Margaret Sanger quotes!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lisa4Catholics
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
© Westchester Coalition for Legal Abortion, Inc.
237 Mamaroneck Ave., White Plains, NY 10605

My old neighborhood. I wish anyone well who attempts to change minds here. You are dealing with a fundamentalist religion disguised as…well…several things.

Here is just one part of it:

“Judaism says very specifically that a fetus is not a person until birth and until it survives 30 days,”–Rabbi Sally Priesand, Monmouth Reform Temple, NJ

And that is the moderate view. At least there is a objective law, sick as it may be. From there you go into Trotskyism and worse.
 
Sgt Sweaters:
That, sir, is a huge list of empty rhetoric and flimsy arguments. To be quite honest I don’t want to get into another forum at the moment, but would be perfectly happy refuting any number of these. Anything in particular?
Yeah that is quite a big list but like u said it is quite flimsy rhetoric and probably very easy to answer each one briefly. But then again, any little help will do. Why don’t u just pick out the more complicated ones since feel I’m not up to par to answer well enough.
 
From that website:

“She had her fun, now let her pay for it. If you have sex, you should expect to get pregnant and pay the consequences… This vindictive, self-righteous attitude stems from a belief that sex is bad and must be punished. Motherhood should never be punishment for having sex. Forcing a child to be born to punish its mother is the ultimate in child abuse.”

We have the self righteous attitude? How ridiculous. Self righteous is thinking that you can do whatever you want and if a child happens to come along and spoil your fun, well, there’s abortion for ya, no worries! What an awful argument. And by the way, since when is motherhood a punishment? How about considering it a responsibility for your actions? At least instead of resorting to murder you could consider adoption.
This is only one thing that particularly stood out to me, but that whole list is full of holes in their arguments and accusing pro-lifers of not being concerned for women’s health…riiiiiight. Have they ever looked up the health risks in having an abortion? (heck, even using the pill, for that matter?)
I get headaches reading stupid stuff like that. :mad:
 
40.png
jayb:
Yeah that is quite a big list but like u said it is quite flimsy rhetoric and probably very easy to answer each one briefly. But then again, any little help will do. Why don’t u just pick out the more complicated ones since feel I’m not up to par to answer well enough.
I’m writing them out right now. I’ll PM them to you later, because once again, it’s a long list, and I don’t want to hijack this thread. :eek:
 
40.png
Celia:
From that website:
“She had her fun, now let her pay for it. If you have sex, you should expect to get pregnant and pay the consequences… This vindictive, self-righteous attitude stems from a belief that sex is bad and must be punished. Motherhood should never be punishment for having sex. Forcing a child to be born to punish its mother is the ultimate in child abuse.”
:confused: :confused: :confused: HUH???!!!
 
That lady looks like a battleaxe.

All I can say is, what if her parents had done her the kindest thing to a newborn? She suggested it… :mad:
 
Anyone ever read her bio on biography.com?
She was undeniably difficult to work with, and close examination of her writings shows that she endorsed birth control in part to maintain the position of the white race, but she was just as certainly a courageous pioneer.
Ha!
 
40.png
Celia:
Huh…what? I don’t get it.
I think the quote was confusing. You don’t know who is saying what. The quote you gave seems to be in opposition to itself. I think I can guess what it is saying, but I’d have to read the website to really know. Interesting that both viewpoints in the quote are opposite and skewed…
 
40.png
The_Angelus:
That lady looks like a battleaxe.

All I can say is, what if her parents had done her the kindest thing to a newborn? She suggested it… :mad:
What gets me is she looks like Anton Levay the founder of the church of satan:eek: That is so creepy:eek:
 
40.png
yochumjy:
I think the quote was confusing. You don’t know who is saying what. The quote you gave seems to be in opposition to itself. I think I can guess what it is saying, but I’d have to read the website to really know. Interesting that both viewpoints in the quote are opposite and skewed…
Ohhhhh, I’m sorry. LOL, I should have posted it a little clearer…if you go to the website there is a column on the left with some things that the pro-life movement might use in their arguments, and on the right is a column that supposedly refutes those claims. The first sentence of my post is supposed to be the pro life side, then dot dot dot…the pro-choice positions answer. You have to probably check out the site to get it 'cause I’m probably not explaining it too well.
Sorry for the technical error 😛
 
Margaret Sanger’s racism went even deeper than that…she partnered with the racist Lothrap Stoddard who wrote “The Rising Tide of Color” (which my husband owns a copy of, if anyone wants to know details) which is exactly like nazism, it blames all of societies problems on the “colored person”.

Not only that, PP is still extremely racist. Look up how many suits for racism in the workplace have been filed against them…waaaay more than you’d think!

She wasn’t just biased against the black, she also despised anyone with a disability, the poor, the slow, and just about everyone else except herself and her fascist buddies. She believed in population control, how there are too many people and you should push b.c. for the unfit so that the “fit” could be the only “race” left on earth. Amazing how her philosophies have infiltrated our culture right and left.

What’s really shocking reading her books is the incredible inconsistancy! One minute she’s claiming to know what’s best for poor women, to be soo compassionate to all women, and the next she’s calling them “human weeds” that should be exterminated and kept from breeding more of thier “kind”. One minute she’s quoting supposed medical figures, and the next she’s telling stories about the “feeble-minded” women she knows. It’s insane.

BTW, saying that Hitler inspired Margaret Sanger is like saying that Margaret Sanger inspired the devil. Hitler admired groups like hers for thier ability to decrease the “unfit” population. He didn’t JUST want to get rid of Jews, you have got to remember their were at least 3 million NON Jewish people killed in the holecaust. Many were disabled, elderly, black, etc. His entire EXCUSE for hating the Jews was that they had faulty genes. He was just another twisted leaf on the eugenics bush from the beginning.

You have to admit, becauser of M. Sanger and her sick little grandson, waaaay more people have been killed than Hitler ever could’ve touched.

Lord have mercy on thier twisted souls…
 
40.png
Christian4life:
Margaret Sanger’s racism went even deeper than that…she partnered with the racist Lothrap Stoddard who wrote “The Rising Tide of Color” (which my husband owns a copy of, if anyone wants to know details) which is exactly like nazism, it blames all of societies problems on the “colored person”.

Not only that, PP is still extremely racist. Look up how many suits for racism in the workplace have been filed against them…waaaay more than you’d think!

She wasn’t just biased against the black, she also despised anyone with a disability, the poor, the slow, and just about everyone else except herself and her fascist buddies. She believed in population control, how there are too many people and you should push b.c. for the unfit so that the “fit” could be the only “race” left on earth. Amazing how her philosophies have infiltrated our culture right and left.

What’s really shocking reading her books is the incredible inconsistancy! One minute she’s claiming to know what’s best for poor women, to be soo compassionate to all women, and the next she’s calling them “human weeds” that should be exterminated and kept from breeding more of thier “kind”. One minute she’s quoting supposed medical figures, and the next she’s telling stories about the “feeble-minded” women she knows. It’s insane.

BTW, saying that Hitler inspired Margaret Sanger is like saying that Margaret Sanger inspired the devil. Hitler admired groups like hers for thier ability to decrease the “unfit” population. He didn’t JUST want to get rid of Jews, you have got to remember their were at least 3 million NON Jewish people killed in the holecaust. Many were disabled, elderly, black, etc. His entire EXCUSE for hating the Jews was that they had faulty genes. He was just another twisted leaf on the eugenics bush from the beginning.

You have to admit, becauser of M. Sanger and her sick little grandson, waaaay more people have been killed than Hitler ever could’ve touched.

Lord have mercy on thier twisted souls…
Christian4life:

Actually, I mentioned the total figure earlier. If I go with my hisotrian friend and Yad Yashem, the totel number of JEWS killed in the Holocaust reaches a total of 8 million, if you include CONVERTS and their descendents (mostly Catholics). The overall total reaches 16 to 18 million depending on your source and whom you include/exclude.

Either way, it’s horrific, and the logic used to justify what they did and why came from a book, The Release of the Destruction of the Life Devoid of Value, by Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche, which was first published in 1920.

This is the logic being used by those who support Abortion on Demand and by those who support Euthanasia.

One of the points in the Pro-Abortion Site. They say they are “PRO-CHOICE”…But, in the cases where women fled the People’s Republic of China because of that Government’s oppressive policy of forced Abortion and sterilization, the “Pro-Choice” groups" filed Amicus Curae Briefs, not on behalf of the women who were seeking “Refugee Status”, but on behalf of the Clinton State Department and the Government of the PRC, to force the women’s return to Red China, their imprisonment and their forced sterilization (since they had already had the children). NARAL and NOW both opposed the WOMEN and their applications for asylum IN EVERY INSTANCE, and sided with the Government of the PRC, and its policy of FORCED ABORTIONS, IN EVERY INSTANCE!

“PRO-CHOICE” has to include the option of HAVING THE BABY, or is isn’t PRO-CHOICE! - It’s just PRO-ABORTION, as NARAL and NOW were IN THOSE CASES! See how the PRO-ABORTION side answers this one!

These were the cases that began to bring me back from my 15 years of “Being Pro-Choice”, because the women’s organizations couldn’t care less about the “Reproductive Rights” of those Chinese women, because they wanted to keep their babies!

con. next post, Michael
 
MOre for the PRO-ABORTION SITE:

The PRO-ABORTIONS love to use the Rape and incest bit, partly because it devides those of us who think we’re being compassionate.

This is a case where the real COMPASSION is counter-intuitive.

They’ve done real scientific tracking studies on “Rape Victims” who got pregnant, and did various forms of psycho-social evaluation of both those who had habortions (killed the babies) and those who carried the babies to term and either kept them or gave them up for adoption).

Which group of women overall falt the most positive about what they had done, the least punished and had the most positive overall expoeriences towards the entire experience, including the rape?

The PRO-ABORTIONISTS have gotten this one completely wrong! Those who had the most intensely NEGATIVE feelings towards the whole experience, and were left feeling the most depressed in the greatest numbers were those women who HAD THE ABORTION!

Those women who carried to term and HAD THE BABIES generally felt much more POSITIVE about what they did and about the overall experience! Many of them, esp. the Catholics, felt that whatever suffering they had gone through had somehow been made REDEMPTIVE, that somehow they had been allowed to share in the sufferings and the Redemptive power of Christ.

In many cases, having the baby caused the experience to be TRANSFORMED from absolutely negative to REDEMPTIVE. In other words, many were able to see some sort of reason for what they went through.

That didn’t happen to a SINGLE WOMEN who had the Abortion!

I hope this helps someone with his/her thought processes.

Margaret Sanger is practically sanctified in School. We need to “Deprogram” as many we we can.

Blessed are they who act to save God’s Little Ones. Michael
 
Wow, I didn’t know about that entire China thing.

However, my husband researched this and he found an article in which United States “family planning” (yeah, guess who) officials took a newborn chinese baby boy from the mother’s arms and drowned him against her will. Did these “family planning” organizations ever apologize for what these people did? Of course not! One less person in the world, that’s all they care about.

Margaret Sanger and her colleagues, as well as some of Hitler’s colleauges, were known to share eugenics literature. Hitler’s idea of a “master race” was not original. The whole point of eugenics is to define what’s “normal” or “fit” and make sure to eliminate anyone else. The ONLY difference between that and Nazism is that they will also kill the “fit” if the woman wants to, because they are so dang gung-ho about population control. It’s the same sort of philosophy that HItler had about leibenstraum (sp?) which means “living space” and for him meant living space for the Germans and no one else.

But from what I’ve read, I cannot see how people can compare Hitler and Sanger and say one was worse than the other…from what I’ve read that actually came out of thier brains, they were both evil to the core.
 
P.S., and, this would sound like slander if it wasn’t true ( but for anyone who doesn’t believe me there is a pro-Sanger site called The Margaret Sanger Papers Project which confirms it) Sanger was the one who started this whole “free sex” thing amongst women.

She slept with LOTS of men, even while she was married. There is even a quote in her biography (done by avid admirers of her) that explains how she agreed to marry again but “on her own terms” so that she could sleep around as much as she wanted. She left her husband and her 3 small children to pursue her dreams of rampant birth control and promiscuity.

And her ideas live on in the feminist movement today. I still do not get how any woman could be THAT stupid to actually believe that being a ho gives you more power as a woman…that somehow if men are using you and you are using them it cancels out and it’s like you aren’t being used??? :ehh:
 
From Christian4life:

And her ideas live on in the feminist movement today. I still do not get how any woman could be THAT stupid to actually believe that being a ho gives you more power as a woman…that somehow if men are using you and you are using them it cancels out and it’s like you aren’t being used??? :ehh:

Me:
That is sooo true. I always wondered how being a sexual object to men was supposed to be empowering to our gender.
 
HEY HEY! Klanned Barrenhood! nice leader ya got there! does Hitler host the cocktail mixers or is that a joint effort with Anton Lavey??

ya bunch of sickos!

and hey miss President, Denial is not just a river in Egypt honey!
 
40.png
jayb:
Hey I don’t know if anyone here can help me answer these typical abortion arguments in the best way possible but that it be brief. I hope not to be asking for something impossible. I’d appreaciate your time and help. I’m in another debate thread where I’m the only catholic and everyone else is anticatholic. I think it’s the best way to evangelize.
here ya go: wcla.org/articles/procon.html
Try ProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments by
Randy Alcorn, Multnomah Publishers. If it’s out of print, try Abebooks.com.
He’s not Catholic, but what does that matter? He puts every one of these arguments, and others, to rest.

AND everybody on this thread should read
Archgitects of the Culture of Death
by Donald De Marco and Benjamin Wiker
Published by Ignarius.
It’s really a Must Read. It’s depressing, but it explains a lot.
 
Try ProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments by
Randy Alcorn, Multnomah Publishers. If it’s out of print, try Abebooks.com.
He’s not Catholic, but what does that matter? He puts every one of these arguments, and others, to rest.

AND everybody on this thread should read
Archgitects of the Culture of Death
by Donald De Marco and Benjamin Wiker
Published by Ignarius.
It’s really a Must Read. It’s depressing, but it explains a lot.

First of all, hello everyone. I’m new here.

Secondly, I wanted to comment on your book suggestion, Strider. It sounds interesting. I just ordered it from my local library.

Under the table of contents, I recognized Sigmund Freud as one of those responsible for our culture of death. As a psychology graduate, I have studied Sigmund Freud to some extent. I must say that some of his theories are bizarre, and I cannot argue that he is in part responsible for this culture of death. Freud’s idea that sexual impulses must not be subdued has done a lot of damage to our catholic/christian values on sexuality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top