If you aren’t creeped out by the No Birth Control Left Behind rhetoric of the White House and Planned Parenthood, you aren’t listening closely enough. The anesthetic of progressive benevolence always dulls the senses. Wake up.
When a bunch of wealthy white women and elite Washington bureaucrats defend the trampling of religious liberties in the name of “increased access” to “reproductive services” for “poor” women, the ghost of Margaret Sanger is cackling.
As she wrote in her autobiography, Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in 1916 “to stop the multiplication of the unfit.” This, she boasted, would be “the most important and greatest step towards race betterment.” While she oversaw the mass murder of black babies, Sanger cynically recruited minority activists to front her death racket. She conspired with eugenics financier and businessman Clarence Gamble to “hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities” to sell their genocidal policies as community health and welfare services.
Advertisement
Outright murder wouldn’t sell. But wrapping it under the egalitarian cloak of “women’s health” — and adorning it with the moral authority of black churches — would. Sanger and Gamble called their deadly campaign “The Negro Project.”
In other writings, historian Mike Perry found, Sanger attacked programs that provided “medical and nursing facilities to slum mothers” because they “facilitate the function of maternity” when “the absolute necessity is to discourage it.” In an essay included in her writing collection held by the Library of Congress, Sanger urged her abortion-clinic colleagues to “breed a race of thoroughbreds.” Nationwide “birth control bureaus” would propagate the proper “science of breeding” to stop impoverished, non-white women from “breeding like weeds.”
Speaking with CBS veteran journalist Mike Wallace in 1957, long after her racist views had supposedly mellowed, Sanger again revealed her true colors: “I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world — that have disease from their parents, that have no chance in the world to be a human being practically. Delinquents, prisoners, all sorts of things just marked when they’re born. That to me is the greatest sin — that people can — can commit.”
Sanger also elaborated on her anti-Catholic animus, telling one of Wallace’s reporters that New York Catholics had no right to protest the use of their tax dollars for city birth-control programs: “It’s not only wrong, it should be made illegal for any religious group to prohibit dissemination of birth control — even among its own members.” When Wallace pressed her (“In other words, you would like to see the government legislate religious beliefs in a certain sense?”), Sanger laughed nervously and disavowed the remarks.
Fast forward: Five decades and 16 million aborted black babies later, Planned Parenthood’s insidious agenda has migrated from inner-city “birth control bureaus” to public-school-based health clinics to the White House — forcibly funded with taxpayer dollars just as Sanger championed.
Several undercover stings by Live Action, pro-life documentarians, have exposed Planned Parenthood staff accepting donations over the years from callers posing as eugenics cheerleaders who wanted to earmark their contributions for the cause of aborting minority babies. “We can definitely designate it for an African-American,” a Tulsa, Okla., Planned Parenthood employee eagerly promised.
What has cheap, easy, and unmonitored “choice” for poor women in inner cities wrought? Nightmares like the Philadelphia Horror, where serial baby-killer Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his abortion-clinic death squad oversaw the systematic execution of hundreds of healthy, living, breathing, squirming, viable black and Hispanic babies over four decades — along with several minority mothers who may have lost their lives in his grimy birth-control bureau.
City and state authorities looked the other way while jars of baby parts and reports of botched abortions and infanticides piled up. Beltway Democrats who now bray about their concern for “women’s health” were silent about the Gosnell massacre and countless others like it in America’s ghettos. Why?
The Obama administration is crawling with the modern-day heirs of the eugenics movement, from Planned Parenthood golden girl Kathleen Sebelius at the Department of Health and Human Services to the president’s prestigious science czar John Holdren — an outspoken proponent of forced abortions and mass sterilizations and a self-proclaimed protégé of eugenics guru Harrison Brown, whom he credits with inspiring him to become a scientist.
Brown envisioned a government regime in which the “number of abortions and artificial inseminations permitted in a given year would be determined completely by the difference between the number of deaths and the number of births in the year previous.” He urged readers to “reconcile ourselves to the fact that artificial means must be applied to limit birth rates.” He likened the global population to a “pulsating mass of maggots.”
Listen carefully as this White House dresses its Obamacare abortion mandate in the white lab coat of “reproductive services” for all. The language of “access to birth control” is the duplicitous code of Sanger’s ideological grim reapers.
Look for things you buy anyway, like yogurt or cheese, and see if there are coupons for those things. You should have a store loyalty card if your store offers one, like safeway or sample things before you buy best place would be to check is "Get Official Samples"
I'm glad she typed up this article. I had come to this conclusion as well, a few days ago. To think that the "Universal Coverage", or any other cutesy phrase, never was connected to Population Control, and therefore, Eugenics. That is the basis for most of the international movements. There was a 13 year old girl in Britain the other day; her school implanted (surgically) in her arm (I think) a conception prevention device that lasts like 3 months. Her mother didn't know about it, it was done at and by the school.
The arguement has always been phrased as "women's health". Once the government controls healthcare, then they fully control that info and services, including 'opinions' for a 'better life'. Hardly ever has health services been provided, they have always been birth prevention only. The distraction is the increase maternal care and child care, it gains trust and believe it'll convince the mother to not have more kids if she is sure that her child will live a long life.
To think that WWII stopped cold practically, the eugenics movement (with exeptions). If you want an example look to Connecticut and the US Senator thereof, in the late 1930's. Progressivism comes full circle. This time, they're all lawyers and global.
I am a huge fan of your writing, but in this time I am afraid you missed a significant point, and I can only envy people who do this mistake.
I am as apalled by "late-term abortions" as the most pro-life lot. However there is a distance between killing a baby capable of being born and surviving, and dropping a pill that would stop the life from starting in the first place.
Lucky you, you don't know what it means to grow with parents who tell you that they didn't really need you, and treat accordingly. Who built a list of problem complaints against you, and believe that entitles them to practically anything. And I am talking about otherwise decent, progressive thinking people.
I my case, it was 50 years of puting my life back together. I survived. As I understand, many talented and healthy people abort themselves in their teens, 20s and even 30s.
No, I don't wish my parents aborted me, it's always better to have a chance. But do I wish better contraception was available to them? Yes, I do. And I do wish that parents to be have better understanding of their responsibilities to their future children and to the society.
Actually, "responsibility" is a very conservative thing, you guys like to talk about charitable givings, volunteering, military service etc. Yet when it comes to children, you take that strange attitude that life begins at intercourse and parenting ends at birth. That everyone who happened to have sex should bring the child to life, doesn't matter their emotional capacity to care for one.
"Yet when it comes to children, you take that strange attitude that life begins at intercourse and parenting ends at birth."
I'd love to hear your basis for that comment. What conservative has ever said that a parent's responsibility ends when the child is born? That's completely absurd.
I can't speak for anyone else, but you don't seem to quite have captured my beliefs at least.
The distinction I would draw is that once an embryo is conceived, a child has already been brought to life. The question at hand is if another beings value ought to be based on how much someone else wants it and is prepared to take on the burdens of caring for it or if lives have an intrinsic value.
And I've not seen evidence that pro-life advocates believe that parenting ends at birth. I think the parenting classes; religious education programs; food, clothing and school supply drives; private schools; tutoring programs; mentoring programs and counseling programs that have been founded and supported by a wide variety of groups generally opposed to abortion are all cases in point.
One can certainly make the argument (as many do) that a child in the womb is not entitled to special protections because it is not independently viable. And many are consistent in their beliefs and also argue in favor of infanticide of disabled children, sterilization of the retarded and the withholding of life support from the sick and elderly.
The question is if it is right to REQUIRE those with one set of beliefs (that life is worthy of protection) to underright the actions of those with the opposite beliefs. If it is wrong for group A to deny contraceptives or access to abortions to group B, why is it right for Group B to obligate Group A to pay for their choices.
I keep trying to draw a mental parallel with slavery or with investing in companies that did business with apartheid era South Africa. But the analogy keeps failing because no one was ever required to buy a product used to subsidize the purchase of slaves. And no one was required to do business with the apartheid regime. Students were able to pressure universities to divest themselves of stock holdings in companies that invested in South Africa because choice in investing was an option. However people of conscience regarding abortion have no remaining choices. They must choose a health care policy that covers contraceptives they consider abortifaecients. And employers are not permitted to act on their consciences and not fund these abortifaecients, even though no one would be shocked at an employer chosing not to invest pension funds in a firearms company or in blood diamonds.
Your struggle to find a parallel is understandable--it's because there are none. No other "right" involves having the government force one group of people to pay for the "right" of another group of people. Even Democrats ("Defending Slavery since 1861!") never tried to force Quakers to pay for slaves for everyone who wanted one, or to force the NAACP to buy only from South African vendors. Frankly, I think PETA should have to pay for me to have steak every night and the government should make the Brady Campaign buy me an AR15!
"you take that strange attitude that life begins at intercourse and parenting ends at birth."
Do you know what the F! you're talking about? You sound about as clear-minded as an unborn baby, to put it nicely.
Life begins at conception, as with parentage. At what garage sale did you buy the worthless notion that conservatives believe parentage ends at birth?
Would that NOT be closer to the leftist view, since leftists always seek to have the government step in and do for people what they could otherwise do for themselves?
Too bad your parents hated you, but I'm not sure why that is everyone else's problem. Nor do you even begin to explain why the fact your parents were supposedly a-holes should serve as a basis for public policy to affect every single human procreated.
You're a raging narcissist, to use your negative experiences in childhood to urge death to unborn babies.
Instead of aborting you or precluding your conception, your "parents" should have put you up for adoption.
As an adopted child, I really have only the foggiest notion of just how fortunate I was.
I could have ended up with a diseased, leftist mindset.
Terry One, you can always call Kevorkian. He'd be more than happy to end your misery.
Me? I'd recommend you make an appointment with Marcus Bachmann.
"As I understand, many talented and healthy people abort themselves in their teens, 20s and even 30s."
The key point here is that they are aborting themselves and not others. The notion that aborting a baby is some act of altruism would be laughable if it wasn't so disturbing.
"And I do wish that parents to be have better understanding of their responsibilities to their future children and to the society."
Aborting babies is now part and parcel of societal obligations? Don't the parental responsibilities to the child outweigh obligations to society? There are some aberrations, but the vast majority of parents put their children first, society much much lower.
"Yet when it comes to children, you take that strange attitude that life begins at intercourse and parenting ends at birth."
Who, exactly, has said that parenting ends at birth? And life doesn't begin at intercourse, it begins at conception. You mention responsibility several times. The (potential) parent's foremost responsibility is to not create children they don't want. There's one way in which children are created (excepting laboratory work) - through intercourse. If you know that you don't want children and/or cannot care for them, don't participate in activity which produces them. Rather than arguing that abortion is somehow responsible, act responsibly in the first place, have some discipline and self-control, and keep your pants on (or take measures to prevent fertility - there *are* procedures).
In short, abortion is not some grand show of selfless beneficence - it is an act of, and result of, pure selfishness.
"In my case, it was 50 years of putting my life back together. I survived. As I understand, many talented and healthy people abort themselves in their teens, 20s and even 30s."
My experience is like yours, only worse. However, 50 years seems to be about what it takes. You are not alone.
Thank you for sharing, especially when you know you are doing so in an unsympathetic venue.
Reading your comment about how it took 50 years to put your life back together, after having been informed regularly that you were redundant from birth, has alone justified my reading of NRO online.
50 years. Prior to reading your comment, I'd thought I was a slow learner. It *does* take that long to crawl out from abusive brainwashing, if you are lucky.
In the President, the eugenicists at last have their super-salesman. Here’s a guy with a community organizer background and a devoted following. He, more than anyone else, can finally act to control and eliminate the unfit while bringing forth a race of supermen to populate his brave new statist utopia. Now, if he can only get the trains to run on time he can join the pantheon of great führers.
The democrat party, which is largely responsible for the inexorable moral degradation of itself and vast swaths of the culture, deserves a generation in the political wilderness to firmly evaluate the elitist cesspool it has become. The inexcuseable legislative agenda inflicted upon the nation by the Pelosi, Reid, and Obama trifecta of doom has been brazenly surpassed by dictatorial machinations since January of 2011.
"No class or group or party in Germany could escape its share of responsibility for the abandonment of the democratic Republic and the advent of Adolf Hitler. The cardinal error of the Germans who opposed Nazism was their failure to unite against it."
-William L. Shirer; Chapter 6, The Last Days Of The Republic, 1931-33; The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich.
Malkin, you are peddling the worst of the worst ... just stop it with your death dirge, you sound like Palin (yes remember that fanatic) and her 'death panels'. You make me sick. Your propaganda is sinful and disgusting.
Perhaps you should educate yourself. I encourage you to google for pictures of what aborted babies look like. If you have a conscience you will be moved. If you have a conscience you may find yourself racked with guilt for having mistaken evil for good. It's that abominable. Abortion is sin in the raw.
