Posted on 12/05/2011 6:40:08 AM PST by artichokegrower
It's not hard to guess where Margaret Sanger found her inspiration. Born in 1879, the mother of birth control was one of 11 children. "My mother died at 48," she wrote in "My Fight for Birth Control." "My father lived to be 80." The latter was a stonecutter, specializing in children's gravestones. The former was a devout Catholic who was pregnant 18 times during her 30-year marriage.
From these beginnings, Margaret Sanger became one of the most important reformers in American history - a woman who by the mid-1900s needed no introduction, certainly not to women desperate for information about how to limit their families. Thousands of them wrote her directly, needing to put nothing more on the envelope than "Margaret Sanger, New York."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
"While she decries it, Baker notes that Sanger's support of eugenics was in accordance with the day's leading scientists."
Yeah the day's leading scientists who went on to do their horrific work in Nazi Germany.
“pregnant 18 times during her 30-year marriage”
It’s not a clown car.
and
My brother and his “wife” have had 5 children. They range in age from 3 to 16. Of the oldest 4 not ONE wants children when they grow up. I found that kind of wierd.
Margaret Sanger did the work of Satan
What an ironic name she had, given the proliferation of abortion.
Sanger’s mother had 18 kids. I wonder which ones she would have wished to abort.
Her mother died young so Sanger decided it was from having too many kids and went off to save others from the terrible fate of Childbirth./s/
Unable to recognize Evil, progressives embrace it.
she was an evil, racist woman...
“Unable to recognize Evil, progressives embrace it.”
And they ALL tell us her most vile statements were “taken out of context”.
What a horrible revered woman.
FU MS, and all your moron worshippers.
Do I really need sarcasm tags?
I’m a bit too busy to scan the entire SF article. However, given the source, I shall assume that none of Ms Sanger’s racism was revealed in the article. If I’m not mistaken, she pushed birth control as a means of controlling the “inferior” races, did she not?
And of course, liberals, in their quest to keep their lies alive, lie by omission each and every day.
Title should read: Margaret Sanger A Life of Passion and a Passion for Death!
The highest award a Dem can receive is the Margaret Sanger award.
Pray for America
spare us from the chronicles of a witch
Kind of like global warming. Bad things can happen when you detach your work in science from morality.
When the issue of compulsory sterilization was brought up at the Nuremberg trials after the war, many Nazis defended their actions on the matter by indicating that it was the United States itself from whom they had taken inspiration.
I showed it to a young lady in my office who is of course pro abort and asked her what she thought. She was speechless and unwilling to confront her world-view. What is the difference between Sanger and Hitler I asked?
Sanger is worshiped in our schools, that says something.
God will not be mocked, his retribution is coming.
schu
She outlived my grandfather by around 13 years.
Women did die in childbirth "back in the day." In fact, though it is less common, they still do. Women, men, and children died from a great many things that are less common causes of death, at least in the US, today: tuberculosis, pneumonia, heart defects (many now easily corrected with surgery), diabetes, appendicitis, gangrene, typhoid, cholera, dehydration, influenza, being kicked in the head by a horse, malaria, falling out of a tree, all manner of industrial and farm accidents, infections following severe burns, snakebite, and on and on and on....
War Against the Weak - Review
How American corporate philanthropies launched a national campaign of ethnic cleansing in the United States, helped found and fund the Nazi eugenics of Hitler and Mengele — and then created the modern movement of “human genetics.”
In the first three decades of the 20th Century, American corporate philanthropy combined with prestigious academic fraud to create the pseudoscience eugenics that institutionalized race politics as national policy. The goal: create a superior, white, Nordic race and obliterate the viability of everyone else.
By identifying so-called “defective” family trees and subjecting them to legislated segregation and sterilization programs. The victims: poor people, brown-haired white people, African Americans, immigrants, Indians, Eastern European Jews, the infirm and really anyone classified outside the superior genetic lines drawn up by American raceologists. The main culprits were the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune, in league with America’s most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as Harvard, Yale and Princeton, operating out of a complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island. The eugenic network worked in tandem with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the State Department and numerous state governmental bodies and legislatures throughout the country, and even the U.S. Supreme Court. They were all bent on breeding a eugenically superior race, just as agronomists would breed better strains of corn. The plan was to wipe away the reproductive capability of the weak and inferior.
Ultimately, 60,000 Americans were corrosively sterilized — legally and extra-legally. Many never discovered the truth until decades later. Those who actively supported eugenics include America’s most progressive figures: Woodrow Wilson, Margaret Sanger and Oliver Wendell Holmes.
American eugenic crusades proliferated into a worldwide campaign, and in the 1920s came to the attention of Adolf Hitler. Under the Nazis, American eugenic principles were applied without restraint, careening out of control into the Reich’s infamous genocide. During the pre-War years, American eugenicists openly supported Germany’s program. The Rockefeller Foundation financed the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute and the work of its central racial scientists. Once WWII began, Nazi eugenics turned from mass sterilization and euthanasia to genocidal murder. One of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute doctors in the program financed by the Rockefeller Foundation was Josef Mengele who continued his research in Auschwitz, making daily eugenic reports on twins. After the world recoiled from Nazi atrocities, the American eugenics movement — its institutions and leading scientists — renamed and regrouped under the banner of an enlightened science called human genetics.
http://waragainsttheweak.com/
credit for links, to poster ‘bronxville’ who’s thread below has much more: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2665957/posts
Nazi inspiration came, not merely, from America but ‘specifically’ from Sanger’s writings! However, you can sell any lie, in the San Francisco Bay Area, if it has the imprimatur of progressivism.
bump!
Like Sanger, the Democrats (the politicians AND their voting supporters) have used the slaughter of alive unborn human beings as an empowerment scheme for decades. Their derrangement is coming full circle, to now give awards and send Christmas Cards in praise of their demonic empowerment.
The sob story in the article is that Sanger was there when Sadie Sachs died from a botched abortion. Of course it was a tragedy - but like a typical liberal, Sanger had the problem correct, but the solution completely wrong.
The focus of reform should have been support for the women who were pregnant - not encouraging a death sentence for their preborn children. The churches of the day (and today as well) were perfectly capable of addressing this type of scenario with expanded charitable missions. Look at Father Baker in Buffalo, New York as an example of the successful handling of these issues. The corporal works of mercy are required by Christians -
These issues can be addressed without abortion and keeping the government out of it!
As far as birth control, it encourages abortion because it leads to promiscuity - and for married couples, natural ways of spacing children are available and could easily be promoted.
I finally watched the movie, “Children of Men” a couple of nights ago which poses thesis of what would happen if all of humanity was sterilized by an air-borne disease. I would say that is quite implausible but I’m more concerned about the reality of people simply not choosing to have children. If you look at the global fertility rate it has been dropping since the beginning of the 20th century. It seems as wealth increases the desire for children decreases.
Margaret Sanger: 'Mother' of Planned Parenthood, pro-abortionist and American Eugenics
She was a racist, a eugenicist, an anti-cleric and a left wing radical [IWW]. You don’t need a book to describe Margaret Sanger. Only took about fourteen words and an abbreviation.
She wasn’t real fond of Italians and Eastern Europeans, including Jews, either.
I’m “uncomfortable” with how we talk about “reproductive rights” and “women’s health”, and “abortion rights” interchangeably.
So if you oppose abortion on demand, you are then said to oppose “women’s health”. The left has re-defined abortion rights as part of “women’s health” and is framing the debate in those terms.
I suppose they left out the time Sanger spoke at a Klan rally.
Can’t be “hot” with a baby pushing your belly out, so kill the baby. If your sense of self-worth is based on how “hot” you look, you’re going to have a tough life.
On the other hand, her frequency of pregnancy hints that maybe she wasn't breastfeeding. YMMV, but lactation (especially nighttime breastfeeding) significantly increases the spacing of pregnancies to about 30 months.
Interestingly, Margaret Sanger's father was an atheist and a leftist. If he were concerned about his wife's frequent pregnancies and miscarriages, maybe he could have moderated his behavior just a tad to give her a little recuperation time? Just askin'...
On the other hand, her frequency of pregnancy hints that maybe she wasn't breastfeeding. YMMV, but lactation (especially nighttime breastfeeding) significantly increases the spacing of pregnancies to about 30 months.
Interestingly, Margaret Sanger's father was an atheist and a leftist. If he were concerned about his wife's frequent pregnancies and miscarriages, maybe he could have moderated his behavior just a tad to give her a little recuperation time? Just askin'...
All she really wanted to do was to get rid of those pesky Negroes. And other ‘undesirables.’ For the collective good of all, of course.
sanger bump
Everyone that has the means and emotional stability should raise as many children as they can afford to raise.
I too saw that movie and I don’t see this as a black and white issue....you either have 18 kids or you are an abortion loving monster?
I think that the Lord gave us minds to think with and we can do better than that.
And the Lord gave us hearts to feel with. Whether 3,000 years ago or today the same pattern repeats itself. Wealth seems to cause people’s hearts to harden against children. Combine that with Socialism dumbing down and infantilizing Western society and you have a bunch of people who can only think of themselves and only of today.
Here’s an excerpt on a Jewish teaching on wealth vs. children.
The tribes of Reuven and Gad also showed a flawed orientation toward their children in valuing their possessions first, as seen in their request to Moshe: “We will build here sheepfolds for our livestock, and cities for our children” (Bamidbar, 32:16). Rashi notes, on the basis of Tanchuma 7, that “They were more concerned about their possessions than about their sons and daughters, since they spoke first about their livestock and then about their children.” Moshe corrected them by placing priorities in the proper order, telling them to first “build for yourselves cities for your children” and afterwards “enclosures for your sheep” (there, verse 24).
Read more here.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Message.aspx/4685
When Americans decide to place children above their wealth and possessions we’ll see a positive fertility rate once again.
I don’t believe that everyone should be creating a child every year they are married and fertile unless they can afford to house, clothe and feed those children.
My brother has 5 kids. His family has been on food stamps and government medical coupons for 16 years. That’s right, you are paying to raise his children as HE sees fit.
People need a license to get married. Why not have a license to have children?
Given some “parents” in this world, I’ve considered the idea. I don’t support it as it would add yet more power to the government over our lives.
So how did humanity make it this far without family licenses?
How are we going to make it in the future if the poorest, least educated among us sqirt out a dozen or so kids (on the taxpayers dime of course) and raise them(on the tax payers dime of course)
See, I am very much a pro-life Christian, but I draw the line at socialism. Don’t you?
Get rid of all entitlement programs. Once that happens people will take the appropriate action on how deal with it.
“Get rid of all entitlement programs.”
Oh very much agreed.
“Once that happens people will take the appropriate action on how deal with it.”
I agree. The very poor, chronically addicted and uneducated will be forced to only have the children they can support. Kind of like the rest of us. We do what we can afford to do and we cringe at the thought of someone else picking up the tab for a decision that we made.
Self reliance is a wonderful thing, reliance upon the Lord is even better, but relying on government to take from a person that “has” and give it to someone that doesn’t just because of poor decision making is not conservative and it darned sure is not American.
It should be people helping people not government helping people.
I completely agree.
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.