Planned Parenthood and Nazi Germany - Page 8

Grace · 06-09-2008, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

Margaret Sanger, as others such as Presidents William Howard Taft, Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover, Calvin Coolidge, university presidents and faculty, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, important people from all walks of life, embraced eugenics as a benefit for the human race. Smearing Sanger for beliefs embraced by a multitude at the time does nothing to discredit Planned Parenthood.

About.com: http://hnn.us/articles/1662.html

"In her direct assistance to one half of the human race, Margaret Sanger offered to women their inalienable rights and their individual power, a power not to be manipulated by federal, state, or municipal laws -- the power to bring into the world her children only when it was right for the mother and for the child, the power truly to better the race. As Sanger says, "Only upon a free, self-determining motherhood can rest any unshakable structure of racial betterment."
Accepting the science of the time that claimed sterilization saved the feebleminded, who were not capable of parenting, from themselves and from a life of institutional confinement, it seemed only common sense to Margaret Sanger to approve an operation that had no effects on the individual's life other than to prevent conception. Yet Margaret Sanger had a problem--as Justice Holmes did not--with sterilization as compulsory and with "the difficulties presented by the idea of 'fit' and 'unfit.' Who is to decide this question?" she asked. "

Obviously she felt SHE was capable of "deciding this question". I really had no idea you would be in defense of eugenics. You are alot sicker than I imagined.

OKgrannie · 06-09-2008, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grace

Obviously she felt SHE was capable of "deciding this question". I really had no idea you would be in defense of eugenics. You are alot sicker than I imagined.

Read carefully, Grace, then think. Sanger questioned "who would decide" because she supported individual choice. Where in my posts is anything defending eugenics?

Grace · 06-09-2008, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

Read carefully, Grace, then think. Sanger questioned "who would decide" because she supported individual choice. Where in my posts is anything defending eugenics?

"Accepting the science of the time that claimed sterilization saved the feebleminded, who were not capable of parenting, from themselves and from a life of institutional confinement, it seemed only common sense to Margaret Sanger to approve an operation that had no effects on the individual's life other than to prevent conception."

If you agree with this statement, you support eugenics. If you had actualy read the site I provided you would know that her goal was to mask eugenics by calling them "choice", or "rights", so this quote from her is realy no surprise. What I dont understand is how you totaly look past all the other quotes, clearly exposing her for the monster that she was.

Catus Felidae · 06-09-2008, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grace

If you agree with this statement, you support eugenics.

Eugenics
–noun (used with a singular verb

) the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

So scientists who work to rid society of mental retardation, genetic diseases, etc. support eugenics (as you mean the word to be understood)?

If you had actualy read the site I provided you would know that her goal was to mask eugenics by calling them "choice", or "rights", so this quote from her is realy no surprise. What I dont understand is how you totaly look past all the other quotes, clearly exposing her for the monster that she was.

Are those doctors and scientists also 'monsters'?

Is my daughter, who has given up a LOT of bad habits during her pregnancy and adopted a LOT of good ones, so as to insure the healthiest baby possible, also a 'monster'?

CrazyFlamingos · 06-09-2008, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catus Felidae

Are those doctors and scientists also 'monsters'?

Is my daughter, who has given up a LOT of bad habits during her pregnancy and adopted a LOT of good ones, so as to insure the healthiest baby possible, also a 'monster'?

I suppose couples who discover that they both carry the same defective gene so that their children are almost certain to have a serious birth defect are monsters if they choose to be sterilized.

OKgrannie · 06-09-2008, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grace

"Accepting the science of the time that claimed sterilization saved the feebleminded, who were not capable of parenting, from themselves and from a life of institutional confinement, it seemed only common sense to Margaret Sanger to approve an operation that had no effects on the individual's life other than to prevent conception."

If you agree with this statement, you support eugenics. If you had actualy read the site I provided you would know that her goal was to mask eugenics by calling them "choice", or "rights", so this quote from her is realy no surprise. What I dont understand is how you totaly look past all the other quotes, clearly exposing her for the monster that she was.

The eugenicists of that time believed that the feebleminded should be forcibly sterilized, but Sanger disagreed with that. I disagree with forcibly sterilizing people, but agree that they should have the choice to do so. The quotes you cite have been lifted from context. Example:

Margaret Sanger Quotes

• A quote taken out of context: "We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population." (In the context, it's apparent that she didn't want such word to get out because such a characterization of her work was common -- and untrue. Then as now.) • When Sanger used terms like "racial betterment" she was generally referring to the human race, so in looking at quotes using such phrases, check the context before making assumptions. Her opinions of the disabled and immigrants -- opinions not attractive or politically correct today -- were often the source of such sentiments as "racial betterment."

Grace · 06-09-2008, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

The eugenicists of that time believed that the feebleminded should be forcibly sterilized, but Sanger disagreed with that. I disagree with forcibly sterilizing people, but agree that they should have the choice to do so. The quotes you cite have been lifted from context. Example:

Margaret Sanger Quotes

• A quote taken out of context: "We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population." (In the context, it's apparent that she didn't want such word to get out because such a characterization of her work was common -- and untrue. Then as now.) • When Sanger used terms like "racial betterment" she was generally referring to the human race, so in looking at quotes using such phrases, check the context before making assumptions. Her opinions of the disabled and immigrants -- opinions not attractive or politically correct today -- were often the source of such sentiments as "racial betterment."

On the disabled:

“Every single case of inherited defect, every malformed child, every congenitally tainted human being brought into this world is of infinite importance to that poor individual; but it is of scarcely less importance to the rest of us and to all of our children who must pay in one way or another for these biological and racial mistakes” (Pivot of Civilization, p. 274).

“No more children should be born when the parents, though healthy themselves, find that their children are physically or mentally defective” (Woman and the New Race [NY: Blue Ribbon Books, 1920], p. 89).

Birth control “is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives” (Ibid., p. 229).

Outta context my ass.

Grace · 06-09-2008, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos

I suppose couples who discover that they both carry the same defective gene so that their children are almost certain to have a serious birth defect are monsters if they choose to be sterilized.

Here go, I knew the hyperpole was soon to come.

OKgrannie · 06-09-2008, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grace

"Accepting the science of the time that claimed sterilization saved the feebleminded, who were not capable of parenting, from themselves and from a life of institutional confinement, it seemed only common sense to Margaret Sanger to approve an operation that had no effects on the individual's life other than to prevent conception."

If you agree with this statement, you support eugenics. If you had actualy read the site I provided you would know that her goal was to mask eugenics by calling them "choice", or "rights", so this quote from her is realy no surprise. What I dont understand is how you totaly look past all the other quotes, clearly exposing her for the monster that she was.

Here is more about one of Sanger's quotations. Don't be so gullible, Grace, the people attempting to smear Sanger have their own agenda, and it isn't a pretty one.

MSPP > Newsletter

For instance she wrote to philanthropist Clarence Gamble in 1939:
The ministers work is also important and also he should be trained, perhaps by the [Birth Control] Federation [of America] as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members. (MS to Clarence Gamble, MSM S17:574)
Anti-choice groups attempting to discredit Sanger frequently extract the line "we don't want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population" without offering context or intelligent explanation....
In this instance, MSPP editor and director Esther Katz thought it necessary to respond to the Wall Street Journal because of the prestige and large circulation of the paper. She based her response on a close reading of the documents in question, offering more complete extractions of Sanger's writings. "The textual evidence reveals," she wrote, "that Sanger did not rationalize her support for birth control on racist grounds, that she never advocated genocidal policies aimed at racial, ethnic or religious groups, and that she, in fact, believed access to birth control would benefit, not eliminate minority populations.""

Grace · 06-09-2008, 01:15 PM

Eugenics
–noun (used with a singular verb

) the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

So scientists who work to rid society of mental retardation, genetic diseases, etc. support eugenics (as you mean the word to be understood)?

If you call being black, or a Jew, or being poor a "undesirable trait" then yep, you got it spot on.

If Scientist encourage people to murder there "undesirable children", then yes, they support eugenics. This isnt rocket science.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode