jamesrage said:We have a abortion forum section so why not have a thread on planned parenthood's founder.
Here is some interesting words of the founder of one the country's leading abortion group.
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
On sterilization & racial purification: Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial "purification," couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.
On the right of married couples to bear children: Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review, April 1932
On the purpose of birth control: The purpose in promoting birth control was "to create a race of thoroughbreds," she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)
On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities: "More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control." Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12
jamesrage said:On the right of married couples to bear children: Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review, April 1932
jamesrage said:On the purpose of birth control: The purpose in promoting birth control was "to create a race of thoroughbreds," she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)
On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities: "More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control." Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12
star2589 said:Most pro-choicers do not follow those beliefs, though there might be some fringe pro-choicers that do.
Korimyr the Rat said:That's because most people who follow those beliefs aren't "pro-choice" by any stretch of the imagination.
Early 20th Century eugenics had nothing to do with choice; abortion was illegal, while undesirables were either forcibly sterilized, subjected to medical experiments, or killed outright.
And that was in America.
star2589 said:thats pretty disgusting, but I dont see what bearing it has on the abortion debate today. .
Most pro-choicers do not follow those beliefs, though there might be some fringe pro-choicers that do.
Korimyr the Rat said:This, I'll admit, is intolerable. It was also seventy years ago, when Henry Ford himself was building engines for the Nazis.
What's wrong with taking people who can't afford to have children, and offering to pay them to have themselves sterilized?
And what's wrong with taking the fittest, most desirable human beings, and encouraging them to have more children?
As long as there's no force involved, and as long as people have a free choice in the matter, I completely and utterly fail to see what is wrong with this. It's not like we're living in Europe, with negative population growth (not counting immigration) and desperately scrambling to have more babies.
For that matter... are you finally coming out as being as opposed to birth control as you are to abortion? Or are you just opposed to any service that Planned Parenthood provides?
of course they want uncle sam/us the tax payer to help them with their nazi eugenics programs.ngdawg said:Planned Parenthood clinics are NOT just about abortion.
What a better way to steralize or control numbers of people by telling them that exterminating a baby in their womb is the same as cutting off a toe nail, that it should be their right to murder a child before he or she has a change to leave the womb and that they will do it for free.They provide medical services, ie; physical exams, Pap smears, treatment of STD's, birth control and counselling. I've used them when I couldn't afford a private physician.
If you haven't ever been there, then you are clueless as to what they do as a whole, but you'll sit there and spew about just one facet of a medical organization.:roll:
You're off your nut....jamesrage said:of course they want uncle sam/us the tax payer to help them with their nazi eugenics programs.
What a better way to steralize or control numbers of people by telling them that exterminating a baby in their womb is the same as cutting off a toe nail, that it should be their right to murder a child before he or she has a change to leave the womb and that they will do it for free.
I do not have to see Brokeback mountain to know that it is a movie about gay sheep ranchers.The history of planned parenthood and it's founder is on the net.Instead of forcibly trying to steralize people to make a master race they sucker people into controling their numbers for them.Kind of similar to similar to Tom Sawer story where instead of white washing the fence himself and instead of paying someone to white wash a fence he suckers the other kids into white washing his fence.
ngdawg said:You're off your nut....
Not once was I greeted with any of what you say, nor was I suckered into anything. I had a physical, going in on my own accord and wanting BC pills. Since they charge by your ability to pay, it was cheaper than a private doctor. .
No more, no less, no underhanded propaganda.
History of Ford, et al is also on the net. I won't bother asking what's your point. You're blowing smoke
They still have the vile practice of abortion,So they are still continuing their original cause.ngdawg said:Not YOUR propaganda-that wouldn't fill a business card....:doh
You are implying that Planned Parenthood has a propagandist agenda and approach and still uses the eugenics outlines
and I'm telling you as a former patient that is NOT the case on a person to doctor basis in their clinics, nor is Sanger's agenda of ethnic cleansing.
ngdawg said:'Vile' and 'evil' are your opinions.
They provide a service to women who seek it. They provide other services to women seeking those.
Still not seeing your point in any of this, really.
If you don't like a company's political, moral or ethical stance or historical beginnings, you don't patronize them. Very easy.
Just to clarify: A) I'm not an abortionist. Don't perform them, don't have them. WRONG, Pal. B) Who said anything about keeping scum like Smith alive? You draw assumptions pretty quick with no basis to back any of them up. So, WRONG, Pal-again C) I value my kids more than anything, but we aren't talking about kids or even children. We're talking about the termination of pregnancies, ie: aborting embryos or fetuses. That is not my decision to make.jamesrage said:So it is perfectly acceptable to murder a innocent child?No wonder why you abortionist want scum like Joseph smith to stay alive.Your lack of value for a child's life and the value you have for scum's life is now explained.
No one, even in the field of abortion, exterminates a 'child'.jamesrage said:Service?I would not call exterminatiung child like some rat nazi a service.
Whose truth? YOURS? Simply not enough reason to change my stance, which you obviously are not aware of, but then again, I don't really care whether you are or not. You are too blissful in your ignorance and I am not one to burst a child's bubble so readily.jamesrage said:Abortionist are scum,perhaps if their more open scumbag roots is exposed perhaps people will see the truth.
ngdawg said:Earth Day was founded by a guy who killed his wife, stuffed her in a trunk and then fled to France.
He did not start it alone(there was a couple of people working together on it) ...I'll have to dig up the man's name...he lived in Philadelphia when he murdered his wife, but it isn't Nelson, I know that, of course.talloulou said:Ummm.....Gaylord Nelson was the founder of Earth Day. And a when he died he left behind a loving wife. Where you getting your info?
ngdawg said:Ira Einhorn. http://karisable.com/killers.htm
In 1979, 18 months after the disappearance of Einhorn's lover, Holly Maddux, 30, Philadelphia police climbed the stairs to his shabby apartment. In a steamer trunk a few feet from where Einhorn slept, homicide detective, Michael Chitwood, found her mummified body. Holly's skull was fractured in 6 or more places. Einhorn, 62, spent 20 years on the lam after skipping out on his 1981 trial while free on bail. When jury foreman read out the verdict: guilty of 1st-degree murder. He shook his head slowly in a sign of disagreement as the judge, William Mazzola, read out the sentence -- life in prison without parole -- and told Einhorn he was "an intellectual dilettante" who "preyed upon the uninitiated, uninformed, unsuspecting and inexperienced." Ira Einhorn at Pennsylvania's maximum-security Graterford Prison, is a long way from the sun flowered French countryside - where he was gaily entertaining visitors and arguing the fine points of the French legal system with charm and confidence.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,168382,00.html
Dominating the page was the man who, with atomic energy and electric-blue eyes that alternately charmed and haunted, had dominated every conversation he'd ever had. Einhorn wasn't on a weight-loss program back then. Cross a bear with a man, take away all grooming implements and you get Ira, who considered himself too mythic to bathe regularly or use his given name. Einhorn means "one horn," so he called himself the Unicorn. When it wasn't fair maidens he was after, it was the company of nags like Rubin, Hoffman and Allen Ginsberg. He ingested enough drugs to kill a whale. He organized be-ins. He called himself a planetary enzyme and "sort of smelled like a hoagie with onions all the time," as a friend puts it. For Philadelphia, a social and political backwater in which consciousness raising was a billy club to the head, Einhorn was, all alone, a connection to the psychedelic world.
And no one has, to my knowledge. So your point being.....what? If they had tried to 'hide' her idealogies, they would have done so. They're a very large, powerful coalition.talloulou said:Margaret Sanger is completely indefensible. Planned parenthood has tried to hide the type of person she really was but she wrote too many articles with too many hateful quotes that have been printed and reprinted. Noone can deny that she promoted birth control as some sort of way for the white race to prevail over blacks.
ngdawg said:And no one has, to my knowledge. So your point being.....what?
Which actually proves my point that they are not hiding her idealogies. I also said they do not FOLLOW them. They have a right to defend their founder as the founder, though and paint her other, more positive aspects in a better light. They're not the only organization to do it and won't be the last. As a past patient, I certainly did not have to follow anything they ascribe to and that holds true now as well. Unlike things like the KKK, people who go to PP aren't going there because they're racist and certainly aren't signing afidavits pledging allegiance to anything.talloulou said:Planned Parenthood attempts to defend her on their own website. They paint a very different picture of her than even her own body of work paints. Also they pick a few racist statements she never said and provide rebuttals for them while they ignore the racist crap she not only said but wrote herself.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp...icalinfo/birthcontrol/bio-margaret-sanger.xml
ngdawg said:Which actually proves my point that they are not hiding her idealogies.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?