STATE of OREGON WILL ADMIT STERILIZATION PAST

The Oregonian ^ | 11.15.02 | Julie Sullivan

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

What I mean is, I would love to see links or actual publications that show this collaboration. Going to look around myself for a while since I have the time.

[f.Christian]

bbbbzzzzzzt!

[BikerNYC]

Interesting concept. A noteworthy fact is that humans are the only species on the planet that no longer conform to survival of the fittest.

I don't know about that. If I knew that my tribe would care for my offspring and, even though they might not be the best representatives of my genes, my offspring would be allowed to further perpetuate my genes, I might fight a little harder for my tribe instead of for a tribe that acted so as to end my genetic line.

Human emotions might respond on such a level that makes a society less robust if it has a program of eugenics like this.

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

Excerpt from website: Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, figured prominently in the American eugenics movement. In Birth Control Review, which Sanger founded in 1917, she published such articles as "Birth Control and Positive Eugenics" in 1925 and "Birth Control: The True Eugenics" in 1928.

According to Robert G. Marshall and Chuck Donovan in their book Blessed are the Barren, Sanger is clearly shown to have been a proponent of the Nazi-like eugenics movement, which sought to improve the human race through selective breeding. This application of Social Darwinism justified the twisted idea of evolutionary superiority to promote sterilization and population control.

Sanger spoke of sterilizing those she designated as "unfit," a plan she said would be the "salvation of American civilization." Sanger also spoke of those who were "irresponsible and reckless," among whom she included those "whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers." Sanger decried the fact that "anyone, no matter how ignorant, how diseased mentally or physically, how lacking in all knowledge of children, seemed to consider he or she had the right to become a parent."

Not only was Sanger an advocate of eugenics, so were many of her colleagues. For example, at a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the "black" and "yellow" peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Sanger's American Birth Control League, which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood. Perhaps supporters of Planned Parenthood would be less enthusiastic if they knew of the beliefs of its founder, Margaret Sanger and her colleagues.

(emphasis mine) From: Fact Sheet-Social Darwinism

[WaterDragon]

I'll try. I found it all on Google. There was even a letter Sanger wrote about getting rid of blacks. She was a filthy person.

[WaterDragon]

Oops....you found the material. There's lots on google.

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

Thanks for the info. :)

Yeah, I found this one Google. Found this website, too. Not only does it look excellent (haven't looked at it all), it mentions FR several times (must have been set up by a Freeper :). Population Control and Eugenics: the Dark Underworld of Modernity

Must put this one quote from the beginning of the website here:

Last month United Nations Population Fund officials announced they would distribute enough “reproductive health kits” to supply 350,000 Kosovar refugees for six months. Kits include condoms, birth control pills, IUD’s, and manual vacuum aspirators (for abortions). Joseph Meaney, of Vita Umana Internazionale, visited refugee camps in northern Albania for several days this month and heard many complaints that UNFPA contraceptive supplies have bumped much needed medical supplies and even food from supply convoys. “Dr. Gezim Bashka, head of maternity services in the Kukes hospital told the Italian press agency ANSA that she was short of antibiotics, sheets, and serum, and that other materials had arrived instead. ‘I don’t want to seem ungrateful,’ she said, ‘but. . . . much superfluous material has arrived. Today a shipment of birth control. Explain to them that we need other things.’” (Excerpts from Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute’s “Friday Fax” for 5/28, describing a recent Population Research Institute investigation of Kosovar refugee camps, reported in National Review's "For the Record Online" June 02, 1999)

[WaterDragon]

There needs to be a specific term for the one-idea liberals -- the ones who care only about aborting every woman in the world. I really don't get it. A friend of mine whose parents were both Communists is ultra liberal but only cares that abortion is freely available. That is her total political interest.

She had an abortion while in her early twenties. She's now fifty, she and her husband have two kids. She told me she has nightmares about the baby she aborted, wishes she hadn't. But this still hasn't changed her views about abortion. I really do not understand this mindset.

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

How about Monolib? :) Maybe not.

I don't understand it either. I think people may grab on to one topic and obssess about it because they don't have enough confidence in their abilities to take up other causes. They find a little success in the first area of politics they splash into and they find they want more applause from whatever group they've chosen.

Personally, I enjoy reading about a lot of topics. I'm finding that many things tie together if you look deep enough (as shown by this thread).

[WaterDragon]

The insecurity you mention might be the key. I've noticed that the abortLibs become almost hysterical at the idea of any restrictions whatsoever on abortion. For example, I showed my friend reports about a number of clinics that were incompetent, almost criminally so, putting women's lives at risk. She simply didn't want to believe that was possible! One thing I am glad about, though. She does support banning so-called partial-birth abortion. She recognizes it as outright murder.

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

That's awesome! I was talking with a friend of mine a couple of years ago and she mentioned that she voted for Gore because "he'd done so much for the environment". I said I voted for Bush because he was against PBA, whereas Gore is for it. She just shuffled her feet and said nothing. I asked her if she knew what PBA was and how they do it (on the off chance that she didn't know anything about it). She was a nursing student, so I wasn't surprised when she said she did. I'm just surprised that it didn't make her rethink her choice. She and I haven't discussed politics since, though we're still friends.

I'm glad to hear that some Liberals have a couple of neurons still intact. Hopefully she'll change her opinion on abortion altogether someday.

[WaterDragon]

Me, too. The key seems to be that some of them allow themselves to think about what is really happening. Others just don't. I don't think the pretending is all that helpful to them, though.

[Salvation]

I worked at a middle school today and read this in the local fish wrapper, The Statesman Journal. I was totally stunned.

Made me wonder why the Archbishop [Vlazny] has not spoken out on this.

Shudders! Just thinking about treating humans in this way.

[Siobhan]

It is the same behavior and mindset as the Nazis.

[WaterDragon]

It really is. The Democrats throw around accusations that conservatives are like the Nazis, but the Democratic special interest groups have their actual roots in the same genocidal movement that birthed Hitler!