started. Sanger was against abortion(I just learned this today doing research).

But her views as you so clearly point out are not followed anyway. This is a Catholic doctrine. It is not going to gain adherents in other Christian and non-Christian faiths. So I do fail to see the point.

If catholics just want to discuss how terrible PPH is then fine, but Sanger is long gone and I do see no point. Just my opinion.

 

[distracted]

Isn’t our job as a Christian to make sure the hungery get fed? It sounds like your saying our job is not to have children so they don’t have to be fed.

I believe the point I made is consistant with both the Bible and traditional teaching of the Church. (please anyone correct me if I’m wrong)

That being said, you are making a valid point. “God will provide” can be intrepeted any of number of ways including naively.

I do understand that it is not as simply as it sounds, but I don’t think it is as difficult as society would have us believe, especially in this country.

Here is some info I promised in my last post:

The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau, taken from various gov*ernment reports:

Forty-three percent of all poor households actu*ally own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Only 6 percent of poor households are over*crowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.

Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

Yes, I think we have become quite materialistic. (BTW I am not exluding myself)

poor here means wealthy in other 3rd world countries…

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I chuckle out loud whenever “well meaning other than black folk” try to address and resolve all of problems of blacks as if they are not smart enough to do it themselves.

They are black. So of course they need our help in understanding the evils of abortion and homosexuality.

((sigh)) Why… they don’t even know who Margaret Sanger is !!

ps… she is still dead.

The note, I’m sure not intended of paternalism was something I noticed as well.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

But the legacy [Planned Parenthood] she left behind does pose a threat …

afgen.com/planned_parenthood_racism.html

No more of a threat than PPH poses to white folks or any other kind of folks. And the fact is that the majority apparently of all racial and ethnic varieties still find it a useful organization. Since most people on CAF agree that PPH is bad, there is little point in stating the obvious is there?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

98% percent? Prove that one!! Do you get your statistics straight from the contraceptive/pro-abortion lobby?

No its from Pew actually and they seem to be most respected in their polling. You seriously think that there isn’t an overwhelming number of folks who favor contraception. 85% of Catholics use it.