Archive for Alan Guttmacher

Planned Parenthood leaders saw abortion for eugenics reasons according to Justice Clarence Thomas

Posted in Eugenics, Guttmacher, Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood Eugenics Connections, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 29, 2019 by saynsumthn

 

Part Two of Two.

Abortion for eugenics reasons was advocated by Planned Parenthood leaders such as Alan F Guttmacher according to a multi-page summary written by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in the case Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. In part one, we detailed how Justice Thomas linked eugenics ideology to Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger. Here we will include additional statements from the Justice.

In his opinion, Thomas wrote a lengthy history of eugenics and touched upon one of Margaret Sanger’s notorious directors, Lothrop Stoddard. Thomas wrote, “[…E]ugenicist Lothrop Stoddard argued that the “prodigious birth-rate” of the nonwhite races was bringing the world to a racial tipping point…Stoddard feared that without “artificial barriers,” the races “will increasingly mingle, and the inevitable result will be the supplanting or absorption of the higher by the lower types….Eugenic arguments like these helped precipitate the Immigration Act of 1924, which significantly reduced immigration from outside of Western and Northern Europe….”

Read more about Stoddard’s views at Live Action News (here).

Thomas also implicated former PP president and eugenics VP, Alan F Guttmacher, writing, “Many eugenicists therefore supported legalizing abortion” adding how “abortion advocates—including future Planned Parenthood President Alan Guttmacher— endorsed the use of abortion for eugenic reasons…Even after World War II, future Planned Parenthood President Alan Guttmacher and other abortion advocates endorsed abortion for eugenic reasons and promoted it as a means of controlling the population and improving its quality…”

Image: Alan Guttmacher 1973

Alan Guttmacher 1973 (Image credit: WGBH)

Thomas went on to address PP leaders on eugenics, “One journal declared that “abortion is the one mode of population limitation which has demonstrated the speedy impact which it can make upon a national problem.” …Planned Parenthood’s leaders echoed these themes. When exulting over “‘fantastic . . . progress’” in expanding abortion, for example, Guttmacher stated that “‘the realization of the population problem has been responsible’ for the change in attitudes. ‘We’re now concerned more with the quality of population than the quantity.’”

Live Action News has documented how Guttmacher was instrumental in the decriminalization of abortion and then pushed PP into committing abortions.  The fact is that Guttmacher’s ideas of forced or compulsory population control measures were in lock-step with Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger. After all, they were both members of the very racist American Eugenics Society, with Guttmacher serving as the group’s vice-president. As Live Action News has documented in the past, Sanger made sure that Planned Parenthood was knee deep in eugenics.

Image: Planned Parenthood president Alan F Guttmacher VP of eugenics society

Planned Parenthood president Alan F Guttmacher VP of eugenics society

The Justice, a Black man himself, spoke about the suspicion that Blacks had about “family planning” and abortion becoming a tool of Black genocide, mirroring examples pointed out previously by Live Action News:

“Avoiding the word “eugenics” did not assuage everyone’s fears. Some black groups saw “‘family planning’ as a euphemism for race genocide” and believed that “black people [were] taking the brunt of the ‘planning’” under Planned Parenthood’s “ghetto approach” to distributing its services,” the Justice wrote.

Image: Article Blacks Charge Genocide from abortion

Blacks Charge Genocide from abortion

Thomas pointed out how eugenicsts were cited in the Roe v. Wade case, writing, “Similarly, legal scholar Glanville Williams wrote that he was open to the possibility of eugenic infanticide, at least in some situations, explaining that “an eugenic killing by a mother, exactly paralleled by the bitch that kills her misshapen puppies, cannot confidently be pronounced immoral.” …The Court cited Williams’ book for a different proposition in Roe v. Wade.”

Live Action President, Lila Rose pointed out that Live Action has seen first hand how the abortion industry targets vulnerable and minority demographics as evidence in the undercover call below:

 

“I applaud Clarence Thomas’ assertion that ‘Given the potential for abortion to become a tool of eugenic manipulation, the [c]ourt will soon need to confront the constitutionality of laws like Indiana’s…. Enshrining the constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex, or disability of an unborn child, as Planned Parenthood advocates, would constitutionalize the views of the 20th Century eugenics movement.’ Rose stated.

Although Thomas concurred with the Court’s decision to not rule on the discrimination portion of the case at this time, he recognized that this issue of eugenics must be addressed by the Court, writing, “Given the potential for abortion to become a tool of eugenic manipulation, the Court will soon need to confront the constitutionality of laws like Indiana’s…Although the Court declines to wade into these issues today, we cannot avoid them forever. Having created the constitutional right to an abortion, this Court is dutybound to address its scope.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: This is a longer – edited- version of one also published by Live Action News. 

Justice Clarence Thomas: Abortion is tool of modern-day eugenics

Posted in Black Genocide, Eugenics, Margaret Sanger, Margaret Sanger and AES, Margaret Sanger Legacy Society, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , , , , on May 29, 2019 by saynsumthn

 

Part One of Two.

In deciding the recent case Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc., United States Supreme Court Justice sent a warning to the Court, suggesting that states have a “compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics,” even going as far as to implicate Planned Parenthood’s founder and leaders. In the decision, the Court allowed one provision of an Indiana law requiring the humane burial of aborted children to stand, while denying another provision to bar abortions on the basis of sex, race or disability.

Justice Thomas penned a multi-page response to address the Court’s decision, which began (emphasis added):

I write separately to address the other aspect of Indiana law at issue here—the “Sex Selective and Disability Abortion Ban.”… Each of the immutable characteristics protected by this law can be known relatively early in a pregnancy, and the [Indiana] law prevents them from becoming the sole criterion for deciding whether the child will live or die. Put differently, this law and other laws like it promote a State’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.

He then pulled no punches, making it plain that Planned Parenthood — the defendant in the case — was founded in eugenics:

The use of abortion to achieve eugenic goals is not merely hypothetical. The foundations for legalizing abortion in America were laid during the early 20th-century birth control movement. That movement developed alongside the American eugenics movement. And significantly, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger recognized the eugenic potential of her cause.

Sanger was a known member of the American Eugenics Society. In addition to speaking at a Ku Klux Klan meeting by invitation, about which she wrote in her autobiography, the Planned Parenthood founder also advocated forced sterilization to rid the planet of those she deemed “unfit.” Despite this involvement, as Live Action News previously documented, Sanger’s namesake is listed on two current Planned Parenthood awards as well as Planned Parenthood facilities and Legacy Societies, with no condemnations from the abortion-friendly media.

Justice Thomas went into great detail, recording for posterity and for the public the truth about Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger. While we will not list all of the comments in detail here, some are more notable:

  • Sanger viewed birth control as a way to reduce the “ever increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”
  • Sanger argued that “Birth Control . . . is really the greatest and most truly eugenic method” of “human generation.”
  • In her view, birth control had been “accepted… as the most constructive and necessary of the means to racial health.”
  • Sanger accepted that eugenics was the best way toward a “solution of racial, political and social problems.”
  • Sanger believed that the imbalance between birth rates of the “fit” and “unfit” was “the greatest present menace to civilization.”
  • Sanger believed in “stopping not only the reproduction of the unfit but upon stopping all reproduction when there is not economic means of providing proper care for those who are born in health.”
  • In Sanger’s view, frequent reproduction among “the majority of wage workers” would lead to “the contributing of morons, feeble-minded, insane and various criminal types to the already tremendous social burden constituted by these unfit.”
  • [I]n 1939, Sanger initiated the “Negro Project,” an effort to promote birth control in poor, Southern Black communities.
  • In a report titled “Birth Control and the Negro,” Sanger and her coauthors identified Blacks as “the great problem of the South.”
  • She recruited Black clergy to reassure the Black community on the benefits of controlling their birth rates and to keep them from the idea that Sanger “want[ed] to exterminate the Negro population.”

Justice Thomas correctly points out that Sanger herself did not advocate abortion but regarded “the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year [as] a disgrace to civilization.” He made it clear that “[…]Sanger’s arguments about the eugenic value of birth control in securing ‘the elimination of the unfit’ apply with even greater force to abortion, making it significantly more effective as a tool of eugenics.”

“Whereas Sanger believed that birth control could prevent “unfit” people from reproducing, abortion can prevent them from being born in the first place,” he said, noting that abortion is a mere extension of Sanger’s eugenic mindset.

For further reading, Live Action News has detailed Planned Parenthood’s eugenic history in articles below:

“This case highlights the fact that abortion is an act rife with the potential for eugenic manipulation,” Thomas wrote.

In part two – we will review the Justice’s view of PP’s former doctor and president, Alan F Guttmacher.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This is a longer – edited- version of one also published by Live Action News. 

History of legal abortion prior to Roe

Posted in Abortion death, Abortion Death Prior to Roe, Abortion History, Abortion Numbers, Abortion prior to Roe, Abortion stats, American Law Institute, Guttmacher, Home Use Abortion, Illegal abortion, State Abortion Stats, States prior to Roe with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 5, 2018 by saynsumthn

Legal abortion equals more abortion, and America’s history is proof of this

abortion

Prior to the 1973 Roe v. Wade court decision, each state had its own abortion laws. Many had laws on the books banning it completely, but others legalized it in some form well before 1973. Roe didn’t become Roe overnight. We can trace its roots back more than a decade prior. And as is usually the case with abortion, once an inch is given, so to speak, those in favor of it tend take a mile. Here’s where it began:

1959: American Law Institute passes model penal code to liberalize abortion, the basis for Roe v. Wade

In 1959, the American Law Institute (A.L.I.), an organization of American lawyers and other elite members of the judiciary, whose mission was the reform of American law, proposed that therapeutic abortions should be legal. Although the first draft of the Model Penal Code to liberalize abortion was released on May 21, 1959, the final version was issued in 1962.

Image: American Law Institute-ALI model penal code on abortion (Image: CDC)

American Law Institute-ALI model penal code on abortion (Image: CDC)

The law proposed that “[a] licensed physician is justified in terminating a pregnancy if he believes there is a substantial risk:

(1) When continuation of pregnancy would gravely impair the physical and mental health of the mother; or

(2) When the child might be born with grave physical or mental defect; or

(3) When the pregnancy resulted from rape, incest, or other felonious intercourse.”

American Law Institute, Model Penal Code on Abortion (Image: Chicago Tribune, 1966)

The ALI’s Model Penal Code was the premise of the 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade. At that time a large percentage of states allowed abortion only when the woman’s life was endangered. By 1967, three states had liberalized it; according to Time.com, by 1968, four of five states—Colorado, North Carolina, Georgia and Maryland, had authorized it “if the child is likely to be born defective,” but “California did not sanction this ground because Governor Ronald Reagan threatened to veto any bill that included it.”

READ: Not just Nazis: The grisly history of research on abortion survivors

According to the Washington Post, “Through the mid-1960s, 44 states outlawed abortion in nearly all situations that did not threaten the life or health of the mother.”

In 1966, abortion was still illegal in all fifty states, according to Dr. and Mrs. John C. Willke. However, in 1966, Mississippi altered its existing law by adding rape as an indication for a hospital abortion, according to the CDC’s first abortion surveillance report in 1969. And, according to National Right To Life’s timeline, in 1954, Alabama permitted abortions for the mother’s physical health.

According to Dr. Willke, “The Bureau of Vital Statistics reported only 160 mothers had died from abortion in 1966 in the entire USA.”

1973: Abortion legalized nationwide by Supreme Court, with more than 600,000 abortions 

In 1969, the CDC estimates that there were 22,670 abortions. As more states began to legalize it, the numbers climbed dramatically. By 1970, the CDC reported 193,491, and the list went on:

1971: 485,816
1972: 586,760
1973: 615,831

After the U.S. Supreme Court decided to legalize abortion nationwide by a 7 to 2 decision in Roe v. Wade, the CDC Abortion Surveillance report from 1973 indicates that a total of 615,831 legal procedures were reported from 50 states and the District of Columbia and New York City.

Image: Abortions reported to CDC prior to 1973

Abortions reported to CDC prior to 1973

 

Alan F. Guttmacher, MD, who served as Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s president from 1962–1974, responded to the ruling by stating, “I think that to raise the dignity of woman and give her freedom of choice in this area is an extraordinary event. I think that Jan 22, 1973, will be a historic day.”

According to the CDC, in ten states, abortions outnumbered live births among teens 15 years and younger.

By race, the numbers broke down as follows:

  • 67.7% were white
  • 25.7% were Black or other races
  • 6.6% reported race was unknown

At the time the initial report was filed, the CDC reported that 51 deaths related to legal, illegal, and spontaneous abortions had been reported in 1973, and 71 in 1972. However, those reports were eventually updated.

READ: These Black leaders in history viewed abortion as Black genocide

In this table from the CDC report (shown below), 39 women died from illegal abortion in 1972, and 19 in 1973 while 24 died from legal abortion in 1972 and 25 died in 1973.

CDC Abortion deaths 1972 to 1990

Live Action News has previously documented how the abortion lobby falsely claimed that hundreds of thousands of women died annually from illegal terminations, in a deliberate effort to push abortion on the nation. Standing in stark contrast to this is the breakdown of the estimated numbers going back to 1930. Clearly, the claims that hundreds of thousands of women were dying was a complete falsehood — and Dr. Bernard Nathanson, founder of NARAL, later admitted as much:

Image: Illegal Abortion Deaths according to various sources, 1930 to 1979 – updated (Graph credit: Live Action News)

Illegal Abortion Deaths according to various sources, 1930 to 1979 – updated (Graph credit: Live Action News)

Roe v. Wade was filed by Norma McCorvey, known as ‘Roe,’ and was argued by Sarah Weddington. McCorvey would later admit that the claim that she had become pregnant through rape was fabricated. In fact, McCorvey’s child was never aborted. Her baby was born while the case was still being argued and she ultimately placed her child for adoption.

McCorvey became a staunch pro-life advocate and later expressed sorrow for her participation in the infamous court decision, working to overturn the case up until her passing in February of 2017 at the age of 69.

Click here for more details on state legalization prior to Roe.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Media narrative on feminism is pro-abortion and disregards pro-life opposition

Posted in Betty Friedan, Feminism, Lader, National Organization for (Some) Women, National Organization for Women, NOW, Planned Parenthood abortion plank, Subverted with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 26, 2018 by saynsumthn

Sorry, pro-abortion media: Pro-life feminism isn’t going away

feminism

On the heels of the #MeToo and #TimesUP movements came International Women’s Day, a date set to celebrate the accomplishments of women and look upon ways to improve their lives. However, the media predictably seems to have chosen to seek out the voices of abortion supporters with regard to feminism, again largely neglecting the thoughts of pro-life feminists.

Yahoo! asked simply, “What is feminism in 2018?” but failed to publish the remarks of a “conservative [female] campus leader” alongside the remarks of other feminists; Yahoo! reserved her thoughts for a completely separate article, essentially segregating her comments from the overall discussion of feminism.

And while USA Today quoted some conservative and pro-life women in a piece they published, asking, “Can you be a Conservative feminist?” the publication failed to point out that pro-life feminism used to be the standard. Early feminist leaders like Susan B. Anthony referred to abortion as “child murder” and viewed it as a means of exploiting both women and children. They demonstrated that true feminism was pro-motherhood, pro-woman, and pro-child.

The fact that conservative feminism was questioned to begin with reveals a deeper problem.

 

Some mainstream media articles on International Women’s Day included interviews with the head of an abortion rights organization, but failed to give equal time to pro-life leaders. The author of the Yahoo! article, for instance, managed to include the thoughts and statements of NARAL abortion lobby group president Ilyse Hogue but failed to publish remarks from female leaders of national pro-life organizations. Perhaps this was a simple error… or perhaps it wasn’t; after all, pro-life women do not fit into the modern day feminist image or the pro-abortion media narrative on feminism.

But Yahoo News cannot be totally faulted for this way of thinking, since history teaches us that the association of abortion and feminism was by design. National Organization for Women (NOW) founder Betty Friedan, the “mother of the women’s movement” in the 1960s, was herself complicit in silencing pro-life women and allowing them to be systematically pushed out of NOW for one single reason: they opposed abortion. Despite this, NOW was inaccurately dubbed the largest “women’s organization” in the nation, even though the group philosophically discriminated against pro-life members, and a major pro-life women’s group far outnumbered them. While many pro-life feminists in the 1960s and 70s were in agreement with fighting inequality and abuse of women on all fronts, they spoke against NOW’s insertion of abortion into their plank in the late 1960s.

The idea of inserting abortion into NOW’s plank came not from Friedan, but from two men: Larry Lader and Bernard Nathanson. These men were obsessed with decriminalizing abortion as was Planned Parenthood’s then-president, Alan Guttmacher, a former vice president of the American Eugenics Society. Lader, who had known Friedan for many years, authored a biography of Planned Parenthood’s eugenicist founder, Margaret Sanger, and called himself “her disciple.”

Image: Larry Lader and Bernard Nathanson. Nathanson became pro-life.

Larry Lader and Bernard Nathanson — two men behind the original abortion industry in the U.S.

Once these men were successful in convincing Friedan to make abortion a part of NOW’s plank, the group, along with the mostly male-dominated media at that time, deliberately chose to link feminism directly with one issue: abortion. They redefined being a “feminist” and made it so that such a term became synonymous with asserting a woman’s dominance over her preborn child instead of with fighting inequality or fighting abuse, for example. This caused a deep rift between pro-life and pro-abortion feminists — a rift that remains to this day.

Today, we see the effects of this way of thinking, as many women remain silent in the face of real abuses against other women, as in the case of Harvey Weinstein, in which notable female Hollywood actresses failed to speak out to warn vulnerable women in the industry. This was never the intention of true feminism. True feminism spoke up for women as well as those weaker than themselves: their children.

Many of the same Hollywood actors and media outlets that were silent on the Weinstein scandal are equally silent on the fact that Planned Parenthood covers up child sexual abuse, often returning underaged victims of rape and sexual assault into the arms of sexual abusers. This has been documented again and again, but thanks to modern day feminism’s allegiance to abortion, Planned Parenthood remains government-funded, protected, and unaccountable while child victims are left to fend for themselves.

When the media discusses feminism, any perceived threat to “reproductive rights” (another term for “abortion rights”) is always front and center, again making it seem as if all women and all feminists find this to the be the most pressing issue for women, and synonymous with feminism, which is untrue.

A large number of women in the U.S. oppose abortion, at least on some level, and many oppose it altogether. Many women who have experienced abortion come to regret it deeply. Not all women think alike on the issue of abortion.  Unfortunately, because of pro-life feminists’ view that the preborn child in the womb is deserving of equal protection as a human person, their voices are dismissed.

Yahoo! quotes NARAL’s president as stating, “To me, it just seems like a basic, fundamental understanding — it’s cliché at this point: Feminism is the radical notion that women are equal. Period. Full stop.”

Of course women are equal to men. The problem is that pro-abortion feminists don’t believe women are equal to men without abortion. And if this idea about feminism is so “basic,” then why the bias against pro-life feminists? Aren’t they also of the mindset that women are equal to men?

It’s time to end the deliberate sabotaging and outright silencing of pro-life female voices (and importantly, pro-life women of color) in the arena of public debate. It is time for the media to stop pandering to the radical abortion lobby and open the door to female voices from a wider range of thought.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Did Planned Parenthood appoint Black leaders to quell suspicion of Black genocide?

Posted in Black Genocide, Blacks oppose Birth Control, Planned Parenthood CEO, Planned Parenthood Employee, Planned Parenthood uses blacks, Planned Parenthood using blacks with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on February 28, 2018 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood, Black genocide

Despite the fact that Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger promoted eugenics, it was actually under another eugenicist leader, Alan F. Guttmacher, that Planned Parenthood began referring for and eventually committing abortions. At the exact same time that abortion was being pushed publicly, the organization elected a Black chairman to roll out this agenda. All of this transpired in the late 1960s, a time when America was in conflict over the struggle for the civil rights of Black Americans.

During this time frame, many of the organization’s leaders were concerned about overpopulation. The organization’s history is steeped in eugenics, and this ideology manifested itself in many ways, including the forced sterilization of many Black citizens. As laws about these eugenics courts began to be challenged, a new tool of eugenics was making its way across the land: abortion.

Even though many within Planned Parenthood’s organization and other population control groups thought coercion would be needed to stem the growth of people groups they deemed “unfit,” Guttmacher, by now a Planned Parenthood president, was able to convince his friends that abortion, at first in perhaps a voluntary way, would be a better solution. However, there was a slight problem, because Black citizens and other minority groups were already suspicious of birth control efforts aimed at them. How would they feel about abortion?

Image: article Blacks Charge Black Genocide from Planned Parenthood

The solution for Planned Parenthood was to bring Black leaders to the organization’s board, in an effort to convince Black Americans that Planned Parenthood’s efforts were not genocidal. This strategy was not a new one; Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger — who gave a talk for the Ku Klux Klan — had already implemented the so-called “Negro Project” to accomplish the exact same thing. Memos between Planned Parenthood staffers and leadership indicated a great concern over how the Black community viewed their efforts. In response, Planned Parenthood’s public relations machine also reached out to Black publications, as they had already done with push for birth control.

Image: Guttmacher article on Birth Control

Alan Guttmacher Birth Control Article (Image: Ebony Mag April 1962)

In 1967,  the Pittsburgh Branch of the NAACP had criticized the swarming of Planned Parenthood facilities into minority neighborhoods. Other leaders like H. Rap Brown and Fannie Lou Hamer had called abortion “Black genocide.” And, as late as 1973, a study published by the American Journal of Public Health,”Fears of Genocide Among Black Americans as Related to Age, Sex, and Region,” found that Black men and women had a level of unease about “family planning.” Researchers Castellano Turner, Ph.D., and William A. Darity, Ph.D., concluded that Blacks were more suspicious when “family planning” was under the control of Whites. “It is noteworthy that the greatest degree of agreement is found where the issue of black control of family planning (as against white control) is at issue,” they said.

Graph: Black Genocide Fears

Study on how Blacks feared family planning – Fears of Genocide Among Black Americans 1973 study Castellano Turner, Ph.D. and William A. Darity, Ph.D.

After dialoguing internally about the unease of the Black community, the suggestion was made to add Black members to Planned Parenthood’s board; this took place at the same time that Planned Parenthood was calling for the decriminalization of abortion. According to a New York Times article from November 14, 1968, the first time that Planned Parenthood went on record calling for abortion, they also elected their very first Black board chairman to roll out the new agenda — Dr. Jerome H. Holland, who, according to media reports, “pledged his support for the group’s program saying that those who call birth control a form of genocide are ‘not aware of the real meaning of family planning and its uses.’”

Image: Jerome Holland of PPFA

Planned Parenthood names first Black Chairman to push abortion – First Black Chairman of Board elected by Planned Parenthood 1968

Holland was no stranger to Planned Parenthood. He had been on the general board of directors for some time, serving on the executive committee of Planned Parenthood-World Population by 1963. He served as vice-chairman in 1967, where he presented Planned Parenthood’s infamous Margaret Sanger award to John D. Rockefeller III, also a population control advocate.

Holland was also added as chairman of the Board of Guttmacher’s newly formed Center for Family Planning, which would later be named the Guttmacher Institute and become a “special affiliate” to Planned Parenthood.

But Holland’s post as chairman of the board of Planned Parenthood was short lived.

In 1970, Holland was named ambassador to Sweden by President Richard Nixon; however, the headlines of the first Black chairman of Planned Parenthood had seemingly done their job. Holland was openly endorsing abortion as a “health matter” between the woman and her doctor.

Image: PPFA article

Black chairman Jerome Holland lauds Planned Parenthood eugenics

The same year Planned Parenthood elected its first Black chairman of the board, Frederick Osborn, a founding Eugenics Society officer connected to Planned Parenthood, wrote, “Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under a name other than eugenics.” Osborn signed Margaret Sanger’s “Citizens Committee for Planned Parenthood,” published in her review in April of 1938. Some speculate that Planned Parenthood’s infamous slogan “Every Child a Wanted Child” may have originated with Osborn.

A few years later, a new Black leader would emerge to reinforce the push for abortion within Planned Parenthood: Faye Wattleton.

After 62 years as an organization, why did Planned Parenthood wait until 1978 to elect the very first Black female as president? Like Holland,  Wattleton was not a novice where abortion was concerned. She had been with Planned Parenthood for a while, serving as a volunteer in the early 1970s and eventually serving as director of the Dayton affiliate.

Article about Faye Wattleton elected to PPFA

Faye Wattleton elected first Black Planned Parenthood president

At a press conference held in February of 1978, then president-elect of Planned Parenthood Wattleton told the media that she was “putting the world on notice” that the organization was going to be much more aggressive on abortion rights. “What has happened is that we have allowed them [right-to-lifers] to have center stage,” Wattelton said, “I’d like to say those days are over.”

Wattleton then vowed to restore — “to the poor” — access of abortion under Medicaid.

Wattleton was asked if her leadership of Planned Parenthood as a Black woman would alleviate suspicions within the Black community linking abortion and her organization to Black genocide. Wattleton responded, “I don’t think a lot of people are yelling genocide anymore, because I’m Black. I’m in a watchdog position on these issues and no one should assume I’ve been co-opted. What better way is there to guard against those types of abuses?”

Wattleton then said that the Black community should be more concerned about quality of life than “increasing our numbers.”

Image: Faye Wattleton

Faye Wattleton first Black president Planned Parenthood

Wattleton served as president of the abortion corporation for 14 years, where, among other radical abortion advances, she helped to legalize the sale of the RU-486 abortion pill in the United States. Under Wattleton’s leadership, Planned Parenthood’s budget grew from $90 million in 1978 to $384 million in 1990. For her service and dedication to the eugenics-minded organization, in 1992, Wattleton received Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger Award. Despite Sanger’s known eugenics and Klan connections, Wattleton once referred to her as “[t]he great heroine of our time,” telling Hubbard News in 1979 that Sanger would be proud of Planned Parenthood’s progress.

But the idea that Blacks would no longer be targeted for eugenics because a Black woman was at the helm of a eugenics organization was short-lived. During Wattleton’s tenure at Planned Parenthood, she stated that supporters of Planned Parenthood contributed to the abortion giant to “keep the Black population down.” On CNN, in a debate with Bob Dornan, an outspoken pro-life member of the US House of Representatives, at that time, Wattleton, admitted, “As a matter of fact… we have received contributions from people who want to support us because they want all welfare mothers and all Black women to stop having children.”

And also clipped in the documentary film, Maafa21, below:

Wattleton went on to help form the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, she has been described by some in the media as “a pioneer, a crusader, a media star and a rebel of sorts.”

Today, many within the Black community still see abortion as a tool of eugenics, and the abortion statistics show that it has become a leading cause of death of Blacks in the nation. Margaret Sanger’s vision of limiting births among certain races may not have begun with abortion, but it appears to have led to abortion.

Tragically, today, as a result of Guttmacher continuing Sanger’s eugenics agenda by introducing abortion to Planned Parenthood, over 800 preborn children of all races die there every day from abortion.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Planned Parentrhood’s “Blueprint” to force taxpayers to pay for birth control began under Guttmacher

Posted in Birth Control and Eugenics, Black Genocide, Black leaders on abortion, Black Neighborhood, Bush, Bush Family, Fred Jaffe, Guttmacher, Jaffe Memo, Margaret Sanger Award, Planned Parenthood Blueprint, Planned Parenthood Free BC, Planned Parenthood Free Birth Control, Planned Parenthood History, Planned Parenthood President, Planned Parenthood Tax Dollars, Saves Taxpayers, Tax Payer Funding of Abortion, Title X with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 3, 2017 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood has always been about making sure fewer poor people actually become parents — and here’s proof

In 1966, Planned Parenthood‘s medical director, Alan Guttmacher (a former VP for the American Eugenics Society and founder of the Guttmacher Institute), proposed a blueprint to force taxpayers to pay for birth control access for the poor. Elected to Planned Parenthood’s national board in 1962, Guttmacher believed (as did many eugenicists) that the poor needed access to birth control.

But while publicly, the messaging was one of empowering others to make “choices,” the real motivation was population control. Guttmacher once told the New York Times, “The main goal of our program is not just to limit population, but to give everyone the same opportunity for quality medical care.” Note that Guttmacher acknowledged population control as one of the goals, but clothed it in the same type of messaging used by modern-day Planned Parenthood: the language of access to “health care” or “medical care.”

Image: Guttmacher plan to force taxpayers to fund birth control (Image: NYT Birth Control Group Offers Plan For Free Services to Millions 02/10/1966)

Guttmacher plan to force taxpayers to fund birth control (Image: NYT Birth Control Group Offers Plan For Free Services to Millions 02/10/1966)

Planned Parenthood’s ultimate goal was to convince the public that taxpayer-funded “family planning” — directed at preventing births among the poor — would save the taxpayer money. And, just like today, the nation’s largest abortion provider accomplished this goal with the help of politicians on both sides of the aisle.

In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson lent his support to taxpayer funded “family planning” efforts, stating in a speech that for every five dollars spent on population control, more than a hundred would be invested in economic growth. The scheme to promote the use of taxpayer dollars as a way to “reduce costs” was detailed in the film Maafa21:

The “plan” — described by a 1966 NYT article as a “partnership of public and private agencies” — was to make birth control services “freely available to every American by 1970” in an effort to prevent about 250,000 pregnancies every year. It was presented at Planned Parenthood’s New York headquarters by the organization’s then-president, George N. Lindsay, who called it the “best bargain in health services that money could buy.”

Planned Parenthood president George N Lindsay (image credit: NYT)

“We have the technological know-how — pills and intrauterine devices,” Lindsay is quoted as saying. “We have the support of Government. President Johnson has called for increased birth control services in the past two State of the Union messages. And now we have devised a methodology for solving a huge problem in five years.”

That same year, President Johnson accepted Planned Parenthood’s highest award (the Margaret Sanger Award) for his policies pushing family planning for foreign countries. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Sanger’s work in the eugenics movement has been highly criticized by many modern African-American leaders. Sanger, who gave at least one speech to the Ku Klux Klan and stacked Planned Parenthood’s boards with eugenicists, advocated the sterilization of the so-called “unfit.”

Today, despite her involvement in the eugenics movement, Planned Parenthood labels Sanger a heroine and has positioned her name in a place of honor on at least one of its centers.

Margaret Sanger’s name on Planned Parenthood building

By 1969, the so-called “Planned Parenthood blueprint” to force taxpayers to fund birth control was underway, as recounted by the New York Times:

Whatever the merits of the argument, the ghetto approach is now the federation’s chief thrust, and it is also the policy of the Federal Government, which since 1966 has undergone a dramatic reversal,  moving from almost no action on birth control to a proposed expenditure in 1969 of $31 million. Last month the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) recommended the adoption of Planned Parenthood’s “blueprint” for supplying free birth control device to some five million American women below the poverty line.

Image: Guttmacher plan to force taxpayers to fund birth control (Image: NYT 02/02/1969)

Guttmacher plan to force taxpayers to fund birth control (Image: NYT 02/02/1969)

The “plan” was highly criticized by the Black community, which saw the move as a means of racist Black genocide.  “Among other things, this policy has brought the Planned Parenthood Federation under attack from black militants who see ‘family planning’ as a euphemism for race genocide,” the NYT reported.

To prove the genocidal fear had merit among minority groups, the paper published statistics that supported “the suspicion that Black people are taking the brunt of the ‘planning.’” Black birth rates fell in several cities:

  • Lincoln Parish, LA: 32% (1966-67)
  • Washington, DC : 24% (three years)
  • Baltimore, MD: 36% (since 1965)

A 1966 internal memo from Alan Guttmacher and Fred Jaffe outlined a new “community relations program” for winning over the Black community by “form[ing] a liaison between Planned Parenthood and minority organizations.” The plan, according to Planned Parenthood, was to emphasize that “all people have the opportunity to make their own choices,” rather than, as the memo states, exhortation telling them how many children they should have.”

Guttmacher said at the time that the plan was “long overdue” but stressed, “we do not need to panic. In fact, if we panic and continue to publicize the ‘problem’, we may well exacerbate it.”

Also in 1966, Planned Parenthood gave its Margaret Sanger Award to Martin Luther King, Jr. Whatever Planned Parenthood was trying to accomplish, it worked. By 1969, then Congressman George H.W. Bush (R-Texas) chaired the Republican Task Force on Population and Earth Resources, created in part to ascertain the resistance to family planning among “certain groups.” He determined that “[s]o far, it looks like opposition from religious groups and the Black militants isn’t too serious.”

Planned Parenthood’s “blueprint” called for an expenditure of about one percent of the nation’s health budget, with an anticipated $78 million from taxpayers in 1970. It also called for an expansion of hospitals’ family planning services as well as programs financed by the federal anti-poverty program. By 1970, the United States House of Representatives voted 298 to 32 to approve the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act, Title X of the Public Health Service Act, authorizing federal dollars to pay for family planning services for low-income women. This legislation would become known as the Title X statute, which today allocates millions of federal tax dollars to Planned Parenthood and other family planning organizations.

In 1971, Congress allocated $6,000,000 for the Title X program. The following year, funding was increased to ten times as much: $61,815,000. Title X funding peaked in 2010 with a high of $317,491,000 and dropped to $286,479,000 for fiscal year 2017. President Trump’s FY2018 budget request includes $286.5 million for Title X, the same as the FY2017 enacted level.

TitleX Funding History CBO

Although Federal law prohibits the use of Title X funds in programs where abortion is a method of family planning, recipients of the dollars can be abortion providers. The reason for this is that Title X requirements allow recipients of these federal dollars to discuss abortion with patients under the term “options counseling,” telling providers that they must offer pregnant women the opportunity to receive information and counseling on each of the following options:

  • prenatal care and delivery
  • infant care, foster care, or adoption
  • pregnancy termination

In other words, Planned Parenthood can use the same rooms within the same facilities to commit abortions as they do to perform “options counseling,” during which they can refer for abortions as well as provide tax-funded family planning services under Title X.

Live Action investigations have already documented the abysmal way that Planned Parenthood handles inquiries from pregnant women seeking prenatal care at their facilities. With few exceptions, abortion is the only option Planned Parenthood offers pregnant women:

Research conducted by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) reveals that Planned Parenthood affiliates participating in Title X spent $64.35 million in taxpayer dollars in 2012.

Despite deceptive marketing from politicians who claim that defunding the abortion corporation would hurt women, studies show that women do not need Planned Parenthood to get contraception care. Despite Planned Parenthood’s desperate attempt to reinvent itself as a health care provider, it is the number one provider of abortions in the United States, claiming 35 percent of the abortion market share nationwide. The organization has millions of dollars in excess revenue each year (despite its being classified as a nonprofit organization), and has recently boasted of the private donations flooding into its coffers.

In addition, actual health care services at Planned Parenthood are dwindling while abortions are increasing. In addition, Planned Parenthood is not a trusted recipient of tax dollars, with its history of fraud and abuse and its failure to report suspected child abuse (which Live Action News reported about here and here) — a reason that alone should result in the organization losing taxpayer dollars under Title X.

Planned Parenthood’s free birth control scheme has resulted in millions upon millions in taxpayer funding each year. Instead of those dollars doing good for women, they are aiding an abortion corporation which ends the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent preborn babies every year. That is not a blueprint that anyone should follow.

Live Action News has written additional articles on this topic that include the history of Title X (Parts onetwothree, and four) as well as George HW Bush’s relationship to TitleX and Planned Parenthood.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Former Planned Parenthood president: forced birth control would be ‘desirable’

Posted in American Eugenics Society, Eugenics, forced abortion, Forced Population Control, Forced Sterilization, Guttmacher, Margaret Sanger, Margaret Sanger License to Breed, Margaret Sanger on Segregation and sterilization, Planned Parenthood History, Planned Parenthood President, Population Control with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 3, 2017 by saynsumthn

A former Planned Parenthood president and vice president of the American Eugenics Society once advocated that if families did not limit births to just two children, then compulsory methods of population control could be necessary.  The idea, proposed by Dr. Alan F. Guttmacher, a well-known eugenicist and one-time president of Planned Parenthood who established the Guttmacher Institute, came on the heels of radical proposals by Planned Parenthood board members and others that immediate compulsory means should be used to curtail population growth.

In 1970, Guttmacher addressed a group concerned about the so-called “population explosion.” Lee McCall, a reporter for the Sarasota Herald Tribune, attended the conference and noted that Guttmacher, as president of Planned Parenthood World Population “for the past eight years,” was invited to speak under the sponsorship of Planned Parenthood of Sarasota County, Inc.

McCall spoke with Guttmacher about “discussions” that had been floating around to limit children within families to “2 or 3.”

McCall wrote:

There has been discussion of limiting families to 2.2 children.

Dr. Guttmacher feels it inadvisable for Planned Parenthood to boldly vocalize such a plan.

‘It would be difficult,’ he said, ‘In the first place it would probably split the organization. Also we would have trouble with minority groups accepting this.’

Despite his apparent hesitancy towards coercion, McCall goes on to quote Guttmacher as admitting that such a “plan” of compulsory population control would be “desirable.”

“So even though the plan may be desirable and would make us a stronger nation, a less polluted nation, I feel it would be strategically unwise at this time,” the former Planned Parenthood president told the reporter.

Keep in mind, this is the very organization which allegedly claims it was founded on freedom of choice. And Guttmacher was attempting to dispel the theory that abortion and birth control were racist efforts of genocide aimed to limit the birth rate of the Black community.

Racism seen as denting Birth Control 1966

This admission was profound and came shortly after the New York Times attempted to paint Guttmacher as a wanting “volunteer” birth control measures only.

In its 1969 article entitled, “Dr. Guttmacher is the Evangelist of Birth Control,” the New York Times was forced to acknowledge that many leaders sitting on Planned Parenthood’s board were in favor of coercive measures of population control. While painting the picture of an agency which was pushing birth control on the “ghetto” rather than the “middle-class” who were having more than the optimal amount of children, the paper noted that a “sizable” number of Planned Parenthood’s board was made up of “preponderantly white and well-to-do” people. They then quoted a Planned Parenthood board member who admitted the racist attitude of the organization, when he stated:

What it all comes down to is that we want the poor to stop breeding while we retain our freedom to have large families. It’s strictly a class point of view.

However, despite the majority of Planned Parenthood’s board holding a “class” point of view regarding who should be “encouraged” to use contraception, if Guttmacher was for “voluntary measures” of population control, compulsory measures were never ruled out.  Because, as the Planned Parenthood president saw it, if “voluntary measures” did not work, then force would be necessary.

This point of view can clearly be seen in a 1969 article from Medical World News Reports, in which Guttmacher floated the possibility that coercion could be used. His shocking statement was published by the Sarasota Herald Tribune where it quoted Guttmacher as suggesting that, “Each country will have to decide its own form of coercion, and determine when and how it should be employed.”

Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

The following year (1970) Guttmacher told an audience at New Mexico State University that, “[…] if by 1990, the population is still growing at a rate of 2% then we must go to some kind of compulsory birth control.” (emphasis added).

Earlier in 1966, Guttmacher compared the world population with the threat of nuclear war and told the Washington Post that governments may have to act officially to limit families saying, “It may be taken out of the voluntary category.”

In his 1959 book, “Babies by Choice or By Chance”, Guttmacher described the atomic bomb as “more merciless to our generation” and “more kinder to future generations” than “the explosion of the population bomb.” He bemoaned the fact that death rates were lowering, while birth rates were on the rise, writing, “Therefore if we want to decelerate the rate of population growth, it must be done by conception control.”

Babies by Choice or By Chance, by Alan F Guttmacher

This idea of temporary volunteerism was also noted by author Angela Franks, who wrote in her book, “Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Legacy: The Control of Female Fertility”, that, “in the late 1960’s, Guttmacher put a limit on volunteerism: if we don’t see a population decline by 1980, he said, ‘we’ll have to get tough.’”

The fact is that Guttmacher’s ideas of forced or compulsory population control measures were in lock-step with Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger. After all, they were both members of the very racist American Eugenics Society, with Guttmacher serving as the group’s vice-president. As Live Action News has documented in the past, Sanger made sure that Planned Parenthood was knee deep in eugenics.

But, rarely reported by contemporary media is the fact that Sanger once suggested that parents should be required to have a “license” to even be allowed to have children at all.

License to Breed Margaret Sanger

In her “A License for Mothers to Have Babies” with the subtitle, “A code to stop the overproduction of children.” Sanger outlined her plan article by article, which read in part (emphasis mine):

A marriage license shall in itself give husband and wife only the right to a common household and not the right to parenthood.

Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for parenthood.

Article 5. Permits for parenthood shall be issued upon application by city, county, or State authorities to married couples , providing the parents are financially able to support the expected child, have the qualifications needed for proper rearing of the child, have no transmissible diseases, and on the woman’s part, no medical indication that maternity is likely to result in death or permanent injury to health.

Article 6No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.

While Sanger’s plan may have been viewed as extreme in her day, and the idea of coercion may have been chided as evoking a potential backlash against Planned Parenthood, my colleague, Kelli wisely observed that the “two-child idea” advocated by Guttmacher was just as eugenic. In a recent Live Action News report, Kelli noted that the, “[…] view of ‘two children and no more’ has its roots in the eugenics movement, and at the heart of the eugenics movement lies Planned Parenthood. Margaret Sanger and her friends advocated population control for the ‘unfit’, while today’s eugenicists tend to couch their beliefs about family size in terms of environmental concerns.

Despite that fact that Guttmacher and Sanger were both (as eugenicists) concerned that the world population was a threat, it was under Guttmacher’s leadership that Planned Parenthood first vocalized abortion as part of the answer to “over-population.”

He noted this approval in the 1970 interview where he stated:

If we could get the abortion law liberalized, most of the 750,000 unwanted pregnancies would not lead to babies – rejected children, battered baby syndrome and illegal abortions.

And, in that same year, Guttmacher admitted to a 1970 Cornell Symposium, (according to an April 7, 1970 article published by the Cedar Rapids Gazette), that although he did not know when life began, he believed that “unlimited abortion” was the only way to reduce population growth saying:

There is no question that the most effective way of reducing population growth is by unlimited abortion.

Today, Alan Guttmacher is painted by some as a hero of “reproductive rights” despite his promotion of coerced population control and abortion.  And, Guttmacher was correct about one thing, and that is that abortion has been an effective tool in the limitation of births. This was recently acknowledged by pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who said, “I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

It is no surprise that Guttmacher’s namesake institution, the Guttmacher Institute would later be referred to as a “research arm” and a “special affiliate” of Planned Parenthood.  After all, on their website, his Institute describes Guttmacher by saying, “No one was better able to unite the Planned Parenthood organization or summon it to carry out its historic mission.”

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.