 Sanger’s strongest objection is that she is expected to help these people:
“Such philanthropy . . . 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” (Ibid., pp. 116-117).
Those who would help the poor and unfortunate through charity suffer from excessive sentimentalism:
“. . . let us not close our eyes to one of the greatest dangers inherent in such warm-hearted humanitarianism. For it is a curious but neglected fact that the very types which in all kindness should be obliterated from the human stock, have been permitted to reproduce themselves and to perpetuate their group, succored by the policy of indiscriminate charity of warm hearts uncontrolled by cool heads” (“The Need of Birth Control in America,” Birth Control: Facts and Responsibilities |