Archive

Posts Tagged ‘black genocide’

Who Is Margaret Sanger and What Is Planned Parenthood?

October 29, 2012 Leave a comment

TWG: These are the vermin that the leftist DIMS are advocating for these days.  Hard to believe this group of racist genocidal maniacs have any credibility or that they still exist today.  We can thank the so-called “educators” for hiding the truth about these monsters.  DIMS are proud of their alliance with this racist, genocidal chain of baby slaughterers.

“WE DO NOT WANT WORD TO GET OUT THAT WE WANT TO EXTERMINATE THE NEGRO POPULATION.”  ~Margaret Sanger, Founder Planned Parenthood

On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
“…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”  ~Margaret Sanger,
Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

 

 

The Truth About MARGRET SANGER

(This article first appeared in the January 20, 1992 edition of Citizen magazine)

How Planned Parenthood Duped America

At a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the “black” and “yellow” peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.

Sanger’s other colleagues included avowed and sophisticated racists. One, Lothrop Stoddard, was a Harvard graduate and the author of The Rising Tide of Color against White Supremacy. Stoddard was something of a Nazi enthusiast who described the eugenic practices of the Third Reich as “scientific” and “humanitarian.” And Dr. Harry Laughlin, another Sanger associate and board member for her group, spoke of purifying America’s human “breeding stock” and purging America’s “bad strains.” These “strains” included the “shiftless, ignorant, and worthless class of antisocial whites of the South.”

Not to be outdone by her followers, Margaret Sanger spoke of sterilizing those she designated as “unfit,” a plan she said would be the “salvation of American civilization.: And she also spike of those who were “irresponsible and reckless,” among whom she included those ” whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers.” She further contended that “there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped.” That many Americans of African origin constituted a segment of Sanger considered “unfit” cannot be easily refuted.

While Planned Parenthood’s current apologists try to place some distance between the eugenics and birth control movements, history definitively says otherwise. The eugenic theme figured prominently in the Birth Control Review, which Sanger founded in 1917. She published such articles as “Some Moral Aspects of Eugenics” (June 1920), “The Eugenic Conscience” (February 1921), “The purpose of Eugenics” (December 1924), “Birth Control and Positive Eugenics” (July 1925), “Birth Control: The True Eugenics” (August 1928), and many others.

These eugenic and racial origins are hardly what most people associate with the modern Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), which gave its Margaret Sanger award to the late Dr. Martin Luther King in 1966, and whose current president, Faye Wattleton, is black, a former nurse, and attractive.

Though once a social pariah group, routinely castigated by religious and government leaders, the PPFA is now an established, high-profile, well-funded organization with ample organizational and ideological support in high places of American society and government. Its statistics are accepted by major media and public health officials as “gospel”; its full-page ads appear in major newspapers; its spokespeople are called upon to give authoritative analyses of what America’s family policies should be and to prescribe official answers that congressmen, state legislator and Supreme Court justiices all accept as “social orthodoxy.”

Blaming Families

Sanger’s obsession with eugenics can be traced back to her own family. One of 11 children, she wrote in the autobiographical book, My Fight for Birth Control, that “I associated poverty, toil, unemployment, drunkenness, cruelty, quarreling, fighting, debts, jails with large families.” Just as important was the impression in her childhood of an inferior family status, exacerbated by the iconoclastic, “free-thinking” views of her father, whose “anti-Catholic attitudes did not make for his popularity” in a predominantly Irish community.

The fact that the wealthy families in her hometown of Corning, N.Y., had relatively few children, Sanger took as prima facie evidence of the impoverishing effect of larger families. The personal impact of this belief was heightened 1899, at the age of 48. Sanger was convinced that the “ordeals of motherhood” had caused the death of her mother. The lingering consumption (tuberculosis) that took her mother’s life visited Sanger at the birth of her own first child on Nov. 18, 1905. The diagnosis forced her to seek refuge in the Adirondacks to strengthen her for the impending birth. Despite the precautions, the birth of baby Grant was “agonizing,” the mere memory of which Sanger described as “mental torture” more than 25 years later. She once described the experience as a factor “to be reckoned with” in her zealous campaign for birth control.

From the beginning, Sanger advocacy of sex education reflected her interest in population control and birth prevention among the “unfit.” Her first handbook, published for adolescents in 1915 and entitled, What Every Boy and Girl Should Know, featured a jarring afterword:

It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stoop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them.

To Sanger, the ebbing away of moral and religious codes over sexual conduct was a natural consequence of the worthlessness of such codes in the individual’s search for self-fulfillment. “Instead of laying down hard and fast rules of sexual conduct,” Sanger wrote in her 1922 book Pivot of Civilization, “sex can be rendered effective and valuable only as it meets and satisfies the interests and demands of the pupil himself.” Her attitude is appropriately described as libertinism, but sex knowledge was not the same as individual liberty, as her writings on procreation emphasized.

The second edition of Sanger’s life story, An Autobiography, appeared in 1938. There Sanger described her first cross-country lecture tour in 1916. Her standard speech asserted seven conditions of life that “mandated” the use of birth control: the third was “when parents, though normal, had subnormal children”; the fourth, “when husband and wife were adolescent”; the fifth, “when the earning capacity of the father was inadequate.” No right existed to exercise sex knowledge to advance procreation. Sanger described the fact that “anyone, no matter how ignorant, how diseased mentally or physically, how lacking in all knowledge of children, seemed to consider he or she had the right to become a parent.”

 

CONTINUE READING:  http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html

Justice Ginsburg, Without Her Mask, Channeling Margaret Sanger

October 23, 2012 2 comments

 

“WE DO NOT WANT WORD TO GET OUT THAT WE WANT TO EXTERMINATE THE NEGRO POPULATION.” ~Margaret Sanger, Founder Planned Parenthood

 

Justice Ginsburg Backtracks From Racist Abortion Comments

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 10/23/12 12:31 PM

 

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg caused a stir in July 2009 when she made commentsabout the Roe v. Wade abortion case that appeared racist. In an interview with the New York Times, Ginsburg said made it appear she supported Roe for population control reasons targeting minorities.

Roe is the 1973 Supreme Court decision that, along with Doe v. Bolton, allowed virtually unlimited abortions for any reason throughout pregnancy.

Ginsburg first advocated taxpayer funding of abortions and followed it up by saying she backed Roe to eliminate “populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

“Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious,” she said then.

Reporter Emily Bazelon then asked Ginsburg a question about what she meant and Ginsburg responded that the 1980 Harris v. McRae ruling upholding the Hyde amendment, which prohibits federal taxpayer funding of abortions, surprised her.

“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong,” Ginsburg said.

Now, Bazelon has written a follow up article, in which she reports Ginsburg “made it clear today that the issue she had in mind when we spoke in 2009 was concern about population growth among all classes (and races).”

“Emily, you know that that line, which you quoted accurately, was vastly misinterpreted,” Ginsbug said. “I was surprised that the court went as far as it did in Roe v. Wade, and I did think that with the Medicaid reimbursement cases down the road that perhaps the court was thinking it did want more women to have access to reproductive choice. At the time, there was a concern about too many people inhabiting our planet. There was an organization called Zero Population Growth.” She continued, “In the press, there were articles about the danger of crowding our planet. So there was at the time of Roe v. Wade considerable concern about overpopulation.”

Bazelon adds:

 

I asked if she was talking about general concern in the society, as opposed to her own concern or the concern of the feminist legal community. Ginsburg said yes, and then returning to the issue of whether Congress could restrict Medicaid from covering abortion, added, “But I turned out to be wrong. Not too long after Roe v. Wade”—in Harris v. McRae— “the Supreme Court said it was OK to deny Medicaid funding for even therapeutic abortions.”

I asked if the idea of a link between concern about population growth and the court’s rulings on abortion turned out to be wrong. Justice Ginsburg said yes, stating the obvious: After all Roe v. Wade and the decisions that came after it are rooted in the right to privacy.

The history lesson is this: There was a feminist women’s rights argument for legal abortion in the 1970s, which the Supreme Court accepted in Roe v. Wade. And there was a separate and distinct argument about preventing population growth by being pro-abortion, made by groups like Zero Population Growth, which the court did not accept, not in Roe and not later. Justice Ginsburg herself has never made a population control argument for abortion. These were two different rationales promoted by two different movements. Justice Ginsburg touched on this today as well. She said that in the 1970s, when the ACLU women’s rights project sought funding from the Rockefeller Foundation—one of the groups worrying about overpopulation—the foundation “was not interested in the women’s rights business.”

Justice Ginsburg also made it clear today that the issue she had in mind when we spoke in 2009 was concern about population growth among all classes (and races).

 

Source: http://www.lifenews.com/2012/10/23/justice-ginsburg-backtracks-from-racist-abortion-comments/

Abortion Mega-Chain Racist Genocidal Maniacs, Planned “Parenthood”, Still Fooling The Masses…

November 1, 2011 Leave a comment

“We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” For years, the woman responsible for those words–Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger–was fairly successful at keeping the lid on her organization’s mission. Unfortunately for Sanger’s successors, “word has gotten out” about the organization’s racist agenda, and a growing number of voters from both parties are questioning Congress’s investment in a group that was caught on tape gleefully accepting donations earmarked for the abortion of black babies.

 

One of those voters is GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, who hasn’t shied away from what he sees as one of the greatest threats to the African-American community. “You probably don’t hear a lot of people talking about this,” Cain told a gathering at the Heritage Foundation last March. “When Margaret Sanger–check my history–started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world… It’s planned genocide.” Planned Parenthood is “carrying out its original mission,” he explained. “…Talk to some young lady who has gone into some of these centers to see what kind of conversation takes place… There’s not any planning other than to abort the baby.'”

This Sunday, on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Herman was asked if he stands by those remarks. “Yes,” said Cain.” Host Bob Schieffer asked for proof that Planned Parenthood targets black babies. “Seventy-five percent of those [abortion] facilities were built in the black community,” Cain responded. Predictably, Planned Parenthood came out swinging. Yesterday, Veronica Byrd, the group’s Director of American-American Media, tried to massage the horrific abortion rates in the black community with data from Planned Parenthood’s home-grown research arm, the Guttmacher Institute. It claims “fewer than one in 10 abortion clinics are located in predominately African-American neighborhoods.” But that doesn’t seem to jive with the Census Bureau’s findings. In Georgia, for instance, eight of the 15 abortion clinics are operating in communities with the highest concentration of African-Americans. And that’s no accident. Despite making up about 30% of Georgia’s total population, African-Americans represent almost 60% of the state’s abortions!

Tragically, that’s just a snapshot of a nationwide epidemic. In New York City, a black baby has a better chance of being aborted than born! With just a 40% survival rate, the womb is one of the most dangerous places for the city’s African-Americans. As investigative journalist Randy Hall will tell you, much of that is by design. In 2005, Hall found that of Planned Parenthood’s 160 (listed) clinics, 62.5% “were located in cities having a higher black population than the state.” Yet Planned Parenthood will cover up that statistic with the same proficiency that it has covered up years of clinic abuse, statutory rape, fraud, and countless other crimes against humanity. Whether the organization admits it or not, abortion is about race. A race that too many children are losing.

 

%d bloggers like this: