What do eugenics, the Nazis, and Planned Parenthood have in common?

reply to post by Inquisitive1

"The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

She was a real piece of work..

Well, actually, you are a real piece of work. Since you have no idea what she was talking about before you took her quote out of context and commented on it.

Part of the reason you think differently, or have trouble understanding, is likely because you grew up in a generation that didn't see what she did.

Thus we see that the second and third children have a very good chance to live through the first year. Children arriving later have less and less chance, until the twelfth has hardly any chance at all to live twelve months. [npg]

This does not complete the case, however, for those who care to go farther into the subject will find that many of those who live for a year die before they reach the age of five. [npg]

Many, perhaps, will think it idle to go farther in demonstrating the immorality of large families, but since there is still an abundance of proof at hand, it may be offered for the sake of those who find difficulty in adjusting old-fashioned ideas to the facts.

The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it. The same factors which create the terrible infant mortality rate, and which swell the death rate of children between the ages of one and five, operate even more extensively to lower the health rate of the surviving members.

***

Sanger was against women being burdened into having high number of kids. I think it was kind of personal as her mother died after giving birth over a dozen kids. She goes on to say in the same source:

The basic freedom of the world is woman's freedom. A free race cannot be born of slave mothers. A woman enchained cannot choose but give a measure of that bondage to her sons and daughters. No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her body. No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother.

And also:

Woman must have her freedom; the fundamental freedom of choosing whether or not she shall be a mother and how many children she will have. Regardless of what man's attitude may be, that problem is hers; and before it can be his, it is hers alone. [npg] She goes through the vale of death alone, each time a babe is born. As it is the right neither of man nor the state to coerce her into this ordeal, so it is her right to decide whether she will endure it. That right to decide imposes upon her the duty of clearing the way to knowledge by which she may make and carry out the decision. [npg] Birth control is woman's problem. The quicker she accepts it as hers and hers alone, the quicker will society respect motherhood. The quicker, too, will the world be made a fit place for her children to live.

And finally:

While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.

Seems like she was promoting contraception and right for woman to choose whether or not they have kids, in this case.

Originally posted by Hillarie
Without black people there would be no music in the world.

there would also be no developed humanoid race...

reply to post by boncho


You confuse me. I in no way claim that Planed Parenthood (as it is today, anyway) is operating some nefarious, eugenics plan. Or even that they morally believe in such a thing (I'm going to avoid the whole Pro-Choice/Pro-Life crap) -- simply, that their long dead founder did.

I am fully aware that is no longer what they are for, nor has it been for some time.

A) Hate Nazis
B) As a parent, I know for a fact no one can force you to end your child before birth.
C) If they really had that much power (nazis), then people wouldn't have their child birth paid for by the state as was the case with my totally wonderful and adorable son, as the state will cover the costs for low income familes. (I know that will upset some, your taxes paid for my kid to be born, and to that I say a many thanks. Please don't hate. If you do, just look in his eyes first and tell me it wasn't worth it. After all, your taxes go to way worse thing.)

Note: I was going to put a pic of his beaming smile, but I couldn't figure out how to load the pic. Sure I'll get an extra heck for that, but if there is anyone that wants to help instead of hate, I'm here to listen. I learn quick, I promise.

Originally posted by Inquisitive1
reply to post by boncho

 

You confuse me. I in no way claim that Planed Parenthood (as it is today, anyway) is operating some nefarious, eugenics plan. Or even that they morally believe in such a thing (I'm going to avoid the whole Pro-Choice/Pro-Life crap) -- simply, that their long dead founder did.

I am fully aware that is no longer what they are for, nor has it been for some time.

I think you misinterpret the founder, her thoughts, and opinions. I admit some of it is a little harsh, or pushing the limit. But that is also in today's standards.

You consistently quoted her out of context, and given that this thread is equating the organization to eugenics program similar to Nazi actions, I feel like there is some misinformation.

reply to post by boncho


you can jump to as many conclusions about me as you'd like to justify whatever you feel you should.

Back on topic, however, is that while Margaret Sanger was indeed for women rights she was also for eugenics -- killing or sterilizing all those deemed "unsavory" at that time. This is documented. I am not twisting her words.
I honestly see no importance of what (you think) she's seen during her time that made her think eugenics was a neat idea to run with. Medical knowledge back then was very new... and often wrong. Moron, and Degenerate where medical terms they used when nothing else fit the bill. They simply didn't know, but ran with it anyway. Instead of educating (like how to read, write, basic math) the uneducated (who where 97% of the ones they targeted) they assumed the problem was terminal (or otherwise untreatable). And since poor, undereducated people tend to breed poor, undereducated children they assumed the issue was genetic. Their answer to this, and Margaret Sanger's, is Eugenics..

Originally posted by boncho

I think you misinterpret the founder, her thoughts, and opinions. I admit some of it is a little harsh, or pushing the limit. But that is also in today's standards.

You consistently quoted her out of context, and given that this thread is equating the organization to eugenics program similar to Nazi actions, I feel like there is some misinformation.

I've already stated that I am simply addressing Margaret Sanger herself, Not the organization she's founded, as it's long since separated from any such ideology Sanger herself had.

As for me quoting her out of context, I disagree, but please list the context you'd like where appropriate..

Originally posted by Inquisitive1
reply to post by boncho

 

you can jump to as many conclusions about me as you'd like to justify whatever you feel you should.

Back on topic, however, is that while Margaret Sanger was indeed for women rights she was also for eugenics -- killing or sterilizing all those deemed "unsavory" at that time. This is documented. I am not twisting her words.
I honestly see no importance of what (you think) she's seen during her time that made her think eugenics was a neat idea to run with. Medical knowledge back then was very new... and often wrong. Moron, and Degenerate where medical terms they used when nothing else fit the bill. They simply didn't know, but ran with it anyway. Instead of educating (like how to read, write, basic math) the uneducated (who where 97% of the ones they targeted) they assumed the problem was terminal (or otherwise untreatable). And since poor, undereducated people tend to breed poor, undereducated children they assumed the issue was genetic. Their answer to this, and Margaret Sanger's, is Eugenics..

You merely quote the wrong articles.

You should have quoted this one.

reply to post by boncho


To be fair though, the actions of Sanger and her intellectual musings are two separate things. Perhaps one never fully enveloped the other because it just wasn't going to happen in this side of the world. Had she been active in the third reich, who knows what type of position she may have held.

reply to post by Inquisitive1


In any case, I enjoyed your summary of eugenics circa the time we are discussing. As medical knowledge has grown ten fold, it is a very rational and logical way to interpret some of the crazier things the people before us thought.

Originally posted by rbmgang

Originally posted by AllInMyHead
reply to post by libertytoall

 

I worked for Planned Parenthood as a clinic manager in Florida for 4 years and I have to say that this video is total propaganda put out by the anti-choice crowd. Planned Parenthood has helped a LOT of people. I worked with a lot of people on the State and Federal level and never ONCE did I ever hear anyone talk about or even infer anything regarding "population control". And never once did I ever see or hear of anyone trying to sway someone to make a choice they didn't want to make. If someone needed help because they were pregnant and wanted to keep their baby, they got prenatal care. If someone wanted to put their baby up for adoption they got help to find a good family that would take the baby. If someone wanted to terminate their pregnancy, they got that help too.
They also help a lot of people, men and women, who just needed medical care. Anything from a cold to an STD, oftentimes for free. I for one am proud of my time that I worked at Planned Parenthood.

Anyway, I said my piece, resume your PP bashing now.....

Departmentalization at its best...Seriously dude why would someone in the know rub their hands and blatantly say to you yeah brother we going to do some population control hahahaha

Sorry, but no. Why would an organization like Planned Parenthood spend as much time and resources on helping people if its "true agenda" was population control and controlling minorities. There are far easier ways to control populations.

reply to post by AllInMyHead

Sorry, but no. Why would an organization like Planned Parenthood spend as much time and resources on helping people if its "true agenda" was population control and controlling minorities. There are far easier ways to control populations.

To be fair, abortion and contraceptives are a form of population control. In my opinion, it's a much needed form of population control. In the latter case, if people are willing to get abortions, it means they are not ready as parents and their child would suffer if they were to have it. In the former, it makes complete sense for people to use contraceptives until they are ready to take on the responsibility of parenting.

As misguided as the founders were...

Originally posted by boncho
You merely quote the wrong articles.

You should have quoted this one.

A Plan for Peace* By MARGARET SANGER: First, put Into action President Wilson's fourteen points, upon which terms Germany and Austria surrendered to the Allies in 1918 Second, have Congress set up a special department for the study of population problems and appoint a Parliament of Population, the directors representing the various branches of science this body to direct and control the population through birth rates and immigration, and to direct its distribution over the country according to national needs consistent with taste, fitness and interest of the individuals. The main objects of the Population Congress would be (a) to raise the level and increase the general intelligence of population. (b) to increase the population slowly by keeping the birth rate at its present level of fifteen per thousand, decreasing the death rate below its present mark of 11 per thousand (c) to keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, Insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others In this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924 (d) to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring. (*Summary of address before the New History Society, January 11th, New York City)

Direct (though I've changed the layout for readability), in context, full length article A Plan For Peace Margaret Sanger authored in the Birth Control Review magazine you suggested. This has done nothing to change my mind of her. In fact, it just solidifies it further (and it was pretty solid). Still, I like how she neglected to mention killing as a method in section D, but I suspect that was deliberate.

Originally posted by AllInMyHead

Originally posted by rbmgang

Originally posted by AllInMyHead
reply to post by libertytoall

 

I worked for Planned Parenthood as a clinic manager in Florida for 4 years and I have to say that this video is total propaganda put out by the anti-choice crowd. Planned Parenthood has helped a LOT of people. I worked with a lot of people on the State and Federal level and never ONCE did I ever hear anyone talk about or even infer anything regarding "population control". And never once did I ever see or hear of anyone trying to sway someone to make a choice they didn't want to make. If someone needed help because they were pregnant and wanted to keep their baby, they got prenatal care. If someone wanted to put their baby up for adoption they got help to find a good family that would take the baby. If someone wanted to terminate their pregnancy, they got that help too.
They also help a lot of people, men and women, who just needed medical care. Anything from a cold to an STD, oftentimes for free. I for one am proud of my time that I worked at Planned Parenthood.

Anyway, I said my piece, resume your PP bashing now.....

Departmentalization at its best...Seriously dude why would someone in the know rub their hands and blatantly say to you yeah brother we going to do some population control hahahaha

Sorry, but no. Why would an organization like Planned Parenthood spend as much time and resources on helping people if its "true agenda" was population control and controlling minorities. There are far easier ways to control populations.

Do they really spend time helping people or are they trying to increase revenue?? I have a friend who was in a physically abusive relationship. She got pregnant, her husband abused her physically, and off she went to planned parenthood with a black eye and pregnant. Planned parenthood was more than happy to abort her baby but did NOTHING to notify the police of her abusive relationship. They didn't even suggest to her a way out of being beaten nor did they suggest it was the right thing to do to call the police.

Another friend of mine had a younger sister age 14 who got pregnant by a 22 year old. She went to planned parenthood and they took care of everything while keeping the rape a secret.

These are the qualities of an organization looking out for public health?? I think not... They have an interest in getting paid just like any other business.. You may call them non-profit but the reality is they are more like an insurance company. The more claims they have the more money they will receive from donors and the government. They are perfectly willing to keep "hush hush" in the face of physical abuse and rape in order to have loyal patients who will come back to them again.. It's sickening really..

This is a link to a letter from Teddy Roosevelt in 1913 strongly supporting eugenics.

cdm.amphilsoc.org.../eugenics&CISOPTR=133&DMSCALE=100&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMMODE=viewer&'___'EXT=& REC=10&'___'HUMB=1&DMROTATE=0

Moderator! Using 'Link' also ignores much of this. Needs to be 'fixed'.

"... society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind."

"It is really extraordinary that our people refuse to apply to human beings such elementary knowledge that every successful farmer is obliged to apply to his own stock breeding. Any group of farmers who permitted their best stock not to breed, and let all the increase come from the worst stock, would be treated as fit for an asylum."

The letter is owned by the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia, a fantastic source for historical documents.

The letter is a response to a Mr. Charles Davenport. I suggest you do a search on him.

reply to post by libertytoall

Do they really spend time helping people or are they trying to increase revenue?? I have a friend who was in a physically abusive relationship. She got pregnant, her husband abused her physically, and off she went to planned parenthood with a black eye and pregnant. Planned parenthood was more than happy to abort her baby but did NOTHING to notify the police of her abusive relationship. They didn't even suggest to her a way out of being beaten nor did they suggest it was the right thing to do to call the police.

Another friend of mine had a younger sister age 14 who got pregnant by a 22 year old. She went to planned parenthood and they took care of everything while keeping the rape a secret.

In both cases that's actually called privacy. Jesus, in the Catholic church, the actual ones committing the crimes confess to officials. In this case, the victims are talking about experience and you are giving the people that help them a hard time....

If it was mandatory reporting, then you have alienation, and then you have women who might not go there in the first place. So if that is the method they use, I can understand why...

reply to post by libertytoall

Do they really spend time helping people or are they trying to increase revenue?? I have a friend who was in a physically abusive relationship. She got pregnant, her husband abused her physically, and off she went to planned parenthood with a black eye and pregnant. Planned parenthood was more than happy to abort her baby but did NOTHING to notify the police of her abusive relationship. They didn't even suggest to her a way out of being beaten nor did they suggest it was the right thing to do to call the police.

So did YOU notify the police about her abusive relationship? HUh?

Did YOU suggest a way out of being beaten? erm...

Originally posted by oghamxx
This is a link to a letter from Teddy Roosevelt in 1913 strongly supporting eugenics.

cdm.amphilsoc.org.../eugenics&CISOPTR=133&DMSCALE=100&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMMODE=viewer&'___'EXT=& REC=10&'___'HUMB=1&DMROTATE=0

Moderator! Using 'Link' also ignores much of this. Needs to be 'fixed'.

"... society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind."

"It is really extraordinary that our people refuse to apply to human beings such elementary knowledge that every successful farmer is obliged to apply to his own stock breeding. Any group of farmers who permitted their best stock not to breed, and let all the increase come from the worst stock, would be treated as fit for an asylum."

The letter is owned by the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia, a fantastic source for historical documents.

The letter is a response to a Mr. Charles Davenport. I suggest you do a search on him.

edit on 9-5-2012 by oghamxx because: (no reason given)

Seems perfectly rational to me. The eugenics movement continued in the west even after world war 2 and sterilizations were common in some countries up to the 60's. Then the west did almost a complete 180, and only birth control remained. The change in attitudes was probably largely influenced by the advent of the modern mass media.

Eugenics was MAINSTREAM thought around the world up to 50s. It was in no way limited to nazis.

As far as Planned Parenthood is concerned, they are not forcing anyone to do anything, so thats the end of discussion for me. I support them.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by libertytoall

Do they really spend time helping people or are they trying to increase revenue?? I have a friend who was in a physically abusive relationship. She got pregnant, her husband abused her physically, and off she went to planned parenthood with a black eye and pregnant. Planned parenthood was more than happy to abort her baby but did NOTHING to notify the police of her abusive relationship. They didn't even suggest to her a way out of being beaten nor did they suggest it was the right thing to do to call the police.

 

So did YOU notify the police about her abusive relationship? HUh?

Did YOU suggest a way out of being beaten? erm...

Actually I did and convinced her to leave the man that constantly had her living in fear. She thanked me later.

reply to post by libertytoall

Actually I did and convinced her to leave the man that constantly had her living in fear. She thanked me later.

That's good. You did your job as a friend and PP did its job in mitigating the impact of the situation.