Posted on 04/19/2009 9:41:38 AM PDT by wagglebee
Lagos — On March 27, 2009 in Houston, Texas, United States, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, founded by eugenicist Ms. Margaret Louise Sanger, bestowed the Margaret Sanger award on Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton, American Secretary of State, for her untiring efforts in spreading Sanger's teaching in the world. Gleefully receiving the award, Mrs. Clinton hailed Margaret Sanger as a role model. She praised her for purportedly providing "women and girls everywhere the opportunities" they deserve to fulfill their potentials as mothers, as workers and, as human beings. She said that the work of Margaret Sanger's in the United States and "certainly across our globe is not done". Mrs. Clinton laments that women, especially women in developing countries, are denied access to abortion clinics, contraceptives, "reproductive rights services" and other "family planning options". She argues that the skyrocketing maternal and infant mortality rates in the world, especially in developing countries, stem from denial of women access to abortion clinics, contraceptives and other reproductive rights. She says that her office has devised ways to liberate women from the clutches of economic and political strangulation by ensuring that they have unimpeded access to abortion, contraceptives and other family planning services which improve the quality of life of women.
She praises Planned Parenthood Federation of America for promoting abortion and contraceptives all over the world. She thanked President Obama for repealing President Bush's Mexican Policy which stopped the use of American taxpayers' money to fund abortion overseas. She re-assured all that under "the umbrella issue of women's rights and empowerment, abortion, contraceptives and reproductive rights services will be key to the foreign policy of Obama Administration".
First: it beats the imagination why Mrs. Clinton is putting out late Ms. Sanger as a role model. The plain fact is that Maggie is not a role model. She was a racist to the core. She was the proponent of sexual revolution of the 60s which has engendered many vices today. She hated African-Americans. With her eugenic philosophy, Maggie endorsed the murder of the so-called "socially-undesirable Negroes or black people whom she branded unfit to live. She referred to blacks and Jews as "bad stocks" which should be killed. In her extreme melancholy and sadism, she said in 1921: "eugenics is the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political, and social problems". Maggie was anti-human. In 1922, she said: "the most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it". Now if Mrs. Clinton had been killed following this useless teaching of Sanger, she would not have been alive today to become the American Secretary of State. In the same vein, if young Barrack Obama had been killed in the womb in obeisance to the eugenic philosophy of Margaret Sanger, he would not have been alive today to become the President of America. So, how can Mrs. Clinton, in all honesty, say that we should admire Maggie? Admire her for what? For endorsing the killing of infants or what? The way Mrs. Clinton talks at times surprises me.
Second: Margaret Sanger's concept of women liberation which Mrs. Clinton is a mockery of real economic, political, cultural, educational and social empowerment of women. I am an advocate of women empowerment. I believe that this world is not only a man's world. I believe that women, all women, are equal partners with men in re-building the world and making it a better place as our dear Michael Jackson is wont to sing. Women are no inferior to men. Both men and women have the same intrinsic worth and dignity as children of God. In Nigeria the Court of Appeal had held that Nigerian women are not properties of their husbands. Besides, women have come along way in the world and even in Nigeria . The other day history was made in Nigeria and West Africa when an all-female crew flew an Aero Contractors plane between Lagos and Warri. So women empowerment is good.
But Maggie's concept of women liberation is completely an aberration. It seeks to enthrone sexual license, nudity, marital infidelity, homosexuality, lesbianism and abortion as societal norms under the euphemisms of women's right, women's health and women liberation. The damaging effects of Maggie's concept of liberation of women can be seen in many parts of Europe and America today in the legalization of abortion, homosexuality, lesbianism and all the bad things. One bad thing begets another. Since many women in Europe and America can no longer have children due to the adverse effects of contraceptives, they are now coming to Africa to adopt children and take them to their respective countries. And only God knows what they are doing with those adopted African children.
Margaret Sanger's concept of women liberation is completely alien to African culture and tradition. I strongly believe that Africans have no wish to embrace it. It depicts women as mere pleasurable instruments. For this reason, it is essential that Africans rejects the pressures from Mrs. Clinton and others to make Africa a dumping ground for all sorts of strange Margaret Sanger's pervasive ideas. Africa is for Africans. Margaret Sanger may resurrect in Houston, Texas, America, but, please, please, let Margaret Sanger not resurrect in Africa. We have our own values. Culture is defined as a way of life of a people. We have our own way. Every society grows with its own unique values and heritage. For example, the Nigerian heritage-love for children, respect for elders and parents, dignity of women, sanctity of life and the human person, decency and decorum, hard work, respect for family values, virginity before marriage, proper upbringing of children etc. form the superstructure for the building of our national ethos. Therefore if we allow this heritage to erode under strong Western influence, we are finished as a people. Culture is the life-wire of the people. Although culture is dynamic, but the real essence of being of a people must not erode in the name of dynamism of culture. Destruction of culture of a people amounts to destruction of a people.
Contrary to Mrs. Clinton's insinuations, women in developing countries badly need access to better health-care delivery system, not access to abortion, contraceptives or other "family planning" services. Real empowerment of women, according to Human Development index of the United Nations, lies in the social, economic and political empowerment of women, elimination of cultural practices that degrade women, provision of better pension, allowing women access to affordable primary health-care, gratuity and other welfare package for working mothers.
Severe postpartum bleeding is the No. 1 cause of maternal mortality worldwide: One woman dies every four minutes. Without intervention, a woman with severe postpartum hemorrhage can bleed to death in three to four hours. The blood gushes out as if the artery has been cut open. Many African women bleed to death in this manner. Most African women are poor. They are marginalized. They lack better education. In many African villages, pregnant women still give birth in village huts. Last week we were lamenting the depraved medical practice in Nigeria. What is Mrs. Clinton doing to tackle all these other than promoting abortion and contraception methods in Africa?
So African countries must remain vigilant in the face of the propaganda about the rising maternal mortality rate in Africa. In the 70s and 80s the International Planned Parenthood of America, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and other United Nations agencies forecasted a false demographic Armageddon in Africa. In those years they raised alarm that Nigeria and other African countries were perishing owing to high population density. At the threshold of the 90s they abandoned over-population hoax and started harping on HIV/AIDS. Today they claim that the African continent is the HIV/AIDS continent. South-Africa is number 1 on the World HIV "League Table". Nigeria is number 3, after India . In fact one of these United Nations agencies said that AIDS is good for Africa because Africa is over-populated. So much talk about tackling genteel poverty and high maternal mortality rate in Africa, yet many African countries are felled by poverty, hunger, war an all sorts of preventable diseases.
Therefore if Mrs. Clinton is serious about empowering women in developing countries, she should ensure that they have access to better primary medical services and the basic necessities of life. Anything short of this is mere reveling in intellectual dishonesty.
Perfect!
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Jeez... I can see it... a state visit from Hillary! And the first words out of her mouth... “Let’s kill some babies!”
This article repeats many falsehoods about Margaret Sanger.
Although she was a racist and eugenicist, Sanger did not anywhere in any of her writings or speeches advocate killing people (or abortion).
She advocated for contraception, involuntary contraception, sterilization, involuntary sterilization.
People would have much better case against this despicable person if they would stick to the facts about her. She was bad enough without making things up about her proposals.
Nonsense, her statement, "the most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it," is well documented.
Sanger may not have openly advocated abortion, but this is likely because she NEVER dreamed that America would legalize infanticide.
The verbal diarrhea in this sentence is astounding!
I'd like to know how abortion clinics, contraceptives, and morning after pills will lower infant mortality rates in developing countries.
That comment is taken out of context. If you read it in context you will understand what she was talking about.
Very good point. I doubt that even Sanger had the courage to mention “abortion.” We 21st-centuryites forget that it was considered for millenia an abomination. Besides, as the Hippocratic oath makes undeniable, “safe,” effective abortions were always available; they simply weren’t “viable” options in CIVILIZED societies.
Margaret Sanger appointed Lothrop Stoddard as a board member of the Birth Control League (the forerunner of Planned Parenthood). What did Stoddard think about Nazi eugenics? Author Stefan Kuhl writes:
"When the Nazis came to power", argued Stoddard, "they started to increase both the size and the quality of the population. They coupled initiatives designed to encourage "sound" citizens to reproduce with a "drastic curb of the defective elements." Stoddard personally witnessed how the Nazis were "weeding out the worst strains in the Germanic stock in a scientific and truly humanitarian way."
Seems to me agreeing with the way 'weeding out' undesirables the way Hitler did is advocating murder.
Can you post the context in which killing an infant is “understandable”?
Yes, Sanger did agree with ‘weeding out the undesirables”.
But the methods she proposed are NOT what the author of this article says. She is in error on that and it hurts her overall case, that Sanger is a bad person to be despised, which she is.
On more than one occasion, I have wish that both Bill Clinton’s mom and Hillary’s mom had practiced more birth control!!!
Think of how that would have changed America.
And we have Chelsea being groomed for public office!! GAG!
http://www.bartleby.com/1013/5.html
In this chapter of her writing Sanger is talking about the burdens of large families on poor working class families. She is making the case that the stresses of supporting many children with little money causes many social ills, such as child labor, child prostitution, hunger, disease ... etc. She is making the case that many in this situation, faced with another mouth to feed (that the family cannot afford) is at risk for all these things, plus that families may be practicing infanticide as a means to prevent such suffering of their children. She has a graph showing that in larger families, the infant mortality rate jumps much higher in later births than in the earlier births, suggesting that there are nefarious reasons behind why this statistic.
She makes this point in the context of advocating for CONTRACEPTION, in order to avoid the evils she saw in society of her day (which included abortion, extreme poverty, child labor, prostitution ... especially among young girls, and suspected infanticide).
She used these social ills to further her own agenda, which was CONTRACEPTION.
http://www.bartleby.com/1013/10.html
In this section Sanger is advocating for contraception to PREVENT ABORTION. To make her case, she is presenting an argument that many poor immigrant women have no access to contraception and so must “submit to a humiliating, repulsive, painful and too often gravely dangerous operation” (abortion).
“I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.” (Planned Parenthood doesn’t want you to know Sanger said that).
_________________________
If you are interested in presenting Sanger accurately, I urge you to read her complete writings, available on Bartleby.com. She was opposed to abortion, called it an ‘abominable act’ but claimed women were forced to it by desperation of poverty and exhaustion from and having too many children to take care of and being extremely poor. You have to realize poverty in her day is not like poverty in ours.
Yes, she also was a racist (as were many in her day) and got caught up in the Eugenist movement, which had become very popular ... promoted by many prominent people of her day ... even Presidents supported it.
But nowhere in her writing does she advocate infanticide, or abortion. In fact, she used the fact that these practices were already going on to make a case for CONTRACEPTION, which was illegal in her day. Even giving out information about sexual biology and human reproduction was illegal in her day.
You have to read Sanger in context of her writings and her time. Not doing so is like reading things our Founders wrote out of context of their time.
I’m not defending Sanger’s racism and eugenicism. But in the context of her time, these were popular ideas supported by many well know and respected people. We also know that many States instituted involuntary sterilization programs ... Sanger saw STERILIZATION as more humane than abortion,infanticide and extreme poverty caused by poor families children they could not take care of. She saw involuntary sterilization as a means to limit the ‘unfit’. But she did not advocate killing
And, "in the context of her time", Sanger KNEW that she could NEVER get abortion legalized and would probably face prison and lose the support of many of her allies if she even suggested it.
Yes, many prominent people of Sanger’s day, in the USA and in Europe, embraced Eugenics. It had become quite a mainstream idea.
There is no evidence she even considered it.
And she already faced prison for her advocacy of contraception.
MRS. SANGER GUILTY, FACES PRISON TERM
February 3, 1917
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9A01E7DD1538EE32A25750C0A9649C946696D6CF
Mrs. Margaret Sanger, birth control advocate, was convicted of violating the penal code in a decision handed down yesterday by Justices Freschi, Herrman and O’Keefe in Special Sessions in Brooklyn.
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.