Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 14th, 2015 #1
procopius
Senior Member
 
procopius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,611
Default Margeret Sanger: Heroine of the Progressive Left

Margaret Sanger: The Morality of Birth Control

delivered 18 November 1921, Park Theatre, NY

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/spee...rthcontrol.htm

This was at a time when educated women and progressives were pushing for birth control and abortion for moral reasons, as they always do, but were more honest about their true agenda: population control.

I bring this up only because many people believe the peasant propaganda of "women's rights." And all the arguments come down to this: Are you against "women's rights" or for them. Meaning if you are against "women's rights" you are a bad person. But like everything with "women's rights" there is an ulterior agenda.


Quote:
The meeting tonight is a postponement of one which was to have taken place at the Town Hall last Sunday evening. It was to be a culmination of a three day conference, two of which were held at the Hotel Plaza, in discussing the Birth Control subject in its various and manifold aspects.

The one issue upon which there seems to be most uncertainty and disagreement exists in the moral side of the subject of Birth Control. It seemed only natural for us to call together scientists, educators, members of the medical profession and the theologians of all denominations to ask their opinion upon this uncertain and important phase of the controversy. Letters were sent to the most eminent men and women in the world. We asked in this letter, the following questions:

1. Is over-population a menace to the peace of the world?

2. Would the legal dissemination of scientific Birth Control information through the medium of clinics by the medical profession be the most logical method of checking the problem of over-population?

3. Would knowledge of Birth Control change the moral attitude of men and women toward the marriage bond or lower the moral standards of the youth of the country?

4. Do you believe that knowledge which enables parents to limit the families will make for human happiness, and raise the moral, social and intellectual standards of population?

We sent such a letter not only to those who, we thought, might agree with us, but we sent it also to our known opponents. Most of these people answered. Every one who answered did so with sincerity and courtesy, with the exception of one group whose reply to this important question as demonstrated at the Town Hall last Sunday evening was a disgrace to liberty-loving people, and to all traditions we hold dear in the United States. Even back then they talked bullshit like this. I believed that the discussion of the moral issue was one which did not solely belong to theologians and to scientists, but belonged to the people. And because I believed that the people of this country may and can discuss this subject with dignity and with intelligence I desired to bring them together, and to discuss it in the open.

When one speaks of moral, one refers to human conduct. Here she sets you with an argument of morals, by defining morals for you. This implies action of many kinds, which in turn depends upon the mind and the brain. So that in speaking of morals one must remember that there is a direct connection between morality and brain development. Conduct is said to be action in pursuit of ends, and if this is so, then we must hold the irresponsibility and recklessness in our action is immoral, while responsibility and forethought put into action for the benefit of the individual and the race becomes in the highest sense the finest kind of morality.

We know that every advance that woman has made in the last half century has been made with opposition, all of which has been based upon the grounds of immorality. Feminism has been the bane of the USA for a long time. When women fought for higher education, it was said that this would cause her to become immoral and she would lose her place in the sanctity of the home. When women asked for the franchise it was said that this would lower her standard of morals, that it was not fit that she should meet with and mix with the members of the opposite sex, but we notice that there was no objection to her meeting with the same members of the opposite sex when she went to church. Notice that all the criticisms about "women's rights" became true. Now we have proud slut walks.

The church has ever opposed the progress of woman on the ground that her freedom would lead to immorality. We ask the church to have more confidence in women. We ask the opponents of this movement to reverse the methods of the church, which aims to keep women moral by keeping them in fear and in ignorance, and to inculcate into them a higher and truer morality based upon knowledge. And ours is the morality of knowledge. If we cannot trust woman with the knowledge of her own body, then I claim that two thousand years of Christian teaching has proved to be a failure. And of course "the church" was right. Also notice she is openly admitting she is no Christian in 1924.

We stand on the principle that Birth Control should be available to every adult man and woman. We believe that every adult man and woman should be taught the responsibility and the right use of knowledge. We claim that woman should have the right over her own body and to say if she shall or if she shall not be a mother, as she sees fit. We further claim that the first right of a child is to be desired. While the second right is that it should be conceived in love, and the third, that it should have a heritage of sound health. Women having the right over their own body, was the right that killed marriage.

Upon these principles the Birth Control movement in America stands. When it comes to discussing the methods of Birth Control, that is far more difficult. There are laws in this country which forbid the imparting of practical information to the mothers of the land. We claim that every mother in this country, either sick or well, has the right to the best, the safest, the most scientific information. This information should be disseminated directly to the mothers through clinics by members of the medical profession, registered nurses and registered midwives.

Our first step is to have the backing of the medical profession so that our laws may be changed, so that motherhood may be the function of dignity and choice, rather than one of ignorance and chance. Conscious control of offspring is now becoming the ideal and the custom in all civilized countries. Those who oppose it claim that however desirable it may be on economic or social grounds, it may be abused and the morals of the youth of the country may be lowered. Such people should be reminded that there are two points to be considered. First, that such control is the inevitable advance in civilization. Every civilization involves an increasing forethought for others, even for those yet unborn. The reckless abandonment of the impulse of the moment and the careless regard for the consequences, is not morality. The selfish gratification of temporary desire at the expense of suffering to lives that will come may seem very beautiful to some, but it is not our conception of civilization, or is it our concept of morality.

In the second place, it is not only inevitable, but it is right to control the size of the family for by this control and adjustment we can raise the level and the standards of the human race. While Nature’s way of reducing her numbers is controlled by disease, famine and war, primitive man has achieved the same results by infanticide, exposure of infants, the abandonment of children, and by abortion. But such ways of controlling population is no longer possible for us. We have attained high standards of life, and along the lines of science must we conduct such control. We must begin farther back and control the beginnings of life. We must control conception. This is a better method, it is a more civilized method, for it involves not only greater forethought for others, but finally a higher sanction for the value of life itself.

Society is divided into three groups. Those intelligent and wealthy members of the upper classes who have obtained knowledge of Birth Control and exercise it in regulating the size of their families. They have already benefited by this knowledge, and are today considered the most respectable and moral members of the community. They have only children when they desire, and all society points to them as types that should perpetuate their kind. Having less children is more moral.

The second group is equally intelligent and responsible. They desire to control the size of their families, but are unable to obtain knowledge or to put such available knowledge into practice.

The third are those irresponsible and reckless ones having little regard for the consequence of their acts, or whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent entirely upon the normal and fit members of society for their support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped. For if they are not able to support and care for themselves, they should certainly not be allowed to bring offspring into this world for others to look after. We do not believe that filling the earth with misery, poverty and disease is moral. And it is our desire and intention to carry on our crusade until the perpetuation of such conditions has ceased.

We desire to stop at its source the disease, poverty and feeble-mindedness and insanity which exist today, for these lower the standards of civilization and make for race deterioration. We know that the masses of people are growing wiser and are using their own minds to decide their individual conduct. The more people of this kind we have, the less immorality shall exist. For the more responsible people grow, the higher do they and shall they attain real morality.

Like all leftists, they try to convince you of an immoral agenda by claiming it's more moral. Or if you are Christian, that it's the more Christian thing to do. And they always speak down at their opponents with a sense of moral superiority.
Now compare what she said above to this...

Quote:
A Plan for Peace*

Margaret Sanger

First, put into action President Wilson's fourteen points, upon which terms Germany and Austria surrendered to the Allies in 1918. Second, have Congress set up a special department for the study of population problems and appoint a Parliament of Population, the directors representing the various branches of science: this body to direct and control the population through birth rates and immigration, and to direct its distribution over the country according to national needs consistent with taste, fitness and interest of individuals.

The main objects of the Population Congress would be:

a. to raise the level and increase the general intelligence of population.

b. to increase the population slowly by keeping the birth rate at its present level of fifteen per thousand, decreasing the death rate below its present mark of 11 per thousand.

c. to keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.

d. to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

e. to insure the country against future burdens of maintenance for numerous offspring as may be born of feebleminded parents, by pensioning all persons with transmissible disease who voluntarily consent to sterilization.

f. to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.

g. to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.

The first step would thus be to control the intake and output of morons, mental defectives, epileptics.

The second step would be to take an inventory of the secondary group such as illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, dope-fiends; classify them in special departments under government medical protection, and segregate them on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strenghtening and development of moral conduct.

Having corralled this enormous part of our population and placed it on a basis of health instead of punishment, it is safe to say that fifteen or twenty millions of our population would then be organized into soldiers of defense---defending the unborn against their own disabilities.

The third step would be to give special attention to the mothers' health, to see that women who are suffering from tuberculosis, heart or kidney disease, toxic goitre, gonorrhea, or any disease where the condition of pregnancy disturbs their health are placed under public health nurses to instruct them in practical, scientific methods of contraception in order to safeguard their lives---thus reducing maternal mortality.

The above steps may seem to place emphasis on a health program instead of on tariffs, moratoriums and debts, but I believe that national health is the first essential factor in any program for universal peace.

With the future citizen safeguarded from hereditary taints, with five million mental and moral degenerates segregated, with ten million women and ten million children receiving adequate care, we could then turn our attention to the basic needs for international peace.

There would then be a definite effort to make population increase slowly and at a specified rate, in order to accommodate and adjust increasing numbers to the best social and economic system.

In the meantime we should organize and join an International League of Low Birth Rate Nations to secure and maintain World Peace. Getting Europe to die off by low birth rates has always been an agenda of progressives.

__________

*Summary of address before the New History Society, January 17th, New York City
Notice there was very little about "women's rights to their bodies" in that last speech. And a lot of what she said, sounds like what only "Nazis" were accused of later. But politicians like Hillary Clinton have no problem receiving the Margaret Sanger award.

Also you might read into this too far, and think she would be a natural ally of the Germans in WW2 with all her talk of racial fitness and stamina. But you would be wrong....

https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/...Doc=240246.xml

Quote:
The first thing I want to say in relation to my attitude regarding the present War and World Peace is that before Hitler came into power in Germany I was one of the few Americans who joined the Anti-Nazi Committee and gave money, my name and any influence I had with writers and others, to combat Hitler's rise to power in Germany.

↑My attitude was open & above board as↓ my name was on the stationery and periodicals and leaflets which were distributed ↑by this Comm↓ over Germany, Scandinavia, England, and Italy and the United States.

By every means available this Committee tried to arouse the interest of England's Prime Minister and Press, to combat the advance of Nazism. They refused to print the warnings or to listen to the facts given until the Jewish bankers in Europe began to realize that Nazism was a twin sister to Communism as far as private property was concerned.

When Hitler got into the saddle and burned all books he considered (not immoral) but dangerous to the State, my three books were destroyed and have not been allowed to circulate in Germany. The publisher and translator were put into concentration camps and I have never heard of them since.

As soon as Hitler began his tirade against the Democracies, the Anti-Nazi Committee went underground and added to its program--"Anti-War and Anti-Nazi." This valiant little band of workers have endangered their lives again and again by daring to give out facts to the Press outside of Germany, but are constantly adding to their numbers in secret. Almost daily members of the original group must escape into other countries in order to avoid death and torture. It will be because of the work of this group any revolution in Germany must come. While I do not, and cannot, communicate directly with this underground group of valiant workers I hear in various ways and thru methods their activities, and continue to send contributions to help their work.

In the very earliest days of Hitler's power it was the women and men in the liberal and advanced thinking movements of which many were my friends whose work was destroyed, homes confiscated, they themselves either escaped, were put into concentration camps or met death. Women doctors at one time in the highest positions of medical science are today unknown and no one can account for what has happened to them. Germany has put the clock back ↑100 years↓ for the women of Germany and perhaps to a certain extent for the women of Europe.

These brief facts I set forth to say at the outset that what I say later is not based on my sympathy or approval of Nazi Germany.

Anyone who has watched the results of the last War, the World War, and the Peace of Versailles, must realize that war is not the best or even ↑most↓ strategic method of attaining the best results for our civilization. Year by year since 1918 there kept arising a conflict of national interests based upon entirely different ideals--(England and France viz. Germany, Italy, and Russia) interests that unless firmly defined and promptly dealt with by England and France were bound to result in another war--doubtless a World War. But Neville Chamberlain who was the spokesman for the Democracies and into whose hands we of the Western world trusted our Fate and future played, flirted, caressed and catered to the whims of Italy, and Germany, which they in turn (like the experienced prostitute cajoling an old, rich, fat, client) kept asking for more and more and still more until the turning point in September 1938 when Mr. Chamberlain surrendered the Peace of Europe and condemned the Democracies to War or oblivion. From the time that Chamberlain visited Hitler it was not possible to arrest the advance of Nazism by peaceful or diplomatic means because he is not the man to cope with Nazism or Fascism as he was caught in the net of their weaving "Anti-Communism."

England has noble traditions but by no means can we trust the future of our civilization to her diplomats. She has broken pledges which she must explain--Versailles 1916, Manchuria 1931. The pledges of her diplomats and statesmen like Balfour to Palestine, Simon and Manchuria--Hoare as well as Leval for France and their promises to Italy for her part in the war in 1915.

Then the promises of Great Britain to India, as well as the war debts to United States of America, I have not mentioned and I try to forget Great Britain's policy of non-intervention in Spain while she allowed Hitler and Mussolini to crush Republic Spain, the only country on earth today who has stood up with every man, woman and child to the brutal advance of Nazi and Fascist Europe.

The above is but a brief outline of the high spots no intelligent thinking person can forget. Perhaps were I in close touch with those who can explain the policy of Great Britain regarding these historical events I might be moved to say "Amen," but for the present I can only say I do not believe that the statesmen of England or France are any more righteous, noble honest, truthful or wise than the same gamesters in Germany, Italy or Russia. They are all playing a game with Nations as their pawns. I refuse to be pro-British, or pro-France, as I refuse to be pro-German or pro-Russian, or pro-anything, but a thinking, reasoning, human being whose nation is the World, and whose religion is Humanity.

We set apart and give power to a set of men called to represent a Nation. They are supposed to have greater ability and knowledge of international affairs than most of us, and it is to these men whom we trust to safeguard our liberties, independence and our National welfare. When these men or any set of men fail to live up to the trust imposed in them and ruthlessly plunge their own nation into war, regardless of warnings, then it seems to me such men or group of men should resign their positions over to others more representative of the peoples ideals.

I firmly believe that Europe will not have a just Peace until Germany gets rid of Hitler, but also shall Italy, England and France get rid of their own leaders whom History will certainly identify as War Lords.

Last edited by procopius; July 14th, 2015 at 03:01 PM.
 
Reply

Tags
abortion, atheism, birth control, sanger

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:02 AM.
Page generated in 0.11229 seconds.