Posted on 08/07/2016 11:14:14 AM PDT by Kaslin
In a recent interview, Baltimore Ravens tight end Benjamin Watson said that the original idea behind Planned Parenthood, founded by Margaret Sanger, was to "exterminate blacks."
Discussing pregnancy, faith and abortion with Turning Point Pregnancy Resource Center, Watson, the author of Under Our Skin, a book about race relations in America, was asked how race factors into the abortion issue. He said that "blacks kind of represent a large portion of the abortions, and I do know that honestly the whole idea with Planned Parenthood and [Margaret] Sanger in the past was to exterminate blacks, and it’s kind of ironic that it’s working."
The outspoken Christian athlete lamented that minority voters overwhelmingly support candidates who support Planned Parenthood without considering the reasons behind its founding."We are buying it hook, line, and sinker, like it’s a great thing," he said. "It’s just amazing to me and abortion saddens me period, but it seems to be something that is really pushed on minorities and provided to minorities especially as something that they should do."
Sanger was well known for being a leader of the eugenics movement in the United States in the early twentieth century. She was a well-received speaker at Ku Klux Klan rally in 1926 and wrote in a 1939 letter to Clarence Gamble that “we do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population." She pushed for birth control as a way to eliminate the unfit and inferior individuals from the gene pool through the use of sterilization and birth control.
Sanger's legacy is a chain of abortion clinics, 79% of which are located within walking distance of a black or Hispanic neighborhood. And according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Abortion Surveillance report, nearly 36 percent of all abortions in the United States were performed on black children, even though blacks make up only 13 percent of the U.S. population.
Watson said that there are also cultural issues that push minority mothers to abort their babies. "It seems to be painted that when minorities get pregnant they need to get abortions, especially when it comes to teen pregnancy. It’s like when black girls are pregnant, it’s like a statistic, but when white girls get pregnant, they get a TV show."
He added that minorities like having discussions about "having political power and advancement and all those things," but then, "we are turning around and we are killing our children."
He told Turning Point that he is sympathetic because he doesn't know what it's like to face an unplanned pregnancy. "I would never assume people are having abortions flippantly. I know people have them for convenience, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a tough choice for the mothers to make, so I always want to be sympathetic to that."
Asked whether he thought the abortion decision was strictly a "women's issue," Watson said that "a lot of the women wouldn’t be having abortions if the men would step up and be a part of what they are already biologically a part of. Raising children and having children, even though the women birthed the child, is designed for two people to do it."
Women are under "undue stress and pressure" if the father is not there to help," he said, adding that the man should have just as much invested in the child as the woman. "He needs to be there to support her through the physical changes of the pregnancy, and help and provide emotional strength, and do it together. As much as he has a role in making the baby in the first place, it needs to take both of them the whole way through."
He said that those who say the man does not have a role in a child's life are either engaging in politics or trying to make the man's life easier.
Watson shared that he has counseled teammates who have dealt with the unplanned pregnancies of their partners. As the "old guy" in the locker room—married ten years with five kids—his teammates often seek him out for advice. He talked about one conversation he had last year with a teammate who found out his girlfriend was pregnant. "He had that look like, 'I don’t know what to do' and I know that abortion may have very well been a possibility, although we didn’t discuss it specifically," Watson said. "My whole speech to him was encouraging him about what an awesome opportunity it is to raise a child, to give the child a home, to love that child, and that God entrusted him with another life, and what a responsibility and the privilege that is."
He admitted that being a father is not easy and told the teammate there would be sacrifices. "If they come over to my locker, I’m gonna tell them they can’t go home and play video games, they need to go be there for their child, and for the baby’s mother. I tell them they’re never going to be a perfect dad because no one is."
But Watson said he draws his strength from outside himself. "But we have a perfect Father to model ourselves after," he said. "And we fall short, I fall short all the time, but my job as a father is to be the best example of our heavenly Father as I earthly can. I am not going to be perfect, but I need to be honest with them that daddy needs forgiveness just as much as they do, because I need the blood of Jesus just as much as they do. However, we do need to be the provider, be a priest, a protector for them, so that they get a little glimpse of the sacrificial love of the heavenly Father."
If that's the case, where have republican administrations been regarding federal money to PP? The gold standard among leftists complaints about policy is "disparate impact." If the incidence of abortion so heavily skews against minorities, then executive action needs to be taken to remedy the disparate impact.
That was terrific! Thanks for posting it.
Mother Teresa's declaration may be the most powerful statement in 2016 from which to begin discussions of where a candidate stands on all the questions of life and liberty.
The sole reason these rights were deemed unalienable is that both are derived from the Creator--not from the mother or father, and not from government or judicial decision. What is "granted" by human decision also can, by implication, be withheld.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them (life and liberty)," said Thomas Jefferson.
"The world is different now. . . and yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forefathers fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God." - John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address
That understanding underlies every other consideration embodied in our Declaration of Independence and every protection of our Constitution. It is the very basis of our rights to life and liberty, of laws to protect them, and it distinguishes ours from other forms of government.
When we fail to acknowledge that foundation of our liberty, then we risk liberty itself for future generations, for where does the right to choose who lives and who does not really end?
That is why the question is of vital importance in each election. Already, we have deprived millions of their Creator-endowed rights to life and liberty, and our nation must be weaker for their loss. We need leaders who understand the implications and potential consequences of departing from our founding principles.
In recent decades, technological advances have enabled us to observe the characteristics and actions of God's tiniest creations in the womb. Unlike previous generations who could not see, we have no excuse for imagining that these are mere blobs of tissue labeled "fetuses." In their early weeks, we now can see that they are living babies who will continue on to possess life and liberty if we do not "destroy" both. Indeed, they are simply smaller versions of ourselves.
Questions on the economy, taxes, threats from terrorists, health care--all are considerations at this election time. One, however, may be basic to all others. Who will best protect the underlying premise of our Constitution--and the lives and liberties of millions yet unborn?
Promises are illusive and cheap. One fact is indisputable, however: Hillary Clinton is committed to the Far Left's agenda on this matter, and that agenda is not compatible with our Constitution's premise.
He is absolutely right.
bttt - A brave man in a nation of sheep.
Nothing new for anyone who knows anything about Planned Parenthood and Marget Sanger.
Those who don’t know don’t care.. we’re on the downward side of a once great nation.
Huh? Excuse me, but you need help quickly. The founder of PP was no other than Margaret Sanger.
Let’s all buy “Watson” jerseys to show our support for him.
Thanks for the link, I had never seen it and have it bookmarked now.
I seem to recall Watson being eminently reasonable in public before.
Of course Hillary Rotten Clinton would admire Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.
Excellent post as always
Black lives don't matter much to them at all.
It's true.
baltimore ravens awesome role model ping!
To this, I think one might add, "with prejudice."
Yes he is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.