Posted on 12/06/2009 3:25:47 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood, the leading organization advocating abortion in the United States today. Darwinism had a profound influence on her thinking, including her conversion to, and active support of, eugenics. She was specifically concerned with reducing the population of the ‘less fit’, including ‘inferior races’ such as ‘Negroes’. One major result of her lifelong work was to support the sexual revolution that has radically changed our society...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Do you agree with these words?
“While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”
Do you agree with these words?
“While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”
Do you believe that women should have legal access to birth control?
No troll I am talking about the LIE you said about ME in the past.
Nonsense, this thread is about Sanger and eugenics. It's not GGG's fault that the Darwin family played such an integral role in the development of eugenics.
No troll, I hit abuse when you accused ME of wanting to put people to death for desecrating the Sabbath.
Do you deny that you said this?
Consider the source. It's never about the truth.
No I don’t. Many abortions are “recommended” by a physician. It’s a slippery slope. In her day, recommended by a physician was for the life of the mother. Today it’s for the “mental health” of the mother. Obama said that there would be no tax increases for those making less than 250,000. One quote does not go against the actions of the person.
With Sanger quoted as defining blacks as “human weeds”, let’s try a quote from Sanger defining blacks on the same level as whites. Because if you can’t, knowing her friendship with the KKK, her definition of what was acceptable for black babies is quite different from what she defined for the white poor.
Sorry, but I find ALL babies to be worthwhile.
....and the notion that the theory of evolution led to eugenics, abortion, Nazi-led genocide, Marxism, Communism, Pol Pot, Mao, Castro or any other thing you can attribute it to is LUDICROUS.
I'm not talking about the theory of evolution, I am talking about the Darwin family. Try to keep up.
So, why is it then that on threads where issues like abortion and eugenics come up, those who don’t condemn it can be counted on to be the evolutionists?
Face it, the ToE can be, and has been used to justify racism, eugenics, and abortion, and Darwin and many of Darwin’s associates and contemporaries, held those positions.
Denial of the obvious does nothing to help the credibility of the evo position.
Acknowledgment of that, while condemning the use of a scientific theory for nefarious purposes like that, would go a long way.
The one thing that I’ve noticed is the resounding silence from the *scientific* and evolutionist communities concerning the misuse of the ToE. If it’s science and should be kept that way, there should be strong condemnation when it is used as a weapon with which to bludgeon Christians and Christianity with, not the ho-hum attitude that we see now. Not the endorsement of the NEA and ACLU in the use of it to remove Christianity from public schools through litigation. Not the excusing it to justify big government control of education.
Liberal positions, all.
There is never a case where abortion is justifiable, no matter who it is recommended by.
“Darwinism” is not the “Darwin family”....do keep up with the article that is, apparently, “defending religious freedom.”
You know, the article that is trying DARWINISM to eugenics and Sanger.
Keeping an evo on track with the thread is like trying to nail jello to a wall.
There is simply nothing they won't try to try to deflect attention away from the clear and obvious history that the ToE has had in the development of policies like this.
No, it's not. Teach people that they're nothing more than animals and you can expect them to act like it.
So you’re limited to feces-tossing?
Face it, you’re limited to feces tossing.
Denial that you are limited to feces-tossing is irrelevant.
Acknowledgement that this whoe notion is just another ludicrous attack on a scientific theory under the guise of “defending religious freedom” would certainly go a long way...longer than feces-tossing would.
Just because feces-tossers ascribe atrocities to a scientific theory doesn’t mean the science world has to pay them a lick of attention.
Oooo....toss some more “you’re a liberal” feces.
Suppose you’re “defending religion” by tossing feces too, eh?
Never got past that *feces* stage, did you?
Nonsense.
You know, the article that is trying [sic] DARWINISM to eugenics and Sanger.
Evolution is a COMPONENT of Darwinism, eugenics is ANOTHER COMPONENT of Darwinism.
Darwinists prefer that people focus on evolution, that way they can avoid discussing the inescapable FACT that Darwinism has been responsible for over ONE BILLION DEATHS in the past century.
As I read that Sanger’s only opposition to abortion concerned the physical health and life of the Mother, where as The pro-life movement focuses on the life of the child.
Was she opposed to abortion? Only because of the damage and death that it caused to women that under went it.
She had no concern for the children aborted. That coupled with her theories on race and eugenics makes her as evil as they come.
Maybe I’m wrong, I thought she was all in favor of abortion rights.
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.