• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

We Know the Cure for Poverty: The Empowerment of Women

RaleBulgarian said:
Nothing in Sanger’s comments can be reasonably interpreted as endorsing genocide. Only those who want to read “genocide” see that in her words.

Sanger did, however, believe in and support the idea of a variant form of eugenics. Although not an accepted idea either, factually, it is far different from genocide.

* Note - When you include references in your posts, it is customary to provide a link to the source so that others can judge the validity of those references for themselves. Without the link, your attachments are worthless.
Click to expand...

You need to re-read the letter, here is the part that's significant.

It seems to me from my experience … that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table which means their ignorance, superstitions and doubts.
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.

Also, Did I take this quote out of context as well?

margaret-sanger-quote.jpg
 

Attachments

  • MargaretSanger6.jpg
    MargaretSanger6.jpg
    9.4 KB · Views: 57
Iron_Merc said:
You need to re-read the letter, here is the part that's significant.

Also, Did I take this quote out of context as well?

View attachment 672639
Click to expand...

Perhaps you need to actually read some of her papers instead of out of context quotes.

I have read many of Sanger's papers and while I do disagree with any type of forced birth control or eugentics as much as I disagree with forced by law continued pregnancy or forced by law abortion , I have not read anything to make me believe that Sanger was a racist or that she endorsed abortion.



From: the following publication :

In her lifetime, Sanger won the respect of international figures of all races, including the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.; Mahatma Ghandi; Shidzue Kato, the foremost family planning advocate in Japan; and Lady Dhanvanthi Rama Rau of India— all of whom were sensitive to issues of race.
Click to expand...


#Trust Black Women



From the following article:

Sometimes students can throw you a curve ball.

I was having a discussion in class yesterday about Margaret Sanger's role in the birth control movement when one of my students observed she was also a proponent of eugenics. That wasn't the curve ball -- I already knew that and we had a discussion about what that meant. However, he then went on to suggest
that Sanger was a racist who wanted to use birth control to reduce the African-American population. That stopped me cold -- I had no specific response, other than to say I would look into it.

What I discovered is that this has become a huge right-wing meme on the internet.
I was literally overwhelmed with the number of blog posts which vehemently asserted this to be a fact. This has obviously been sparked because of controversies over Planned Parenthood and abortion (although ironically, Sanger herself was opposed to abortion).

It apparently stems from two extremely slender pieces of "evidence":

-She was involved in the "Negro Project" which was organized to help provide birth control to African-American women.. During the debate within the Birth Control Federation of America (which was sponsoring the project) Sanger argued very strongly that there should be African-American leadership in the Project.

A single Sanger quote relating to this debate seems to be the basis for almost all the discussion on the internet of Sanger being racist: "we do not want 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."

This has been interpreted by some people (like Angela Davis) as proof that the project was actually a secret conspiracy to exterminate African-Americans (I find it a bit ironic that conservatives are, perhaps unwittingly, agreeing with Davis diagnosis of a white conspiracy).


In fact, in the context of the debate Sanger was having with other members of the Birth Control Federation, the real meaning was almost certainly that she believed that black leadership was necessary to prevent the mistaken belief that the purpose of the project was racist.

In another quote from this debate Sanger stated: "I do not believe that this project should be directed or run by white medical men. The Federation should direct it with the guidance and assistance of the colored group... " Sanger herself said of the Negro Project (which was supported by prominent African-American civil rights activists like W.E.B. DuBois and Mary Bethune McLeod) that it was designed to help:

"a group notoriously underprivileged and handicapped to a large measure by a ‘caste' system that operates as an added weight upon their efforts to get a fair share of the better things in life. To give them the means of helping themselves is perhaps the richest gift of all. We believe birth control knowledge brought to this group, is the most direct, constructive aid that can be given them to improve their immediate situation."


Every quote from Sanger that I've been able to find suggests that she was in fact extremely sympathetic to the plight of minority groups like African-Americans.
Click to expand...


Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood, and Racism
 
Last edited:
Lursa said:
People choose to give up life for other things all the time: family, religion, their country, principles, etc. I hope you dont believe that you nor the govt have the right to assume what individual people would choose?

Btw, there have been at least 5 people now, on this sub-forum, that have said they wished that they had been aborted. As sad as that is...think about how small a sampling this forum is of the general population and then realize that you cannot assume for others.
Click to expand...

Rickeroo said:
A few things tell me that if a fetus is allowed time enough choose, it would not choose to end its life. We see this in the 0.0143% suicide rate. We have all matured past our fetal stage, and 99.9857% of us are "choosing" to live each year.

Conversely, the willful abortion rate is 1228% higher than the suicide rate. To put that in perspective, a drive from Boston to LA is 2983 miles. Because of suicide, people lie dead in the first half mile of the trip. Because of abortion, dead fetuses are strewn for 566 miles. It's a math thing for me - I just don't see the same willingness in adults to off themselves at the same rate they would off "not themselves".
Click to expand...

You just wrote practically the exact same thing and didnt address my post (see top quote) at all. Again. Please try and then if you'd like, I'd be happy to address your tangent.

Lursa said:
What does that have to do with presuming you or the govt knows what an unborn would want or choose? You are avoiding my argument completely. Please do so.

And what does your post matter? There are no negative effects of abortion on society. If there are, please list them.
Click to expand...

All I saw was that in the face of some facts, you still choose to believe that most unborn would choose to be born. Sure, maybe. But at the expense of the mother who makes her own needs and right to life KNOWN...by her decision. So your personal assumptions about the unborn...maybe yes, maybe no...should not override hers.

Can you answer the bolded questions?

(Please see post 196 and {{Scrab}} )
 
Last edited:
Did you seriously not re -read the letter? How is this not racist?

It seems to me from my experience … that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table which means their ignorance, superstitions and doubts.
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.

Seems to me she is saying they will use a negro minister to better appeal to the black race? She recommends a religious appeal. She specifically states "We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. She then postulates the black minister can straighten out the idea if blacks start to suspect Planned Parenthood of ulterior motives?
 
Scrabaholic said:
They can also work different shifts so that one of them is home w/ the children.
Click to expand...

My parents did that for awhile. And it was a sacrifice for my mom.

She was an ob/gyn nurse, she loves babies, and took a job at a nursing home so she could work a night shift when my father was home.
 
Iron_Merc said:
Did you seriously not re -read the letter? How is this not racist?

It seems to me from my experience … that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table which means their ignorance, superstitions and doubts.
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.

Seems to me she is saying they will use a negro minister to better appeal to the black race? She recommends a religious appeal. She specifically states "We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. She then postulates the black minister can straighten out the idea if blacks start to suspect Planned Parenthood of ulterior motives?
Click to expand...

Why does this matter at all today? (previously posted)


Not this again :roll:

Blaming Margaret Sanger's views on racism/eugenics for *today's* PP organization is like blaming the FF's like Jefferson & Washington, who kept slaves for how we interpret the Constitution *today.* Society evolves and moves on and institutions do so as well.

If you want to throw out PP because of Sanger's views, shall we throw out the Constitution as well because of slave-owning founders? :doh​
 
minnie616 said:
Any pregnancy can put the life of the pregnant woman in jeopardy. It is not always predictable when her life is/ will be in jeopardy.

Any pregnancy can take a turn at a moments notice and put the woman’s health and even her life at risk, at a point where an abortion once the symptoms are there will be too late to prevent a death of the woman or lifelong major irreparable disability.

That’s why no woman should be forced to take the risk if she wants an early elective abortion it should be her choice not to risk the pregnancy. Some women can sence there is something wrong ahead of time.


Life threatening complications aren't rare up to 8 percent of all pregnancies affected by pre- eclampsia or one of it's variants including HELLP syndrome.

We never know when a pregnancy might take a turn and become life threatening to someone we love.

Another 1 to 2.5 percent of pregnancies are ectopic pregnancies which are also life threatening.

So about 1 out 10 pregnancies can be life threatening just from 2 of the many types of life threatening complications.... eclampsia variants and ectopic pregnancies.

My daughter had HELLP syndrome with her pregnancy and she was very close to death when they performed the emergency
C section.

She went to the ER a few weeks before her due date because she was getting a horrible pain in her back just below her ribs which was caused because her liver was being damaged from the HELLP syndrome.

Usually there is pain the upper right part of the abdomen but her pain was in the back because her liver was swelling and shutting down.
They were worried her liver might fail.


Her OB/GYN was shocked when her test results came back showing she had HELLP syndrome. She had just seen him a couple days before and everything with the pregnancy appeared fine then.

My daughter was one the up to 8 percent of women in the US who every year developes 'preeclampsia, eclampsia, or a related condition such as HELLP syndrome." Thankfully she was not one of the roughly 300 US women who do die from the syndrome every year but she was one of the roughly 75,000 women every year who are counted as near misses.

From the following article:




Beyond Downton Abbey: Preeclampsia Maternal Deaths Continue Today


A little more about HELLP Syndrome:




HELLP Syndrome: Preeclampsia Foundation


Now many women like myself and my daughter continue our pregnancies because we wish to become parents.

But I cannot support a law or a country that does not allow elective abortions and thus forces women to continue a pregnancy that may very well put her long term health or life at risk.

On the other side of the coin I could not support a law or a country that would force a women to have an abortion against her will even if her unborn were so malformed that if it did survive birth it would cost taxpayers millions of dollars in medical care.

Each woman should have the legal option to choose whether or not she wishes to continue her pregnancy.
Click to expand...

The maternal death rate is 24 per 100,000 births. Assuming a 19% willful abortion rate, 123,457 pregnancies must happen in order to get 100,000 births, this allows for 23,457 abortions, with 24 women dying, per 100,000 births.

Whatever percent of abortions are done to save the mother's life, I agree with. What is that figure?
 
Iron_Merc said:
You need to re-read the letter, here is the part that's significant.

It seems to me from my experience … that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table which means their ignorance, superstitions and doubts.
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.
Click to expand...
Nothing in the above Sanger comments indicates support of genocide. You’re reading into her comments what your fevered mind wants to be there.

Iron_Merc said:
Also, Did I take this quote out of context as well?

“colored people are like weeds and are to be exterminated”
Click to expand...
No, you you aren't taking the above words out of context, you’re flat out lying. Sanger never said that “colored people are like weeds and are to be exterminated”. Just another sick lie you’ve latched onto and are trying to perpetuate.

Come on, prove me wrong. Post reputable and verifiable source links for the garbage you’re posting.
 
Rickeroo said:
The maternal death rate is 24 per 100,000 births. Assuming a 19% willful abortion rate, 123,457 pregnancies must happen in order to get 100,000 births, this allows for 23,457 abortions, with 24 women dying, per 100,000 births.

Whatever percent of abortions are done to save the mother's life, I agree with. What is that figure?
Click to expand...

So you are using just numbers as the basis for your view?

That's pretty dehumanizing. Esp. when Minnie has explained that every single pregnancy is a real risk to a woman's life...it cant be predicted and it cant always be prevented. We dont know....and you know very well that it's true. Every single woman going into labor is afraid. Her husband/bf fears for her life and that of the baby. Every friend and family member waiting to hear is also worried. The risks are real...that's why we all worry.

And since we dont know...who are you to force that risk on women you dont even know? (If you would see laws that did so). The govt doesnt. The Const protects women from that.

The risk to women is significant and if you want to look at numbers, think about the real loss here, the effects in real life. If she dies, then her husband/bf, parents, other children, brothers, sisters, other relatives, friends...all lose a loved one. Why do you value the loss of the unborn more than this? This is reality for these people. Is it the same for the unborn? Except for the prospective parents...not likely.

It's about way more than numbers.
 
Lursa said:
All I saw was that in the face of some facts, you still choose to believe that most unborn would choose to be born. Sure, maybe. But at the expense of the mother who makes her own needs and right to life KNOWN...by her decision. So your personal assumptions about the unborn...maybe yes, maybe no...should not override hers.
Click to expand...

The only override I agree with is life vs life - the mother takes precedence over the fetus. All other reasons where fetal life is sacrificed in order to satisfy the non-mortal wishes of the mother - not so much. There's too many people opting to stay alive each year for me to be convinced that the elimination of life is a cool thing, or to be viewed in a flippant manner. Too many people not killing themselves. This tells me that they don't take life lightly. I'll make a bargain: If the US suicide rate increases 500 fold, it will approach half the abortion rate. Not quite there, but at least it will be in the ballpark. If I see lots of people offing themselves, then maybe I'll have less respect for life and be more apt to agree with convenience abortions. I'll start believing that fetuses, if given time to make their own 'choice', would choose to end it.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Nothing in the above Sanger comments indicates support of genocide. You’re reading into her comments what your fevered mind wants to be there.


No, you you aren't taking the above words out of context, you’re flat out lying. Sanger never said that “colored people are like weeds and are to be exterminated”. Just another sick lie you’ve latched onto and are trying to perpetuate.

Come on, prove me wrong. Post reputable and verifiable source links for the garbage you’re posting.
Click to expand...

So in that case, explain what Sanger is articulating when she says we don't want the word to get out that we want to exterminate the black race
 
Lursa said:
Why does this matter at all today? (previously posted)


Not this again :roll:

Blaming Margaret Sanger's views on racism/eugenics for *today's* PP organization is like blaming the FF's like Jefferson & Washington, who kept slaves for how we interpret the Constitution *today.* Society evolves and moves on and institutions do so as well.

If you want to throw out PP because of Sanger's views, shall we throw out the Constitution as well because of slave-owning founders? :doh​
Click to expand...

Well, it appears Planned Parenthood doesn't mind butchering black babies after all.

7abortion.jpg
 
Lursa said:
So you are using just numbers as the basis for your view?

That's pretty dehumanizing. Esp. when Minnie has explained that every single pregnancy is a real risk to a woman's life...it cant be predicted and it cant always be prevented. We dont know....and you know very well that it's true. Every single woman going into labor is afraid. Her husband/bf fears for her life and that of the baby. Every friend and family member waiting to hear is also worried. The risks are real...that's why we all worry.

And since we dont know...who are you to force that risk on women you dont even know? (If you would see laws that did so). The govt doesnt. The Const protects women from that.

The risk to women is significant and if you want to look at numbers, think about the real loss here, the effects in real life. If she dies, then her husband/bf, parents, other children, brothers, sisters, other relatives, friends...all lose a loved one. Why do you value the loss of the unborn more than this? This is reality for these people. Is it the same for the unborn? Except for the prospective parents...not likely.

It's about way more than numbers.
Click to expand...

I'd accept abortions that save the mother's life. However, I don't think 1 in 5 pregnancies result in a mortal threat to the mother, who then gets an abortion to save her life. Using round figures, 3.9 million births per year, resulting in 936 maternal deaths. Assuming abortion is outlawed and all abortions save the mother's life, there would be about 630,000 maternal deaths per year, and 4.5 million births. 1 in 5 (roughly) would die in childbirth.
 
Iron_Merc said:
So in that case, explain what Sanger is articulating when she says we don't want the word to get out that we want to exterminate the black race
Click to expand...
You’re lying, so there’s nothing to explain. Same as your lying meme about exterminating blacks “like weeds”.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
You’re lying, so there’s nothing to explain. Same as your lying meme about exterminating blacks “like weeds”.
Click to expand...

Why cant you explain what Sanger was trying to articulate? Its a very simple couple of sentences.

Ill repeat it here in case you forgot:

“We do not want 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,”
 
Iron_Merc said:
WRONG.

You failed to mention the sentences above it to give the true "context" of her comment:
Also, when you read the entire letter it becomes clear she is in fact talking about genocide.

She is talking about hiring black staff and black doctors in order to frame the ideals ang goals of Planned Parenthood, and especially tailor them to African Americans. In essence, she wants to put black women at ease respective to the motives of Planned Parenthood.
She is saying a black doctor could more easily placate the fear or rumor that Planned Parenthood intends to exterminate the black race.
Ergo, she is talking about genocide. And the (minister) is there to affirm that planned parenthood does not have any ulterior motives. And to articulate this to their black clientele.

Genocide? Yeah I think that's what Planned Parenthood is ALL about:
Click to expand...

Incorrect. She did not want word to get out that she was trying to exterminate blacks BECAUSE SHE WASN'T trying to exterminate them. She felt that blacks would believe their fellow blacks before they believed a white woman.
 
Iron_Merc said:
Why cant you explain what Sanger was trying to articulate? Its a very simple couple of sentences.

Ill repeat it here in case you forgot:

“We do not want 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,”
Click to expand...

If anyone’s forgotten, it’s you.
https://www.debatepolitics.com/abor...erty-empowerment-women-20.html#post1070607784
https://www.debatepolitics.com/abor...erty-empowerment-women-20.html#post1070608234
Iron_Merc said:
Here is another chart
View attachment 67263936
Click to expand...
Goody, another suspect chart from a highly suspect poster.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Incorrect. She did not want word to get out that she was trying to exterminate blacks BECAUSE SHE WASN'T trying to exterminate them. She felt that blacks would believe their fellow blacks before they believed a white woman.
Click to expand...
Scrabaholic, while I generally agree with your position on Sanger (historically) I am wondering whether she couldn't have just been using a black man to prevent scrutiny coming down upon her organization. It wouldn't be the first time someone used black people to further their own agenda when the need presented itself.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Incorrect. She did not want word to get out that she was trying to exterminate blacks BECAUSE SHE WASN'T trying to exterminate them. She felt that blacks would believe their fellow blacks before they believed a white woman.
Click to expand...
Iron_Merc has made clear that he isn’t interested in truth or facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom