RSS 2.0 Follow Us!

Related Posts

The Legacy of Planned Parenthood…Rotten Roots Equals Rotten Fruit

Scott on May 15, 2007 at 10:37 pm

John’s recent post about Planned Parenthood draws attention to PP’s flaunting of the law while operating under the assumption that whatever they want to do is justification enough for ignoring the legal and/or moral ramifications of their policies and actions.

This takes me to a line of questions that has been rattling around in my brain over the last few years:

1) How can ANYONE take Planned Parenthood seriously when their history is rooted in racism, prejudice and eugenics?

According to documentation provided at Abortion Facts Online, Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood’s primary founder, was a racial purist whose prejudice and racism were rivaled only by her wholesale support of a Hitleresque eugenics programs (eugenics being the artificial “improvement” of the human race through various forms of intervention including selective breeding, forced sterilization, genetic counseling, abortion/forced abortion, etc).

Among Sanger’s many beliefs was the idea that the socially unfit and “mentally inferior” (less intelligent) should be forcibly sterilized. To Sanger’s way of thinking, the unfit and inferior included blacks, southern Europeans and Jews. In her words, these groups were “feebleminded,” “human weeds,” and a “menace” to the “purer race.”

In Sanger’s own words, one of the best solutions towards sucessful eugenics was:

“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 while also taking an inventory of the secondary groups such as illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, dope fiends; classify them in special departments under government medical protection, and segregate them on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct.”

Nice. What a great neighbor she would have been.

2) How can anyone take Planned Parenthood seriously when their history and collective pattern of behavior shows a blatant disregard for the lives of children (both born and unborn) and when their activities in recent years include: standing in the way of parental notification, opposition to laws that would make it against the law to transport minors across state lines for the purpose of avoiding parental notification while assisting in receiving an abortion, opposition to the prosecution of men guilty of underage sex/statutory rape, etc?

In Ms. Sanger’s words (from her book Woman and the New Race), “The most merciful thing a large family can do for one of its infant members is to kill it.”

Again…Nice! I’m thinking that she wouldn’t have been a very good babysitter.

In American Weekly Magazine in 1934, Ms. Sanger published “The American Baby Code.” This magazine piece contained several points that Sanger believed the U.S. should follow as related to births, birth control, eugenics, etc. These points included:

Article 1. The purpose of the American Baby Code should be to provide for a better distribution of babies and to assist couples who wish to prevent overproduction of offspring and thus to reduce the burden of charity and taxation for public relief and to protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit.

Article 8. Feeble-minded persons, habitual congenital criminals, those afflicted with inheritable diseases, and others found biologically unfit should be sterilized or in cases of doubt should be isolated as to prevent the perpetuation of their afflictions by breeding.

World Net Daily reported on May 12th of this year that Planned Parenthood has been caught time and again not only performing underage abortions, but also protecting pedophiles and child abusers who are victimizing young girls/women who have gone to them for abortions and/or other health related issues caused by the abuse. Planned Parenthood has deliberately ignored the laws of the land and mandatory reporting regulations which dictate that health providers are required to report suspected child abuse of all kinds to legal authorities.

The website has compiled a fairly exhaustive investigation into Planned Parenthood and their tendency to play fast and loose with the law and the truth in order to forward their own agenda and in order to subvert those beliefs and morals that seem antiquated to them.

So it appears that in the views of PP, children are disposable, especially the children of the unfit which includes the feeble-minded, criminals, those who have inheritable diseases and those who are otherwise genetically inferior. At the same time, PP is not beyond ignoring minor transgressions like pedophilia, child abuse and even incest if reporting those crimes will put a crimp in their larger agenda.

3) How can anyone take Planned Parenthood seriously when their goals (as established by their words and their actions) are to steer teens towards sexual activity and promiscuity whenever possible while demeaning any sort of encouragement towards abstinence, sex within the confines of marriage, the stability of marriage and family, etc.?

Margaret Sanger favored a “free love” mentality without any sexual limits and without the burden of children for women. In the words of one of her biographers who wrote Birth Control in America: The Career of Margaret Sanger, Sanger viewed “the marriage bed [as] the most degenerating influence in the social order.”

In The American Baby Code mentioned previously, Sanger formulated several of the points in her article to take aim specifically at engineering families and reproduction including:

Article 3. A marriage license shall in itself give husband and wife only the right to a common household and not the right to parenthood.

Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for parenthood.

Article 5. Permits for parenthood shall be issued by government authorities to married couples upon application, providing the parents are financially able to support the expected child, have the qualifications needed for proper rearing of the child, have no transmissible diseases, and on the woman’s part no indication that maternity is likely to result in death or permanent injury to health.

Article 6. No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.

In December 2006, the Baptist Press published an analysis of a study promoted by the Guttmacher Institute in New York, a study which claimed that 95% of adult Americans have participated in premarital sex. The conclusion of the study’s author Lawrence B Finer was:

“Premarital sex is normal behavior for the vast majority of Americans, and has been for decades. The data clearly show that the majority of older teens and adults have already had sex before marriage, which calls into question the federal government’s funding of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for 12-29-year-olds.”

What the Guttmacher study never disclosed was that the Guttmacher Institute is the well-funded research arm of Planned Parenthood and that Planned Parenthood had an enormous financial stake in trying to play up the dubious results of its research whore institute.

The Baptist Press article goes on to point out how the Guttmacher/Planned Parenthood study is contradicted by a variety of other major studies covering the same ground including studies from the CDC, the health publication Adolescent and Family Health, and Columbia University.

So in the views of Planned Parenthood’s guiding principles, only the fit should be allowed to propagate with “fit” being defined by Sanger and her warped sense of Hitlerian pure-race eugenics (no Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, Italians, or Eskimos). At the same time, in order to continue to receive funding for their numerous operations, PP is willing to ignore the laws and regulations that require them to act responsibly by reporting illegal activities including pedophilia and child abuse. Lastly, Planned Parenthood sees nothing wrong with making up information in order to bolster their public standing while allowing them to continue to suckle at the government teet.

I know that I began this post with three questions.

Well, never mind.

I guess I know the answers after all.

These people should all go to Hell.

Post to Twitter

Category: Pro-Life |

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.