Posted on 04/09/2012 11:28:00 AM PDT by Nachum
Following the death of journalist and reporter Mike Wallace, an interview he conducted with Planned Parenthood founder and eugenicist Margaret Sanger made the rounds across the Internet over the weekend.
Below are clips from the interview Margaret Sanger gave to Mike Wallace in 1957. During the interview, the full version of which can be seen here, Sanger talks to Wallace about why she became an advocate for birth control, abortion, stopping so-called overpopulation, and talks about the Catholic Church, and morality.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
Sanger was a eugenicist and a racist but she did not advocate abortion. I cannot ‘support the statement’ because she never wrote or spoke in favor of abortion and you cannot prove a negative. It is up to people making the claim to prove where she advocated abortion.
I’ve done quite a bit of research on the subject and have never read a single thing she has written or spoken where she says that she supports abortion. In fact, she called the practice abomidable.
Even Planned Parenthood doesn’t want people to know that she never advocated for abortion. It embarrasses them that she was opposed to it.
I have no idea what your attitude is about.
I do not agree with Sanger’s point of view but it does the pro-Life side favor to make up falshoods about a person. She was bad enough without making up things about her that she never supported.
Your first quote is out of context where she is speaking in the voice of poor immigrant families who had espoused that view to her. She did not agree with it, she was advocating for contraception to avoid that sentiment being carried out.
She advocated for contraception and sterilization in the name of eugenics to avoid that ‘sin’ in her view.
That was her whole focus, not abortion.
She advocated for contraception and sterilization in the name of eugenics to avoid that ‘sin’ in her view.
That was her whole focus, not abortion.
Is this “bad enough”? You are not looking at her full biography closely enough.
For what purpose?
“Birth control appeals to the advanced radical because it is calculated to undermine the authority of the Christian churches. I look forward to seeing humanity free someday of the tyranny of Christianity no less than Capitalism.”- Margaret Sanger
The pro-life Democrats—I meand the voters— have largely passed on. The pols have all ratted.
“Many prominent eugenicists, such as Ernst Rudin, close friend and advisor to Sanger and director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry in Munich, filled the pages of her various publications with their radical racist ideology. She worked closely with almost every leading eugenicist of her time, including Harry Laughlin and Lothrop Stoddard, writer of the fascist book The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy. Her close ties with these men, especially some Nazi eugenicists, indicated that she, like much of the mainstream eugenics movement, was supportive of the German eugenics programs — a fact that she and her publicists would later deny.” — P. Jalsevac, The Inherent Racism of Population Control, LifeSite, 2004.
Sanger claimed that the availability of birth control would make abortion rare. That has to do, I think, with the reverse side of eugenics, which was that the “”upper classes,”ought to have children.” The Nazis taught the same thing. The superior breeds should not kill their young.
Abortion was relatively rare in her time.
However in her writings she claims that infanticide was being practiced in urban poor immigrant families (she was a nurse and social worker among these populations).
She did think that contraception would cure a whole host of social ills ... poverty, vagrancy, illiteracy, etc. Turns out she was wrong from what we know today, but in her day it seemed a reasonable assumption.
I have looked at her biography and writings and speeches very closely having researched Sanger and other eugenicists while in college.
She believed in eugenics for the same reason other people of her day did. They felt it would make the human race stronger to weed out the ‘unfit’. Eugenics was very popular in the first half of the 20th Century. Many prominent people espoused eugenics views, even U.S. Presidents
-—She never advocated abortion and that line that you quoted is taken out of context.-—
What’s the context for advocating infanticide?
——Even out of context she does not advocate abortion. She did, however, advocate for forced sterilization of the ‘unfit’——
I searched and couldn’t find a pro-abortion quote. But that public position seems incongruous with her support of infanticide and Nazi-style eugenics. Perhaps her public position regarding abortion was calculated. She seems to have few scruples, so misrepresenting her position for the greater evil would not be difficult for her.
Margaret Sanger’s Multifaceted Defense of Abortion and ...
www.uffl.org/vol16/gardiner06.pdf
Sanger did not advocate infanticide either.
She was using the fact infanticide was occuring in poor families (according to her) to promote legal contraception (which was illegel in her day).
Legal contraception and contraception information was her cause. In her day it was illegal to even distribute information about how to prevent pregnancy.
In addition to that she was a eugenicist (and a racist), as were many prominent people of her time.
I have read that piece.
The author offers no quote from Sanger in which she advocates for abortion. In fact she used the fact infanticide was more common than people thought (according to her) and abortion becoming more common as a reason to legalize contraception and information on contraception, which was illegal in her day.
He goal was legalized contraception and contraception information. She used her work as a nurse and social worker to paint extreme situations poor immigrant families found themselves in in order to promote her contraception cause. The more sensational the anecdotes the better for her cause, which was contraception.
She didn’t advocate infanticide?
On the first page of the PDF I referenced she wrote about witnessing a father of eleven children throwing a crying infant into the snow.
Her reaction.”I remember having keen sympathy with that man!”
She was an EYEWITNESS!
“Out of the door and into the snow the nuisance went.”
She was a moral leper. A devil.
You don’t know if a baby is “diseased” until it is in the womb. She said the sin is bringing a diseased baby into this world. Thus to NOT commit the sin, according to her belief system, would require the termination of that which is diseased, which of course can only exist and be known for sure after conception.
Sanger thought all kinds of people were ‘diseased’ and that they would produce diseased or feeble minded or otherwise inferior offspring. She advocated coerced or forced sterilization of certain people and even clandestine contraceptives if they could be developed (oral contraceptives had not yet been developed but people were working it).
But she never advocated abortion. Not in print (and she wrote prolifically), not is recorded or transcribed speeches. There is simply no evidence that she supported or advocated for abortion. Her main thing was to get contraception and contraceptive knowledge legal. Her eugenics beliefs (which were quite popular in her time) were a sideline to that.
Sanger thought all kinds of people were ‘diseased’ and that they would produce diseased or feeble minded or otherwise inferior offspring. She advocated coerced or forced sterilization of certain people and even clandestine contraceptives if they could be developed (oral contraceptives had not yet been developed but people were working it).
But she never advocated abortion. Not in print (and she wrote prolifically), not is recorded or transcribed speeches. There is simply no evidence that she supported or advocated for abortion. Her main thing was to get contraception and contraceptive knowledge legal. Her eugenics beliefs (which were quite popular in her time) were a sideline to that.
Yes, Sanger used many such anecdotes to shock people into believing that infanticide was prevalent and quite understandable in extreme circumstances. This is one of the ways she promoted her contraceptive agenda.
Sounds about the same as man-made global warming, another junk science, but quite popular with the elites.
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.