CDZ Ginsburg was right , it was about population control.

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,152
Reaction score
7,725
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
" More And Drearier "

* Incompetence *


Who is supposed to play God and determine who is worthy to live and who must die, Would that be you? Tell us what your criteria would be? Are white babies more valuable that black babies? Your thoughts on this should be interesting.
There is an 800 million population in latin america and it is full of socialist , dictatorship , shit holes because the populations have bred themselves into poverty , so be sure to thank the catholic church of psychopathy .

Does the us need to ignore carrying capacity limits and shoot for population gluttony by raising its 333 million with a median iq of 100 to 800 million with a median iq of 85 through first come first served , non merit based for iq or skill set , immigration from countries such as china with 1.2 billion , or india with 1.2 billion , or africa with 1 billion , that are already over populated and over represented globally , to satisfy your expectations for an answer to such a spurious question ?

The catholic church forbid birth control in haiti and what used to be 95% tropical jungle is now 95% dirt and shanty towns ; and , even puerto ricans have very low regard for haitians .

So the mental degenerate slave owners , who could have given less than a damn about anything other than how much money they could acquire , had a black slave population in the south that was more than twice the number of whites ; and , your fake outrage for ignoring huge populations whose capacity for cultural development was a mud hut and body modification makes about as much sense .

Even if violence does not occur, the consequences are unacceptable. Development of a racially integrated society, extraordinarily difficult today, will be virtually impossible when the present black ghetto population of 12.5 million has grown to almost 21 million.

So who lives and who dies? Simple question. Why no Dim takers?
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
2,301
Points
1,893
Sanger was a Racist who ... wanted to wipe Black people off the face of this planet.
This lie is truly Orwellian in scope. Even the slightest acquaintance with Margaret Sanger’s life history would show this to be false and slanderous:


W. E. B. Du Bois served on the board of Sanger's Harlem clinic

Sanger worked with African American leaders and professionals who saw a need for birth control in their communities. In 1929, James H. Hubert, a black social worker and the leader of New York's Urban League, asked Sanger to open a clinic in Harlem. Sanger secured funding ... and opened the clinic, staffed with black doctors, in 1930. The clinic was directed by a 15-member advisory board consisting of black doctors, nurses, clergy, journalists, and social workers. The clinic was publicized in the African-American press as well as in black churches, and it received the approval of W. E. B. Du Bois, the co-founder of the NAACP and the editor of its magazine, The Crisis. Sanger did not tolerate bigotry among her staff, nor would she tolerate any refusal to work within interracial projects. Sanger's work with minorities earned praise from Martin Luther King, Jr., in his 1966 acceptance speech for the Margaret Sanger award.[79]


Even her wiki page talks about her links to the KKK and eugenics. But Dims lie....it's what you do.
Eugenics isn't based on race--

Eugenics is based more on birth defects----like not allowing the mentally handicapped to have children because their kids would be at higher risk for being mentally handicapped.

Who should be playing god?

those of us who actually have to pay to clean up the messes that the druggies/alcoholics/ and others who should not be having kids create.

We can make it simple---if you abuse drugs or alcohol while pregnant or your infant is born on these chemicals--simple blood test and immediate sterilization
If you have an iq of less than 70 and a welfare queen------------------immediate sterilization
this alone would save billions every year and cut down on everything from prisons to foster homes to medical costs and clean up the environment and cutting down on carbon emissions as an added bonus.
 
Last edited:

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
2,301
Points
1,893
Wow.... Now she opposed abortion. That's a good one.
Read the god-damn discussion! You are making a fool of yourself!
Not at all.
She's ignoring the woman's history.
She's like John Kerry, she was against abortion before she was for it.
The point should be that Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate the black race first by BC, then by abortion.

You know nothing of the woman-----------she and her family were Activists for both women and black rights.

She saw children before birth control as CHAINS that kept women trapped in bad marriages and in poverty unable to escape.

She rightly deduced that having a bunch of kids-----------------------leads to child abuse, POVERTY, and spousal abuse.

She correctly theorized that if a woman had fewer children--------that she could more easily leave an abusive relationship and could more easily find employment for herself enabling her to feed herself and her few children. Having one child and job may provide enough to support the child into adulthood -having 10 not so much

Black women even then were more likely to be in abusive relationships and live more in poverty with fewer job skills and prospects making escaping with a bunch of kids impossible.
 

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,152
Reaction score
7,725
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
those of us who actually have to pay to clean up the messes that the druggies/alcoholics/ and others who should not be having kids create.

We can make it simple---if you abuse drugs or alcohol while pregnant or your infant is born on these chemicals--simple blood test and immediate sterilization
If you have an iq of less than 70 and a welfare queen------------------immediate sterilization
this alone would save billions every year and cut down on everything from prisons to foster homes to medical costs and clean up the environment and cutting down on carbon emissions as an added bonus.
Sanger was a Racist who ... wanted to wipe Black people off the face of this planet.
This lie is truly Orwellian in scope. Even the slightest acquaintance with Margaret Sanger’s life history would show this to be false and slanderous:


W. E. B. Du Bois served on the board of Sanger's Harlem clinic

Sanger worked with African American leaders and professionals who saw a need for birth control in their communities. In 1929, James H. Hubert, a black social worker and the leader of New York's Urban League, asked Sanger to open a clinic in Harlem. Sanger secured funding ... and opened the clinic, staffed with black doctors, in 1930. The clinic was directed by a 15-member advisory board consisting of black doctors, nurses, clergy, journalists, and social workers. The clinic was publicized in the African-American press as well as in black churches, and it received the approval of W. E. B. Du Bois, the co-founder of the NAACP and the editor of its magazine, The Crisis. Sanger did not tolerate bigotry among her staff, nor would she tolerate any refusal to work within interracial projects. Sanger's work with minorities earned praise from Martin Luther King, Jr., in his 1966 acceptance speech for the Margaret Sanger award.[79]


Even her wiki page talks about her links to the KKK and eugenics. But Dims lie....it's what you do.
Eugenics isn't based on race--

Eugenics is based more on birth defects----like not allowing the mentally handicapped to have children because their kids would be at higher risk for being mentally handicapped.

Who should be playing god?

tho

So people you feel are undesirable should be killed or sterilized. Cool. Thank you Dr. Hitler. That must be your final solution to all the World's ills.
 

mudwhistle

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
96,470
Reaction score
23,961
Points
2,220
Location
Tested Negative For COVID-19
Wow.... Now she opposed abortion. That's a good one.
Read the god-damn discussion! You are making a fool of yourself!
Not at all.
She's ignoring the woman's history.
She's like John Kerry, she was against abortion before she was for it.
The point should be that Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate the black race first by BC, then by abortion.

You know nothing of the woman-----------she and her family were Activists for both women and black rights.

She saw children before birth control as CHAINS that kept women trapped in bad marriages and in poverty unable to escape.

She rightly deduced that having a bunch of kids-----------------------leads to child abuse, POVERTY, and spousal abuse.

She correctly theorized that if a woman had fewer children--------that she could more easily leave an abusive relationship and could more easily find employment for herself enabling her to feed herself and her few children. Having one child and job may provide enough to support the child into adulthood -having 10 not so much

Black women even then were more likely to be in abusive relationships and live more in poverty with fewer job skills and prospects making escaping with a bunch of kids impossible.
Yep.....so she planned on murdering black babies because they just might turn out to be criminals.
Total friggen racist mentality.
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
2,301
Points
1,893
those of us who actually have to pay to clean up the messes that the druggies/alcoholics/ and others who should not be having kids create.

We can make it simple---if you abuse drugs or alcohol while pregnant or your infant is born on these chemicals--simple blood test and immediate sterilization
If you have an iq of less than 70 and a welfare queen------------------immediate sterilization
this alone would save billions every year and cut down on everything from prisons to foster homes to medical costs and clean up the environment and cutting down on carbon emissions as an added bonus.
Sanger was a Racist who ... wanted to wipe Black people off the face of this planet.
This lie is truly Orwellian in scope. Even the slightest acquaintance with Margaret Sanger’s life history would show this to be false and slanderous:


W. E. B. Du Bois served on the board of Sanger's Harlem clinic

Sanger worked with African American leaders and professionals who saw a need for birth control in their communities. In 1929, James H. Hubert, a black social worker and the leader of New York's Urban League, asked Sanger to open a clinic in Harlem. Sanger secured funding ... and opened the clinic, staffed with black doctors, in 1930. The clinic was directed by a 15-member advisory board consisting of black doctors, nurses, clergy, journalists, and social workers. The clinic was publicized in the African-American press as well as in black churches, and it received the approval of W. E. B. Du Bois, the co-founder of the NAACP and the editor of its magazine, The Crisis. Sanger did not tolerate bigotry among her staff, nor would she tolerate any refusal to work within interracial projects. Sanger's work with minorities earned praise from Martin Luther King, Jr., in his 1966 acceptance speech for the Margaret Sanger award.[79]


Even her wiki page talks about her links to the KKK and eugenics. But Dims lie....it's what you do.
Eugenics isn't based on race--

Eugenics is based more on birth defects----like not allowing the mentally handicapped to have children because their kids would be at higher risk for being mentally handicapped.

Who should be playing god?

tho

So people you feel are undesirable should be killed or sterilized. Cool. Thank you Dr. Hitler. That must be your final solution to all the World's ills.
Of course I feel this way---I am a rational not emotional thinker.

Maybe you should volunteer to work in a neonatal unit at a hospital preferably one that deals with a lot of homeless and druggies after the covid thing is cleared up.............take a good long long look at the babies that the meth and crack heads have along with the alcholics------------and you may figure out why there are women out there that should never ever be allowed to have children-----
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
2,301
Points
1,893
Wow.... Now she opposed abortion. That's a good one.
Read the god-damn discussion! You are making a fool of yourself!
Not at all.
She's ignoring the woman's history.
She's like John Kerry, she was against abortion before she was for it.
The point should be that Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate the black race first by BC, then by abortion.

You know nothing of the woman-----------she and her family were Activists for both women and black rights.

She saw children before birth control as CHAINS that kept women trapped in bad marriages and in poverty unable to escape.

She rightly deduced that having a bunch of kids-----------------------leads to child abuse, POVERTY, and spousal abuse.

She correctly theorized that if a woman had fewer children--------that she could more easily leave an abusive relationship and could more easily find employment for herself enabling her to feed herself and her few children. Having one child and job may provide enough to support the child into adulthood -having 10 not so much

Black women even then were more likely to be in abusive relationships and live more in poverty with fewer job skills and prospects making escaping with a bunch of kids impossible.
Yep.....so she planned on murdering black babies because they just might turn out to be criminals.
Total friggen racist mentality.
Kids growing up be Criminals? Where do you get criminals from? I told you repeatedly-----she was an activist for both women and blacks. She and her entire family were. She saw women and their children trapped in poverty and abuse because women could not escape an abusive relationship or feed all of their kids when they inevitably had 4,5,6,7,8 etc kids as was the norm then..........

She figured out that having fewer kids inevitably means more opportunity for the mother and thusly her children. Having a bunch of kids had the opposite effect. She was trying to do what was best for both the mothers and the children--------she was trying to get them out of poverty and out of abusive homes. And yet the anti-abortion crowd spins nonsense and tries so hard to make her seem like the devil. Its sick------------
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,991
Reaction score
19,322
Points
2,180
Location
in between
That quote is attributed to Tom Metzgar, a white supremacist and neo-Nazi, not Margaret Sanger. It is directly from this book.

Encyclopedia of White Power
Yeah so that excuses her from all of the other racist statements she made.
It means that you guys will pin outrageously fake quotes in addition to taking quotes out of context in order to smear her. If it's ok to fake it...well, what else is being faked? She's a woman who gave women access to LEGAL and affordable birth control, she actually opposed abortion (so its funny how folks are hung up on that). Seems to me birth control is a good thing if you don't want abortions.
Wow.... Now she opposed abortion.

That's a good one.
Have you considered doing a little bit of research?
 

mudwhistle

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
96,470
Reaction score
23,961
Points
2,220
Location
Tested Negative For COVID-19
That quote is attributed to Tom Metzgar, a white supremacist and neo-Nazi, not Margaret Sanger. It is directly from this book.

Encyclopedia of White Power
Yeah so that excuses her from all of the other racist statements she made.
It means that you guys will pin outrageously fake quotes in addition to taking quotes out of context in order to smear her. If it's ok to fake it...well, what else is being faked? She's a woman who gave women access to LEGAL and affordable birth control, she actually opposed abortion (so its funny how folks are hung up on that). Seems to me birth control is a good thing if you don't want abortions.
Wow.... Now she opposed abortion.

That's a good one.
Have you considered doing a little bit of research?
Yes. Already done.
Maybe you should check your sources.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,991
Reaction score
19,322
Points
2,180
Location
in between
" More And Drearier "

* Incompetence *


Who is supposed to play God and determine who is worthy to live and who must die, Would that be you? Tell us what your criteria would be? Are white babies more valuable that black babies? Your thoughts on this should be interesting.
There is an 800 million population in latin america and it is full of socialist , dictatorship , shit holes because the populations have bred themselves into poverty , so be sure to thank the catholic church of psychopathy .

Does the us need to ignore carrying capacity limits and shoot for population gluttony by raising its 333 million with a median iq of 100 to 800 million with a median iq of 85 through first come first served , non merit based for iq or skill set , immigration from countries such as china with 1.2 billion , or india with 1.2 billion , or africa with 1 billion , that are already over populated and over represented globally , to satisfy your expectations for an answer to such a spurious question ?

The catholic church forbid birth control in haiti and what used to be 95% tropical jungle is now 95% dirt and shanty towns ; and , even puerto ricans have very low regard for haitians .

So the mental degenerate slave owners , who could have given less than a damn about anything other than how much money they could acquire , had a black slave population in the south that was more than twice the number of whites ; and , your fake outrage for ignoring huge populations whose capacity for cultural development was a mud hut and body modification makes about as much sense .

Even if violence does not occur, the consequences are unacceptable. Development of a racially integrated society, extraordinarily difficult today, will be virtually impossible when the present black ghetto population of 12.5 million has grown to almost 21 million.

So who lives and who dies? Simple question. Why no Dim takers?
Because the only person who should decide ids the pregnant woman. But...since this is about Sanger...I am still waiting on these dishonest “historians” to show us she supported abortion.
 

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,152
Reaction score
7,725
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
those of us who actually have to pay to clean up the messes that the druggies/alcoholics/ and others who should not be having kids create.

We can make it simple---if you abuse drugs or alcohol while pregnant or your infant is born on these chemicals--simple blood test and immediate sterilization
If you have an iq of less than 70 and a welfare queen------------------immediate sterilization
this alone would save billions every year and cut down on everything from prisons to foster homes to medical costs and clean up the environment and cutting down on carbon emissions as an added bonus.
Sanger was a Racist who ... wanted to wipe Black people off the face of this planet.
This lie is truly Orwellian in scope. Even the slightest acquaintance with Margaret Sanger’s life history would show this to be false and slanderous:


W. E. B. Du Bois served on the board of Sanger's Harlem clinic

Sanger worked with African American leaders and professionals who saw a need for birth control in their communities. In 1929, James H. Hubert, a black social worker and the leader of New York's Urban League, asked Sanger to open a clinic in Harlem. Sanger secured funding ... and opened the clinic, staffed with black doctors, in 1930. The clinic was directed by a 15-member advisory board consisting of black doctors, nurses, clergy, journalists, and social workers. The clinic was publicized in the African-American press as well as in black churches, and it received the approval of W. E. B. Du Bois, the co-founder of the NAACP and the editor of its magazine, The Crisis. Sanger did not tolerate bigotry among her staff, nor would she tolerate any refusal to work within interracial projects. Sanger's work with minorities earned praise from Martin Luther King, Jr., in his 1966 acceptance speech for the Margaret Sanger award.[79]


Even her wiki page talks about her links to the KKK and eugenics. But Dims lie....it's what you do.
Eugenics isn't based on race--

Eugenics is based more on birth defects----like not allowing the mentally handicapped to have children because their kids would be at higher risk for being mentally handicapped.

Who should be playing god?

tho

So people you feel are undesirable should be killed or sterilized. Cool. Thank you Dr. Hitler. That must be your final solution to all the World's ills.
Of course I feel this way---I am a rational not emotional thinker.

Maybe you should volunteer to work in a neonatal unit at a hospital preferably one that deals with a lot of homeless and druggies after the covid thing is cleared up.............take a good long long look at the babies that the meth and crack heads have along with the alcholics------------and you may figure out why there are women out there that should never ever be allowed to have children-----
I worked over 25 years in hospitals, The last 7 in a major inner city ER. Don't lecture me. I believe only God should make the judgments you propose to make. I don't want anyone sterilized or babies killed without consent. What you propose is barbaric.
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,973
Reaction score
14,643
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
Not quite sure what the SCOPE of this discussion is from the OPost.. But I know -- it's getting too personally contentious to moderate in the CDZ.. Several of you are about to kicked out..

If you get a post deletion warning -- note that mod staff will be SITTING on this thread to MAKE it CDZ compliant.. So stay close to topic and away from personal exchanges while I figure out what's "on topic"..
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,973
Reaction score
14,643
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn

Children who are unwanted, unloved, whose mothers are not prepared to mentally or materially raise a child, obviously have a greater tendency to fall into crime. The statistics demonstrate this. (Often such children have no fathers as they also did not want the child.) Of course that is not the reason the women’s movement fought for control over their reproductive life, any more than it is a reasonit fought for the vote. After abortions, women often have loved and wanted children later, when they are ready.
Bottom line, can't feed them don't breed them, can't accept responsibility taking care of them then be be responsible before conceiving them It's REALLY that simple
It may be that simple today for you, but it certainly wasn’t true for poor Irish women before the sale of birth control was legalized and made widely available. Poor working-class women in those days, whether in marriage or not, were regularly raped and/or forced to bear children, whether they wanted them or not.

This may be too personal a question, in which case I apologize beforehand, but have you or your female friends ever used birth control? Are you opposed to their sale? If not, you (like all of us) should show a little appreciation for the struggles and sacrifices of women like Margaret Sanger.
Birth control ≠ abortion on demand.

Sanger was a fucking eugenicist ghoul.
Sanger did not support abortion.
I don't see a lesser evil here vis a vis "forced sterilization" and abortion targeted at the poor and unfit. In fact, sterilization is a far GREATER pre-emptive and EVIL plan...

Part of the hissing and booing here is separating EUGENICS from RACISM.. ENTIRELY possible that Sanger was NOT a racist.. Might be quite color blind in fact.. But focused like a laser on "purifying the gene pool" like all the eugenicists around the world were..

So -- to get that subtle distinction, I went to my reliable leftist progressive source "The Nation" for a read on this.. Piece was written in response to taking Sanger's name off of a couple PP large clinics in NY...


Although she did not single out Black people, Sanger was, yes, a eugenicist. She thought people, especially poor people, often had too many kids to care for properly and that too many of those kids were born physically disabled (or in the language of the day, “feeble-minded”). She did not oppose forced sterilization.

In these views, she had a lot of company. Many intellectuals in the early 20th century—left, right, and center—went even further. That is, they traced social ills like crime and poverty to there being too many of the wrong sort of people, a calamity that modern society, through science and social control, could prevent. Because of the Nazis, we think of eugenics as based on racism and pseudoscientific notions of breeding a racial genetic elite, but it was more about ableism, based on the belief that poverty, crime, prostitution, and promiscuity were the result of inferior genes.

Avowed socialists 
like H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, and even Helen Keller were eugenicists. So were liberal reformers like Havelock Ellis and John Maynard Keynes and traditionalists like Winston Churchill. Gunnar and Alva Myrdal, the architects of the Swedish welfare state (she was a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, too), supported measures to help mothers and children, but they also enthusiastically supported sterilization of the “unfit.” Buck v. Bell, the infamous Supreme Court decision that validated forced sterilization, was written by one liberal hero, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and approved by another, Louis Brandeis. As Chesler tartly observed, Sanger’s name is more closely associated with this case than the men who decided it. Nobody is demanding that Brandeis University change its name.

Dont know what arguing the diff between forced sterilization and abortion targeted at poor communities are gonna get ya... Also don't see a future in arguing over PP was founded in "racism"... The FACTS about eugenics are evil enough.. But SOMEHOW -- "Progressive" is the new left mantle.. The Dems have an AWFUL habit of branding themselves with names out of the hell section of history...
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,387
Reaction score
195
Points
140
" Population Management "

* Comic Book White Black Messiahs *

Yep.....so she planned on murdering black babies because they just might turn out to be criminals. Total friggen racist mentality.
Here we go again with the disingenuous inanity that a fetus is a baby and topped with more willful ignorance asserting that iq and poverty are not related and that poverty and a criminal element are not related .
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,973
Reaction score
14,643
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
But again--------------Eugenics is not based on race. It basically targetted druggies/alcoholics and those with birth defects particularily down syndrome mentally handicapped for sterilization in order to prevent the offspring from suffering......
TurtleSoup gets this.. Now hold your noses while we figure out if the statistics on abortion for the poor and unfit are "systemically racist"...
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,991
Reaction score
19,322
Points
2,180
Location
in between
Not quite sure what the SCOPE of this discussion is from the OPost.. But I know -- it's getting too personally contentious to moderate in the CDZ.. Several of you are about to kicked out..

If you get a post deletion warning -- note that mod staff will be SITTING on this thread to MAKE it CDZ compliant.. So stay close to topic and away from personal exchanges while I figur

Children who are unwanted, unloved, whose mothers are not prepared to mentally or materially raise a child, obviously have a greater tendency to fall into crime. The statistics demonstrate this. (Often such children have no fathers as they also did not want the child.) Of course that is not the reason the women’s movement fought for control over their reproductive life, any more than it is a reasonit fought for the vote. After abortions, women often have loved and wanted children later, when they are ready.
Bottom line, can't feed them don't breed them, can't accept responsibility taking care of them then be be responsible before conceiving them It's REALLY that simple
It may be that simple today for you, but it certainly wasn’t true for poor Irish women before the sale of birth control was legalized and made widely available. Poor working-class women in those days, whether in marriage or not, were regularly raped and/or forced to bear children, whether they wanted them or not.

This may be too personal a question, in which case I apologize beforehand, but have you or your female friends ever used birth control? Are you opposed to their sale? If not, you (like all of us) should show a little appreciation for the struggles and sacrifices of women like Margaret Sanger.
Birth control ≠ abortion on demand.

Sanger was a fucking eugenicist ghoul.
Sanger did not support abortion.
I don't see a lesser evil here vis a vis "forced sterilization" and abortion targeted at the poor and unfit. In fact, sterilization is a far GREATER pre-emptive and EVIL plan...

Part of the hissing and booing here is separating EUGENICS from RACISM.. ENTIRELY possible that Sanger was NOT a racist.. Might be quite color blind in fact.. But focused like a laser on "purifying the gene pool" like all the eugenicists around the world were..

So -- to get that subtle distinction, I went to my reliable leftist progressive source "The Nation" for a read on this.. Piece was written in response to taking Sanger's name off of a couple PP large clinics in NY...


Although she did not single out Black people, Sanger was, yes, a eugenicist. She thought people, especially poor people, often had too many kids to care for properly and that too many of those kids were born physically disabled (or in the language of the day, “feeble-minded”). She did not oppose forced sterilization.

In these views, she had a lot of company. Many intellectuals in the early 20th century—left, right, and center—went even further. That is, they traced social ills like crime and poverty to there being too many of the wrong sort of people, a calamity that modern society, through science and social control, could prevent. Because of the Nazis, we think of eugenics as based on racism and pseudoscientific notions of breeding a racial genetic elite, but it was more about ableism, based on the belief that poverty, crime, prostitution, and promiscuity were the result of inferior genes.

Avowed socialists 
like H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, and even Helen Keller were eugenicists. So were liberal reformers like Havelock Ellis and John Maynard Keynes and traditionalists like Winston Churchill. Gunnar and Alva Myrdal, the architects of the Swedish welfare state (she was a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, too), supported measures to help mothers and children, but they also enthusiastically supported sterilization of the “unfit.” Buck v. Bell, the infamous Supreme Court decision that validated forced sterilization, was written by one liberal hero, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and approved by another, Louis Brandeis. As Chesler tartly observed, Sanger’s name is more closely associated with this case than the men who decided it. Nobody is demanding that Brandeis University change its name.

Dont know what arguing the diff between forced sterilization and abortion targeted at poor communities are gonna get ya... Also don't see a future in arguing over PP was founded in "racism"... The FACTS about eugenics are evil enough.. But SOMEHOW -- "Progressive" is the new left mantle.. The Dems have an AWFUL habit of branding themselves with names out of the hell section of history...
Progressive has nothing to do with eugenics...not sure how that was derived. Sanger was a product of her era, who personally saw what many poor women with too many children had to suffer. In many ways, the demonizing of her is a lot like the demonizing of some our founding figures because they were also slave owners. Demonizing might not be the right word, but it will do. You have to judge the person in the context of their times, and what tbey contributed. Sanger saw birth control as a way for poor women to get themselves out of poverty by limiting the number of children they had.
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,387
Reaction score
195
Points
140
" Procreation Determines An After Life "

* Reality Of Survival *

So who lives and who dies? Simple question. Why no Dim takers?
The meaning of an afterlife is to literally pass on ones genetic identity , one haploid at a time , into the future ; and , individuals are accountable for their own self ownership .

Until birth the fetus is the private property of the mother ; and it can be inferred by the roe v wade decision that post natural viability a standard of parturition was relative , as roe v wade directed that states could proscribe abortion in the third trimester except to save the life of the mother .
 
Last edited:

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,973
Reaction score
14,643
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
Wow.... Now she opposed abortion. That's a good one.
Read the god-damn discussion! You are making a fool of yourself!
Not at all.
She's ignoring the woman's history.
She's like John Kerry, she was against abortion before she was for it.
The point should be that Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate the black race first by BC, then by abortion.

You know nothing of the woman-----------she and her family were Activists for both women and black rights.

She saw children before birth control as CHAINS that kept women trapped in bad marriages and in poverty unable to escape.

She rightly deduced that having a bunch of kids-----------------------leads to child abuse, POVERTY, and spousal abuse.

She correctly theorized that if a woman had fewer children--------that she could more easily leave an abusive relationship and could more easily find employment for herself enabling her to feed herself and her few children. Having one child and job may provide enough to support the child into adulthood -having 10 not so much

Black women even then were more likely to be in abusive relationships and live more in poverty with fewer job skills and prospects making escaping with a bunch of kids impossible.
Yep.....so she planned on murdering black babies because they just might turn out to be criminals.
Total friggen racist mentality.
Nope.,. Again TurtleSoup has this correctly.. "The Pill" created Planned Parenthood.. Turned eugenicists into preventionists and later abortionists. The RACIST part of this is when you TARGET the poor and unfit --- STATISTICS makes it "racist"... Because by statistical cohort -- blacks are over-represented. Entirely possible that eugenicists either were math challenged or didn't care...
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,973
Reaction score
14,643
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
Not quite sure what the SCOPE of this discussion is from the OPost.. But I know -- it's getting too personally contentious to moderate in the CDZ.. Several of you are about to kicked out..

If you get a post deletion warning -- note that mod staff will be SITTING on this thread to MAKE it CDZ compliant.. So stay close to topic and away from personal exchanges while I figur

Children who are unwanted, unloved, whose mothers are not prepared to mentally or materially raise a child, obviously have a greater tendency to fall into crime. The statistics demonstrate this. (Often such children have no fathers as they also did not want the child.) Of course that is not the reason the women’s movement fought for control over their reproductive life, any more than it is a reasonit fought for the vote. After abortions, women often have loved and wanted children later, when they are ready.
Bottom line, can't feed them don't breed them, can't accept responsibility taking care of them then be be responsible before conceiving them It's REALLY that simple
It may be that simple today for you, but it certainly wasn’t true for poor Irish women before the sale of birth control was legalized and made widely available. Poor working-class women in those days, whether in marriage or not, were regularly raped and/or forced to bear children, whether they wanted them or not.

This may be too personal a question, in which case I apologize beforehand, but have you or your female friends ever used birth control? Are you opposed to their sale? If not, you (like all of us) should show a little appreciation for the struggles and sacrifices of women like Margaret Sanger.
Birth control ≠ abortion on demand.

Sanger was a fucking eugenicist ghoul.
Sanger did not support abortion.
I don't see a lesser evil here vis a vis "forced sterilization" and abortion targeted at the poor and unfit. In fact, sterilization is a far GREATER pre-emptive and EVIL plan...

Part of the hissing and booing here is separating EUGENICS from RACISM.. ENTIRELY possible that Sanger was NOT a racist.. Might be quite color blind in fact.. But focused like a laser on "purifying the gene pool" like all the eugenicists around the world were..

So -- to get that subtle distinction, I went to my reliable leftist progressive source "The Nation" for a read on this.. Piece was written in response to taking Sanger's name off of a couple PP large clinics in NY...


Although she did not single out Black people, Sanger was, yes, a eugenicist. She thought people, especially poor people, often had too many kids to care for properly and that too many of those kids were born physically disabled (or in the language of the day, “feeble-minded”). She did not oppose forced sterilization.

In these views, she had a lot of company. Many intellectuals in the early 20th century—left, right, and center—went even further. That is, they traced social ills like crime and poverty to there being too many of the wrong sort of people, a calamity that modern society, through science and social control, could prevent. Because of the Nazis, we think of eugenics as based on racism and pseudoscientific notions of breeding a racial genetic elite, but it was more about ableism, based on the belief that poverty, crime, prostitution, and promiscuity were the result of inferior genes.

Avowed socialists 
like H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, and even Helen Keller were eugenicists. So were liberal reformers like Havelock Ellis and John Maynard Keynes and traditionalists like Winston Churchill. Gunnar and Alva Myrdal, the architects of the Swedish welfare state (she was a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, too), supported measures to help mothers and children, but they also enthusiastically supported sterilization of the “unfit.” Buck v. Bell, the infamous Supreme Court decision that validated forced sterilization, was written by one liberal hero, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and approved by another, Louis Brandeis. As Chesler tartly observed, Sanger’s name is more closely associated with this case than the men who decided it. Nobody is demanding that Brandeis University change its name.

Dont know what arguing the diff between forced sterilization and abortion targeted at poor communities are gonna get ya... Also don't see a future in arguing over PP was founded in "racism"... The FACTS about eugenics are evil enough.. But SOMEHOW -- "Progressive" is the new left mantle.. The Dems have an AWFUL habit of branding themselves with names out of the hell section of history...
Progressive has nothing to do with eugenics...not sure how that was derived. Sanger was a product of her era, who personally saw what many poor women with too many children had to suffer. In many ways, the demonizing of her is a lot like the demonizing of some our founding figures because they were also slave owners. Demonizing might not be the right word, but it will do. You have to judge the person in the context of their times, and what tbey contributed. Sanger saw birth control as a way for poor women to get themselves out of poverty by limiting the number of children they had.
Didn't read the article from The Nation.. Progressivism in the 30s to 50s was the millieu that PRODUCED Margaret Sanger and Margaret Sanger WAS a eugenicist and Progressive...
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top