Planned Falsehoods

Over at TownHall, La Shawn Barber writes:

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America makes a futile effort to deny that its founder Margaret Sanger was a eugenicist. […] As a eugenicist, Sanger’s goals were to discourage the “unfitâ€? and “inferiorâ€? from reproducing.

Futile? Sadly, No!

“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief issue in birth control.”
A quotation falsely attributed to Margaret Sanger, this statement was made by the editors of American Medicine in a review of an article by Sanger.


Comments: 15


Looking for inaccuracies in LaShawn’s work? C’mon guys! Quit phoning it in!!


What about Hokey Hosannas?

Rummy hearts Greenspan…they order in Chinese…and make love on the bearskin…


I advocate the euthenaeugenicidifimacation of anyone who gives their children names with the “La” prefix. Word.


Isn’t “La” just French for “Teh”?


All i know is the baby salad at their snack bar is to DIE for.


Let’s stop attacking founders: justified or unjustified, it’s a waste of time. It’s time for pro-lifers to abandon negative, self-defeating strategies and opt for strategies that give women good reasons to preserve the lives of their unborn. Right most of us pro-lifers only give them reasons why they should feel like axe murderers for wanting to terminate their pregnancies.


Correction: Last sentence should on the post above should begin with “Right now…”


I should have quit while I was behind. It must have been a long day because my typos are beginning to make me sound like a moron.


How about providing societal safeguards that help having and raising these children more practical? Or even prevent the pregnancies in the first place? Things like:

* Sex education that includes teaching about all birth control methods (including but not exclusively abstinence)
* Universal healthcare
* Affordable child care services
* Fully-funded early childhood learning programs
* Parenting classes

For the record, I oppose the practice of abortion except for cases of rape, incest, or preserving the mother’s health. However, I do not believe it is my decision to make.


Now we’re getting somewhere. Great suggestions, yagi. I appreciate your point of view.


No, tig, it’s mormon for “damn I got no idea.”


Sadly, No! Here’s what Margaret Sanger really said:

“Such philanthropy, as Dean Inge has so unanswerably pointed out, is kind only to be cruel, and unwittingly promotes precisely the results most deprecated. It encourages the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant.”


Good to see someone else who appriciates that in order to minimize abortion, we have to fix the economic circumstances which lead to it.
I’m… well, I won’t get into my personal legislative preferances, but I subscribe neither to total ban or any-time, any-place, any-one. Actually spelling it out has required three single spaced pages in the past, so I’ve got no desire to do that again (or argue about it… so tiring).


sandwich dude, it isn’t the typos.


More power to you, GG!

“sandwich dude, it isn’t the typos.”

No? Then it must be the spelling errors, right? Please don’t tell me it’s anything more serious than that.


(comments are closed)