Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Roe v. Wade: The Legacy of Margaret Sanger

January 22 marks the anniversary of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which legalized abortion in our country. It is a stain on the history of American law. Not only did the High Court overreach by legislating from the bench on this highly controversial issue (a decision best left to the people and the states), but the five Justices who gave us this regrettable ruling made themselves stooges in the advancement of the reprehensible goals of one Margaret Sanger.

Who is Margaret Sanger, you ask?

She is the founder of the American Birth Control League, latter renamed Planned Parenthood, which is the largest provider of abortions in the United States, and a leader in the advancement of abortion rights worldwide. The group makes no apologies for its support of abortion-on-demand and its push for the expansion of a woman’s supposed “right to choose.” However they do not broadly publicize their historic connections to Margaret Sanger and her ideology...and with good reason when one considers her less than admirable motives.


Margaret Sanger was active in the reproductive rights movement in America around the same time the Nazis came to power in Germany with their dreams of building a master race by exterminating the Jews and other “undesirables.” While Sanger rejected the anti-Semitic nature of Nazism she did embrace her own version of eugenics, including the sterilization of those she considered unfit to reproduce and preventing the births of those she saw as a burden on society. She believed in building a superior human race through segregation and controlled breeding.

According to an article written by Sanger entitled "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda," published in the October 1921 issue of the journal, Birth Control Review, “The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics.” Sanger envisioned birth control as her own “final solution” for the ills of society. "Eugenics is…the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems,” she states.

Sanger spread this propaganda in public speaking engagements across the country including a 1926 speech at a New Jersey branch of the Ku Klux Klan. And in 1939 her organization began what was called The Negro Project which promoted her style of family planning among blacks in the South. She recruited black ministers from the area whom she hoped would more effectively garner support among locals. In a letter to a fellow activist concerning this program Sanger wrote: “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the 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.”

Planned Parenthood attempts to whitewash Margaret Sanger’s statements by claiming she was influenced by the culture of her time and that we must view her work within that context. But when one reads statements like, “Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race,” as she wrote in a 1922 work entitled Woman, Morality, and Birth Control, or “Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need...We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock,” as she wrote in the April 1933 issue of Birth Control Review, it is difficult to see past the obvious implications. Margaret Sanger founded her organization with the idea of ridding the world of the poor, the physically impaired, the uneducated lower class, and all those she deemed unworthy to breed.

Planned Parenthood is understandably ashamed of their late founder’s despicable agenda. But is their present mission any less despicable? Consider the fact that 78% of Planned Parenthood’s abortion clinics are located in minority communities. And while blacks make up only 13% of the United States’ population, they comprise almost 36% of all abortions. Sure the rhetoric has changed, but the results are the same. Minorities are suffering worse from the scourge of abortion.

Consider also this statement from Planned Parenthood’s website: “Public funds should be made available to subsidize the cost of abortion [and]…sterilization services for those who choose the procedure[s] but cannot afford [them].” In other words, they want us to pay for sterilizing and aborting the poor of our nation. Margaret Sanger would no doubt applaud this policy statement, as she would also be pleased to know that Planned Parenthood receives its own federal subsidies with nearly one third of its funding coming from government grants and contracts.

Margaret Sanger’s goal of a national policy of “eugenics” may not be written into law, but the reality of legalized abortion, its inherent cheapening of human life, and the taxpayer funding of organizations like Planned Parenthood give to her the next closest thing. Thanks to Roe v. Wade and the culture of death she inspired, an unborn child can be written off as an undesired nuisance and a burden on society.

Margaret Sanger would be proud.

5 comments:

  1. For more on Margaret Sanger and her eugenic past and the Planned Parenthood Federation, get a copy of the well documented film: Maafa21 Black Genocide in 21st Century America here: http://www.maafa21.com

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is an incredibly biased article. Read "Women of Valor; Margaret Sanger and the Birth Control Movement in America" and consider a woman's right to make decisions about her own body.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You are of course entitled to your own opinion about abortion. I sincerely pray that you have a change of heart.
    However, I quoted Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood in their own words. I think they speak pretty clearly for themselves. You can’t really call it “biased” to simply report what they said. They have a dark past and I am only shedding light on it. I’m sure that is very uncomfortable for someone who admires Sanger and Planned Parenthood. Sometimes the truth is an uncomfortable thing.
    If by “biased” you mean that I am unwaveringly against abortion and am unable to see the other side of the argument in a positive light, then yes you are correct. Abortion is the taking of an innocent life…abortion is murder. I am certainly biased against murder.
    But it seems you have your own bias in favor of Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood. So I guess we’re both biased. Rather than “Women of Valor” I would say that “Instruments of Evil” might be a better title for the pro-abortion/pro-contraceptive movement.
    Thank you reading. And I'll be praying for you.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I checked out the book referred to in the comment above - Woman of Valor: Margaret Sanger and the Birth Control Movement in America. I found the following review at Amazon:

    "Glaring omissions cannot be put aside. It got into her personal life, fostering the hero myth but it left out much that is troubling.
    Ms. Sanger founded Planned Parenthood but was also a proponent of eugenics, advocating selective breeding, sterilization and euthanasia. In 1932 Sanger urged '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.' In her 1938 autobiography, she describes how well she got along with the woman's branch of the KKK at Silver Lake, N.J. in a speech she gave to them, hanging on well into the night talking with the ladies after the speech. She was associated with The Negro Project, whose main idea was to recruit charismatic black ministers to encourage black women to practice birth control, thereby reducing the number of black babies being born. In a December 10, 1939 letter, Sanger wrote to Dr. Gamble, head of The Negro Project: 'We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.'
    These are her own words. The KKK still quotes her and Hitler gave her an award. The harm she caused, even if you agree with abortion is demonstrable and inexcusable. That the author really didn't touch on this is a crime."

    To leave out these details about Sanger's life when writing a book-length examination of her career is far more "biased" than my simple blog post. I did not set out to cover every aspect of her life. It should be pretty obvious that the blog format does not allow such a thorough writing. That is not "bias" on my part. That is simply writing within the confines of a particular format.

    But a book should surely address these issues. Woman of Valor is 656 pages long! My blog post is barely over a page. The author of Woman of Valor obviously bent over backwards to avoid mentioning the horrible details of Margaret Sanger's past. That is far more "biased" than anything I present here. - I presented Truth; the author of that book avoided Truth for over 600 pages.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As for whether women should be allowed to control their own bodies... Of course they should! But if that means killing another human being (which is what abortion is) then I must draw the line. No one should be allowed to kill an innocent baby as a matter of "personal rights."

    Dear Anonymous Commenter, I'm not sure how your mind (and soul) have become so darkened as to advocate on behalf of abortion...but again I will be praying for you.

    ReplyDelete