Roe attorney: Use abortion to 'eliminate poor'

World Net Daily ^ | 13 May 2006

[Lurker]

In unearthed letter urged President-elect Clinton to 'reform' country

A letter to Bill Clinton written by the co-counsel who successfully argued the Roe v. Wade decision urged the then-president-elect to "eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country" by liberalizing abortion laws. Ron Weddington, who with his wife Sarah Weddington represented "Jane Roe," sent the four-page letter to President Clinton's transition team before Clinton took office in January 1993.

The missive turned up in an exhibit put together by the watchdog legal group Judicial Watch, which has been researching the Clinton administration's policy on the abortion drug RU-486, notes James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web.

snip

Weddington qualified his statement, saying, "No, I'm not advocating some sort of mass extinction of these unfortunate people. Crime, drugs and disease are already doing that. The problem is that their numbers are not only replaced but increased by the birth of millions of babies to people who can't afford to have babies.

"There, I've said it. It's what we all know is true, but we only whisper it, because as liberals who believe in individual rights, we view any program which might treat the disadvantaged differently as discriminatory, mean-spirited and ... well ... Republican

[weegee]

We all knew this was their attitude. This is entirely consistent with Margaret Sanger's writings.

The left has their panties in a wad over an antiabortion ad that appeared in The Houston Press a couple weeks ago. You can read the letters online...

http://www.houstonpress.com/Issues/2006-05-04/news/letters.html

Just Ad Anger

Hate is hate: I can't believe you printed that disgusting ad for American Life League [page 19, April 20]. What were you thinking? You wouldn't print an ad from Holocaust deniers, would you? Why would you print an ad accusing Planned Parenthood of genocide? You don't have to like Planned Parenthood or abortion to know that this ad stinks. Whose life is improved by its appearance? Hate is hate, in whatever venue. Shame on you.

Carole Marmell
Houston

Smearing Sanger: Planned Parenthood does more than any other organization to ensure women and families have access to the quality health care and information they need to make responsible, informed decisions about family planning. Each year we provide nearly five million women, men and teens with medically accurate sex education and reproductive health care and information. In 2005, people across Houston and throughout southeast Texas turned to us for health care in 106,000 visits for birth control, emergency contraception, breast and cervical cancer screenings, HIV testing and counseling, testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections and more.

On April 20 your newspaper printed an advertisement from a fringe operation whose main goal is to eliminate women's access to birth control and reproductive health care by attacking Planned Parenthood and our founder, Margaret Sanger.

Extreme groups will employ every ludicrous tactic in the book to achieve their goals, including attempts to paint our founder as a racist.

In her lifetime, Sanger urged women to use contraceptives so that they would not have to risk the dangers of illegal, back-alley abortion. She condemned the American eugenics movement for advocating that the state, not women themselves, decide who must have children and who must not. She never advocated using birth control for racist goals. In fact, Sanger worked closely with other social justice leaders of her time and believed that a woman's right to control her own body is the foundation of her human rights. She collaborated with health care providers in the African-American community to serve women who were denied access to their city's health and social services simply because of their race. Her visionary work won the respect of international figures of all races and nationalities, including the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.; Mahatma Gandhi; Shidzue Kato, the foremost family planning advocate in Japan; and Lady Dhanvanthi Rama Rau of India.

It's shameful that anti-family-planning extremists have targeted Sanger, who died decades ago, with their smear campaign. If the extremists behind this attack ad were truly concerned with reducing the need for abortion in any community, they would stand with Planned Parenthood to keep families healthy and help prevent unintended pregnancies. It is proven that access to contraception and medically accurate sex education protects women and families. Vitriolic attack ads have never done that.

Peter J. Durkin
President & CEO, Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas, Inc.

http://www.houstonpress.com/Issues/2006-05-11/news/letters.html

Ad Schlock

Beyond words: Do you, or does your ad department, even glance at the ads placed in your publication?

The outright propaganda displayed on page 19 [April 20] is beyond words. The Houston Coalition for Life purposefully took a quote of Margaret Sanger out of context, placed it below an image of a noose and a baby, with a word in large bold text that would elicit emotion in any sane person, and you printed it. While I don't hold Planned Parenthood in the highest regard, thanks to the support they lend to politicians who are in direct opposition to their cause, they play an important role in the lives of young women that goes far beyond abortion. I understand HCFL's passion for what they believe, but I can't respect the validity of their beliefs when their resorting to subterfuge erases any credibility they might have gained through thoughtful debate and responsible dialogue.

You have the ability to demand less deceitful ads from these organizations. Why don't you do it?

Name withheld by request
Houston

Here is the link to the ad:

http://www.all.org/pdf/ppad1.pdf

"We do not want the word to get out that we want to exterminate the Nego population." - Margaret Sanger

Here is People For The "American Way"'s dossier on the group:

Google Archive

And here is Planned Parenthood's own response to some quotes:

Google Archive

[wmfights]

"I'm commenting on the fact that abortion has greatly changed our country in ways that some people may not have considered."
________________________________________

I agree.

Spiritually, look at how we've fallen into the depths. We now are talking about the killing of seniors when their "quality of life" has declined. We accept sexual promiscuity as a norm. We are even "normalizing" deviant sexual partnerships.

Economically, we have killed an entire tax base and labor pool. I am not an actuary, but if these babies were in the work place I don't think we would be looking at the social security crisis that exists. Also, the magnet of jobs drawing illegal immigration wouldn't exist because we would have the pool of workers here.

[AliVeritas]

Today, I'm going to tell you a tale that could have come straight out of the annals of Ripley's "Believe It or Not."

Not very many people have made the connection, but I believe that Legal Abortion in America is at least partially to blame for the human flood of Illegal Immigration streaming daily across our borders. Some will immediately dismiss this suggested linkage as being too far-fetched and preposterous — but before rejecting the idea, let's take a look at some interesting numbers.

In 1973, the year that the notorious Roe v Wade decision became the law of the land, American women legally murdered 615,831 innocent unborn children. The grisly toll rose year by year, until by 1982 the number of annual abortions had doubled, reaching almost 1,304,000. Of course, these are the documented deaths, they fail to include the additional thousands of babies murdered outside the medical realm.

According to statistics from the Centers for Disease Control, the first eleven years of legal abortions in America killed about 11.9 million babies (from 1973 to 1983). If those aborted children had lived and grown to adulthood, their median age today would be 30.5 years old.

Now, the number of estimated illegal immigrants in the U.S.A. ranges from 10.3 million to 15 million; so add these two numbers together and divide by two, and you get about 12.5 million as a pretty close guesstimate of how many illegal workers, mostly Mexican, are now in America.

Is this mere coincidence, or is there some direct correlation between those two numbers, 11.9 million and 12.5 million? I think it is both. Without question, at least part of the reason why we have illegal immigrants crossing our borders in droves is because there is a need for more cheap laborers in the fields and factories of America. It is a simple economic proposition: increased demand creates its own supply.

In fact, these same feminist-inspired demographic trends have resulted in 34 million women joining the workforce between 1970 and 2000, during a time when American birth rates dropped from 18.4 to 13.9 per thousand. The new addition of these women to the workforce has helped to mask the growing demand for labor during a time of explosive economic expansion, "from 5.03 trillion in 1970 to 11.75 trillion in 2004 as measured in 2005 dollars," as WorldNetDaily columnist Vox Day brilliantly pointed out in his August 15 column entitled "Girls just want to have fun."

Day also warned that the American birth rate has fallen "by 25 percent to sub-replacement levels," and this sterile trend threatens all of Western Civilization from North America to Europe. So maybe I'm not the only voice crying in the wilderness about the economic problems that legalized abortions have caused in our society.

True, the U.S. desperately needs welfare reform. There are far too many idle Americans who could do at least some of the menial, hard and dirty jobs that now go to illegal immigrants by default. Certainly, we need to cultivate a better work ethic and an entrepreneurial spirit among our own people.

Nevertheless, I still believe that at least 50 percent of the problem we face is the fact that we have killed off almost 12 million potential workers in the U.S.A. who would now be between the ages of 26 and 35. Nature abhors a vacuum, economic or otherwise.

As the years pass we will see if my hypothesis is correct. If I am wrong, then illegal immigration eventually will level off. However, that massive influx of humanity shows no sign of slacking. As the number of abortions continues to increase each year, so does the growing tide of illegal aliens crossing our borders and filling our cities.

Here's a recent first that does not bode well for our future. Just last week, the white American population of the state of Texas was officially declared to be a minority. Unless we somehow manage to seal our borders, California and New Mexico may not be far behind.

Here are some more disturbing figures. Between 1983 and 1993, we aborted 13.5 million babies in the U.S. Their median age today would be 20.5. These are nonexistent, wasted human beings who would be either in college right now, or just graduating high school and starting a job and maybe a family of their own.

Who will replace them? Most likely, 15 million more foreign-born Hispanics with a propensity for hard work and a burning desire to reclaim the American Southwest for Mexico.

As the famous carnival showman Ripley would say: "Believe It or Not."

[Nowhere Man]

It's all about the unskilled and underpriveledged.. Hmm. We're all largely against abortion here and tacitly give lipservice to being for the poor and underpriveledged.. but the republican policy on this issue seems to be to export their job opportunities, import illegal aliens to keep them from making an income they can live off of and replace them in the workplace with H1 & L1 visa imports under the deciet that there is some sort of labor shortage. But we did cut their taxes...

I know myself, I deplore this latter day Margaret Sanger, both of which are truly evil. I do agree with what you just said 100%, what keeps the Republicans in power, as flawed as they are is the Democrats are so lefty moonbatty with homosexual marriage and perhaps the war on terrorism although the latter seems like it is starting to wear thin. I believe in the war on terrorism of course but when you start having problems at home jobwise and so on, the issues that hit the average person head on, the war on terror will go out the window if it meant everyday survival is threatened. I think in 2004, the Republicans have two main heroes they should thank them for winning, the Canadian Supreme Court who validated homosexual marriage in 2003 up in Canada (which touched a firestorm here) and Mayor Gavin Newsome of San Francisco for keeping that issue alive here in the United States. Still they won only by a kitten's whisker. If the lefty moonbats just let up even a little, they can come back into power.

If the Democrats were truly wise, they'd run somebody like a Hubert Humphrey, a JFK, or Harry Turman type candidate, but that would mean throwing a lot of the moonbat agenda under the bus and they would lose the moonbats they have, which would not be a bad idea. I could vote for a Hubert Humphry or an FDR if they would address the jobs issue, keep fighting the war on terrorism and secure or borders and sovereignty.

But still this does not bode well if the democrats keep all or most of the moonbat stuff while the Republicans sink on borders and the jobs issue, this will hurt us in the long run, perhaps beyond repair. Certainly, I will never feel at home with the Democrats in their present form, but I don't quite fit the Republican mold as it is right now either.

[dcnd9]

Send MSM the links to this and like information and demand they espose this truth.

[weegee]

...makes me wonder if they (the republicans) do want to fix it and see it go away as an issue..

Especially in the light of talk of a "marriage" ammendment when all around us are cases screaming for a "sanctity of life amendment" (to cover abortion, cloning, fetal tissue harvesting, euthenasia, genetic screening as grounds for discrimination and other relevant bad ideas).

[marty60]

This is not new. Margaret Sanger the Queen of the Abortionist movement, wanted to stop Jews and other poor from procreating. she did most of her work in the poorer areas, and also gave speaches to the KKK. also visited Nazi Germany. (RU486)

[Frank Sheed]

The final phase of the eugenics movement occurred after 1930 when the movement rapidly disintegrated. Three events hastened the demise of the eugenics movement in the United States. First, the Depression of the 1930's discredited Social Darwinism, along with the "business elite" who professed such conservative viewpoints. Americans began to realize that failure no longer hinged on individual weakness or lack of ability. Both the biologically "fit" and the "unfit" shared in the misfortunes of the Depression. Secondly, more sophisticated research during the 1930's discredited much of the scientific premises of Galtonian eugenics. Scientists, like Irving A. Folling and Herbert J. Muller, discovered metabolic causes for certain mental retardation and genetic mutations caused by radiation that refuted the hereditary degeneracy of Dugdale's Jukes and Goddard's Kallikaks. And finally, the rise of Hitler-style eugenics with its grotesque and barbaric methods for eliminating "inferiors" horrified Americans. Realization of the full implications of eugenics abruptly halted racial reforms in the United States.

Today, the underlying motives for the eugenics movement during the first two decades of the twentieth century are not dead. Racist eugenics has remained on the fringes of American social thought since 1945, periodically re-emerging into the mainstream in varying degrees and forms. Americans continue to question the intellectual and moral capabilities of numerous non-white groups. Americans have consistently forced its "superior" social institutions - - democracy, capitalism and Christianity - - upon ethnic and racial groups throughout the world, and have subscribed to racial prejudices that maintain a belief in the innate inferiority of "colored peoples".

Today, birth control remains a method of controlling ~ "undesirable" African and Asian populations, along with reducing the propagation of welfare recipients at home. Americans continue to express concern of the "new immigrants" - - the Vietnamese, Filipino, Latin American and Arab - - who seem to fail in assimilating to American ideals, values and culture. Today, as in the past, certain Americans voice fears of a declining Anglo-American birthrate and a burgeoning Black population in America's cities. Today, institutionalization and sterilization of "defectives" remains the answer of a society that desires to segregate the "unfit" from mainstream America. Thus, a movement, which had its heyday from 1905 to 1930, has the makings of revitalization during the 1970's and 1980's.

UPDATE: In the 21st century, Americans are seeing a rebirth of neo-eugenics as we debate the ethics of cloning and genetic manipulation in an effort to combat disease and illness. The temptation remains for modern day eugenicists to weed out perceived "undesirable" human traits. Who will become the "breeders" and who will become the "undesirables?"

[Petronski]

RU486 is Zyklon-B for the uterus.

[marty60]

It was developed by Dr, A Madus as a canceer drug, they found that it aborted babies. Roussel(sp) German company that he worked for has completely disavowed itself from the drug because of it's use to abort Jewish babies. By the way Madus was given a commision in the SS. Aortion has always been used as a way to kill "life unworthy of life" That is what is so dangerous about Dums and liberals. They practice the evil of I will make your choices for you including whether you have the right to life or not.

[AliVeritas]

Amen.

http://www.plannedparenthoodexposed.com/

[weegee]

Ironic that we want to murder senior citizens (especially on the public dole) because their "quality of life" is lesser. And "we" see an outrage about the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Yet "we" are happy with the decision that Moussaoui got a life sentence because it is more hellish than a quick death.

So it is OKAY for his quality of life to suffer? And that he may be tortured in prison by inmates? And we can afford to pay $100,000 a year (sure to rise) for the rest of his life?

SOMEONE is lying about a lot of different things here.

(A) "Quality of life" would mean that anyone not in the top 50% of society should die (they are below average and "suffering"). It is a feel good expression to cover some bad ideas.

(B) The outrage over Abu Ghraib was BS. Saddam did FAR WORSE things and CNN knew of abuses under Saddam's regime but kept quiet to keep their Baghdad bureau. They saw more worth in protecting Saddam than in protecting the war effort. The guards were ALREADY on trial. Exposing the abuse (which senators had been notified about months prior) was a tactic designed to sour the public on the war in Iraq (and win the 2004 election for the Democrats).

(C) The death penalty opponents who cheered when Moussaoui's life was spared showed him a kindness he would not show his victims. It is idiotic to believe that he will be abused in prison (A) because the 1993 WTC bombers are kept in a similar maximum security prison and have not suffered any reported abuse, (B) the 1993 WTC bombers lived to see their work completed "jihadist victory dance", and (C) they continued to plot attacks from inside the prison, aided by a treasonous attorney. Some "suffering".

[weegee]

And insurance companies could discriminate on the basis of latent genetic traits that "could" lead to problems in the future.

If an employer can discriminate on the basis of smoking (and they CAN), then they can also say you didn't pass "the company physical".

[doug from upland]

DO NOT EVER SEND MONEY TO JUDICIAL WATCH

[AliVeritas]

I wonder how her three kids felt about what she was doing?

[CaliGirlGodHelpMe]

Right. Weddington (such a nice name for such an evil person) obviously hates humanity. Usually libs will try to masquerade their hatred of life as "concern", "compassion", "advocacy", or some other psudo-philanthropic whitewash. This guy comes right out with it. Maybe he figures that his eminent position as one of the counsel in Roe v. Wade exempts him from having to put a kind, concerned face on his social engineering.

[AliVeritas]

Exactly.

[Frank Sheed]

The day is not far off when our entire genetic makeup and health history in tandem with our geneaology is implanted into our upper arm on a microdisc. The chip is updated constantly by signals sent by low frequency waves using GPS positioning. We are terminated when we are nearing "critical mode" or our societal profitability profile falls below mean the monthly acceptable standard. Straight out of THX 1138.

[Smogger]

The crime rate is inversely relational to the unemployment rate. After all, when people have jobs, they can buy their own cars, milk, big screen tv's, drugs, and what have you, so there is little incentive to steal. People who are working have little time to commite crime.

[wmfights]

I couldn't agree more. Everything seems upside down.

However, the good news. The judiciary is being changed. The progress may be slow, but its happening. The idea of individual ownership of your retirement account (social security) is taking root. The recognition that life begins much earlier than previously thought is growing.