Archive for birth control in water

Nixon, George H.W. Bush helped Planned Parenthood push U.S. ‘family planning’ programs

Posted in Bernard Berelson, birth control, Birth Control and Eugenics, Birth Control for Population Control, birth control in water, Black Adoption, Black Babies, Black Birth Rates, Black Genocide, Bush, Bush Family, Forced Population Control, Fred Jaffe, Guttmacher, Guttmacher Staffer, Jesse Jackson, Planned Parenthood abortion plank, Planned Parenthood and Black Leaders, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics, Planned Parenthood Blueprint, Planned Parenthood Board Member, Planned Parenthood Free Birth Control, Planned Parenthood History, Planned Parenthood in Black Neighborhoods, Planned Parenthood in minority community, Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger Award, Planned Parenthood opposed by Blacks, Planned Parenthood politicians, Planned Parenthood President, Planned Parenthood racist supporter, Planned Parenthood Republican Party, Planned Parenthood Republicans, Planned Parenthood uses blacks, Population Control, Population Council, Racism, Richard Nixon, Sterilizing agents in Drinking Water, Title X, Zero Population Growth with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 10, 2018 by saynsumthn
Image: George and Barbara Bush 1966

George and Barbara Bush 1966

As is often said, when it comes to unraveling the agendas behind most questionable objectives, follow the money — and, I might add, the motivation. In the 1960s and early 1970s as the government began to push for federal dollars to fund population control programs, this did not occur in a vacuum. In fact, as Live Action News has documented in this series on Title X, it was concocted by movers and shakers within eugenics-based organizations, most notably the Population Council and Planned Parenthood. The previous segment in this series documented how the Nixon Administration — which showed concern over the increase in the Black population at the time — ushered in huge increases in government dollars for so-called “family planning.” In this article, Live Action News will show how the creation of the Federal Title X Program targeting poor families was manipulated by people within the Planned Parenthood and Guttmacher organizations.

The move came at a pivotal moment on the eugenics timeline, because the Black community was quickly gaining traction in the realm of civil rights. Many outspoken Black leaders felt government funded birth control and abortion programs were designed to limit Black births. In a July 1969 speech given by Alan F. Guttmacher (a former Planned Parenthood president and VP of the American Eugenics Society who masterminded the push for legal abortion and is credited with opening the flood gates of abortion within Planned Parenthood), he acknowledged this suspicion, saying:

“In addition, we must take full cognizance of the fact that our work among some militant minority groups is considered genocidal. They charge that what we are doing is not really trying to give a better family life to the less privileged segments of the community but trying to retard the numerical growth of ethnic minorities.”

In that same speech, Guttmacher also acknowledged that funding for the Institute came from grants “from the Kellogg, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations as well as several other lesser foundations.” Some of these same organizations had been funding eugenics for years. A 1970 article published by the New York Times also acknowledged minorities’ fears:

Thus the government’s concentration on the procreative proclivities of the poor is often viewed with suspicion. For instance, “Muhammad Speaks,” the organ of the Black Muslim Movement, has charged that “black people are the target of birth control not because the ruling politicians like them and care about their economic equality, but because they hate them and can no longer use them plantations and other cheap labor conditions.

Just one year earlier, President Richard Nixon recommended that Congress create a Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, noting, “it is clear that the domestic family planning services supported by the Federal Government should be expanded and better integrated.”

Image: Nixon Signs Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (Image credit: Maafa21)

Nixon Signs Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (Image credit: Maafa21)

The commission was chaired by John D. Rockefeller III, a longtime advocate of population control. The Executive Director of the project was to be Dr. Charles F. Westoff, a member of both the American Eugenics Society and Planned Parenthood’s National Advisory Council.

Image: Nixon Commission on Population chaired by eugenics members

Nixon Commission on Population chaired by eugenics members

Nixon’s commission was applauded by former Planned Parenthood VP Fredrick Jaffe. In 1968, Jaffe founded the PPFA Center for Family Planning Program Development, which later became the Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s research arm. The organization is named after Alan F. Guttmacher (previously mentioned). At the time this memo was created, coercive population control measures were being considered — such as poisoning water supplies with birth control chemicals without consumers’ consent or knowledge. If there was resistance to voluntary methods, “involuntary control must be imposed.”  (Read Jaffe’s disturbing memo outlining this here).

Image: Eugenics leaders led the Nixon Commission on Population, (Image credit: Maafa21)

Eugenics leaders led the Nixon Commission on Population, (Image credit: Maafa21)

As previously documented, one of the chief co-sponsors of the Title X statute, which allocates millions of federal tax dollars to Planned Parenthood, was Rep. George H.W. Bush (R-Texas), who later became our nation’s 41st president. Additional information has surfaced indicating that the push for federal population control dollars by Congressman Bush was actually initiated by Planned Parenthood and its “special affiliate,” the Guttmacher Institute.

Image: George HW Bush elected to Congress 1966 with wife Barbara (Image credit: Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

George HW Bush elected to Congress 1966 with wife Barbara (Image credit: Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

This information comes from a Planned Parenthood insider by the name of Jeannie Isabelle Rosoff.

In the book, “A Tradition of Choice,” Planned Parenthood describes Rosoff as the lobbyist (alongside director Frederick S. Jaffe) of the “first Washington office of PPFA.” That office was called the Center for Family Planning Program Development, which later became the Guttmacher Institute.

Image: Jeannie Rosoff, director Planned Parenthood Washington Office

Jeannie Rosoff, director Planned Parenthood Washington Office

In an interview she conducted in 2001 with Rebecca Sharpless, published by Baylor University Institute for Oral History, Rosoff described the affiliate’s move to the nation’s capital:

Ostensibly, therefore, the reason for Planned Parenthood‘s opening an office in Washington was that federal grants were going to be made out of Washington and therefore one should be there to kind of seize the opportunity and guide the direction of this new national program… the whole imperative there is not to refinance Planned Parenthood services but to expand services nationwide… This is where AGI [ Alan Guttmacher Institute] began, really, because to do that, you would really have to go proselytize at the local level…So Fred Jaffe went to the Ford Foundation and got a large grant essentially for the Washington office to create a technical assistance program….

According to the Lancet, Rosoff served two decades “as President and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute” after being recruited by PPFA and hired by Frederick Jaffe. She had first-hand knowledge of the behind-the-scenes dealings regarding the passage of the Title X program. In her interview, Rosoff seems to indicate that the plan rested on her ability to choose the right person to sponsor the legislation.

One of the requisites for the chief Republican was that it had to be somebody who had a decent record on civil rights. We did not want any hint of coercion or excessive concern for saving welfare dollars. And Pierre du Pont of Delaware at that time was in Congress… And he pointed us toward George Bush. And George Bush was serving on the Ways and Means committee as a new congressman from Houston… [O]ne day, Alan Guttmacher was testifying. I could see that he was asking questions and seemed very supportive. So I went to see him and I said, ―You know, this is what we‘re thinking of, and would you be interested in it? And he said, ―Yeah. So he began to organize colleagues, do all the things that you do in terms of getting legislation, getting some cosponsors.

During this same time, coercive population control measures were being bantered around by people within the Planned Parenthood movement, as acknowledged in a 1969 article published by the New York Times.

Image: Planned Parenthood members consider coercive population control measures (Image credit: New York Times)

Planned Parenthood members consider coercive population control measures (Image credit: New York Times)

The paper noted 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. The paper quoted a Planned Parenthood board member who admitted the classist 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.”

Image: Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

Guttmacher suggested to the paper that they were not trying to take away anyone’s rights, but trying to “show ghetto families how to space their children and avoid having children they don’t want.” But he did not rule out coercion, as the paper noted.

“Admittedly Guttmacher is buying time,” writes the New York Times in that 1969 report. “He thinks the voluntary movement should set a deadline of 1980. If world population growth has not dropped below 1.5 percent by then, he says, ‘we’ll have to get tough.’” That same year, the Population Council’s president, Bernard Berelson, published an article suggesting that if voluntary methods of birth control were not successful, it may become necessary for the government to put a “fertility control agent” in the water supplies of “urban” neighborhoods.

By all indications, Congressman George H.W. Bush may have been targeted by Rosoff for another reason, namely that his grandfather, Prescott Bush, once sat on the board of Planned Parenthood.

Image: Prescott Bush sat on Board of Planned Parenthood

Prescott Bush sat on Board of Planned Parenthood

In a foreword to a book on population control, the former president wrote that his father’s (Prescott Bush) involvement with Planned Parenthood motivated his views:

My own first awareness of birth control as a public policy issue came with a jolt in 1950 when my father was running for the United States Senate. Drew Pearson, on the Sunday before Election Day, “revealed” that my father was involved with Planned Parenthood…

Image: Prescott Bush with his son, George Bush (Image Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

Prescott Bush with his son, George Bush (Image Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

And, like his father, George H. W. Bush became a vocal advocate for Planned Parenthood’s agenda while serving as a U. S. Congressman from Texas. He created the National Center for Population and Family Planning in the Department of Health Education and Welfare (HEW).

Congressman Bush seemed dismissive of critics of population control who viewed government programs as a means of Black genocide. He said, “We need to make population and family planning household words. We need to take sensationalism out of this topic so that it can no longer be used by militants who have no real knowledge of the voluntary nature of the program but rather are using it as a political steppingstone. If family planning is anything, it is a public health matter.”

Recruiting members of the Black community to help push the agenda was a priority for Planned Parenthood groups. As documented many times, founder Margaret Sanger showed Planned Parenthood how to masquerade the true eugenics agenda when she implemented her so-called “Negro Project.”

Sanger penned in a letter to eugenicist Clarence Gamble regarding her desire to use Black ministers in furthering her organization’s agenda, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” If it did, these ministers could “straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

planned parenthood

Excerpt: Margaret Sanger Letter to Clarence Gamble, Negro Project

Planned Parenthood understood that recruiting Black support for government funded population control programs was key, and Rosoff was just the person to make it happen. In the previously mentioned interview, the former Guttmacher staffer explains:

One thing which I thought was very important was to get the House black caucus absolutely on board on these issues, which nobody thought could be done because everybody—because of genocide issue brewing at the time….The entire black caucus signed on as cosponsors. So that meant that all Democrats didn’t have to worry about protecting their backs. And George Bush organized a lot of the Republicans.

For her efforts, in 1986, Planned Parenthood granted Rosoff their infamous Margaret Sanger Award.

As a result of Rosoff’s recruitment of Rep. Bush, in 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. The Senate had previously approved the legislation, with the help of Democrat Senator Joseph D. Tydings, a Planned Parenthood supporter who was granted PPFA’s infamous Margaret Sanger award that same year.

These moves did not silence Black leaders. The following year, on June 22, 1971, civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, then national director of SCLC Operation Breadbasket, told Nixon’s Population Commission:

Birth Control as a National policy will simply marshal sophisticated methods to remove (and control when not remove) the weak, the poor – quite likely the black and other minorities whose relative increase in population threatens the white caste in this nation. Contraceptives, will become a form of drug warfare against the helpless in this nation. Those who we could not get rid of in the rice paddies of Vietnam we now propose to exterminate, if necessary, eliminate if possible, in the OB wards and gynecology clinics of our urban hospitals. The direct extension of the old “man-in-the-house” rule against public aid recipients can be detected in the drive for birth control…

(Source: Statements at public hearings of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future as quoted in: Genocide? Birth Control and the Black American by Robert G. Weisbord, Greenwoor Press, 1972; P. 165)

planned parenthood, birth control, family planning

Rev. Jesse Jackson opposed abortion and birth control as Black Genocide

Famed comedian Dick Gregory wrote in Ebony Magazine, “There is ample evidence that government programs designed for poor black folks emphasize birth control and abortion availability, both measures obviously designed to limit black population,” adding:

For years they told us where to sit, where to eat, and where to live. Now they want to dictate our bedroom habits. First the white man tells me to sit in the back of the bus. Now it looks like he wants me to sleep under the bed. Back in the days of slavery, black folks couldn’t grow kids fast enough for white folks to harvest. Now that we’ve got a little taste of power, white folks want us to call a moratorium on having children.

Image: Dick Gregory Ebony Magazine Abortion is Genocide

Dick Gregory Ebony Magazine Abortion is Genocide

Naomi Gray, a former VP of Planned Parenthood World Population and a Black family planning consultant, told the U.S. population commission that many Blacks felt talk of zero population growth was genocide aimed at them. “To many blacks the zero sounds like zero Black children,” Gray said. “White interests in this question have ranged, in my experience, from a desire to have the charge refuted, all the way to finding out if blacks are really smart enough to figure out that whites would like to get rid of them in some polite way.”

Even though Gray herself was an advocate of these programs, she admitted, “It could then legitimately be said that some white interests are more concerned with causing certain black babies not to get born than they are with survival of those already born.”

According to research published by the Institute of Medicine, in 1972, Congress made additional funding for family planning services for low-income available through Medicaid.

In March of 1972, the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future,which Nixon had created three years earlier, began calling for the nationwide legalization of abortion.

planned parenthood

Nixon’s Commission on Population and the American Future (Image credit: Maafa21)

Today, proponents of programs like Title X claim they are helping the poor by providing them with contraceptives. As a result of these kinds of government funded population control programs, the birthrate of women of reproductive age within the U.S. has dropped to its lowest point in 30 years. Some might hail this a victory, but it is just more evidence that, as Sanger suggested in 1919 and the minority community warned in the 60s and 70s, “birth control” may have indeed cleared “the way for eugenics.”

Read the series here: Part OnePart TwoPart Three. Additional articles on Title X’s history include Planned Parenthood’s Blueprint and George HW Bush’s relationship to Title X and Planned Parenthood.

Editor’s Note, 11/8/18: Related links added.

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

BIRTH CONTROL AGENTS IN US DRINKING WATER? EPA Probes Herbicide Atrazine

Posted in Abortion, birth control, birth control in water, Black Genocide, compulsory birth control, Environment, EPA, Forced Sterilization, Maafa21, Pollution, Population Control, Sterilization, Sterilizing agents in Drinking Water, Sterilizing agents in water with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 9, 2009 by saynsumthn

U.S. EPA Probes Herbicide Atrazine for Human Health Threats

WASHINGTON, DC, October 8, 2009 (ENS) – The commonly used weed killer atrazine will undergo a new comprehensive evaluation to determine its effects – first on humans and later on amphibians and aquatic ecosystems, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Wednesday.

The most recent studies on atrazine and its potential association with birth defects, low birth weight, and premature births will be included in the year-long evaluation of the chemical’s effects on humans.

To evaluate atrazine’s potential cancer and non-cancer effects on humans, the EPA will engage the federal Scientific Advisory Panel established by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The panel, composed of biologists, statisticians and toxicologists, serves as the primary scientific peer review mechanism for EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. The panel will hold its first meeting on November 3.

Next September, at the end of this process, the EPA will decide whether to revise its current risk assessment of the pesticide and whether new restrictions are necessary to better protect public health.
20091008_atrazinebottle

Then, the EPA will ask the Scientific Advisory Panel to review atrazine’s potential effects on amphibians and aquatic ecosystems.

One of the most widely used agricultural herbicides in the United States, approximately 70 million pounds of active ingredient are applied across the country every year. First registered for use in December 1958, atrazine can be applied before and after planting to control broadleaf and grassy weeds.

It is used primarily on corn, sorghum, and sugarcane, and is applied most heavily in the Midwest. To a lesser extent, atrazine is used on residential lawns, particularly in Florida and the Southeast.

One of Administrator [Lisa] Jackson’s top priorities is to improve the way EPA manages and assesses the risk of chemicals, including pesticides, and as part of that effort, we are taking a hard look at the decision made by the previous administration on atrazine,” said Steve Owens, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

The Bush-era EPA decided to reregister atrazine for use in 2006. At that time, the EPA determined the chemical poses “no harm that would result to the general U.S. population, infants, children or other major identifiable subgroups of consumers.”

Yet, studies by Dr. Tyrone Hayes at the University of California show that atrazine is an endocrine disruptor that interferes with reproduction and “assaults male sexual development.” Dr. Hayes demonstrated that atrazine chemically castrates and feminizes male frogs at concentrations 30 times lower than levels allowed in water by the EPA.

Atrazine induces breast and prostate cancer, retards mammary development, and induces abortion in laboratory rodents,” says Dr. Hayes. “Studies in human populations and cell and tissue studies suggest that atrazine poses similar threats to humans.”

Atrazine may affect pregnant women by causing their babies to grow more slowly than normal, according to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances. Research has also raised concerns about atrazine’s potential as a multiplier that could increase toxic effects of other chemicals in the environment.

Owens said the EPA is now reconsidering its position on atrazine. “Our examination of atrazine will be based on transparency and sound science, including independent scientific peer review, and will help determine whether a change in EPA’s regulatory position on this pesticide is appropriate,” he said.

The EPA announced its new evaluation of atrazine less than six weeks after the Natural Resources Defense Council released a report that found the chemical in watersheds and drinking water throughout much of the United States.

We don’t need gender-bending chemicals in our water,” said NRDC attorney Mae Wu. “While atrazine’s makers like to talk about the pesticide’s long-running history, we have learned a lot since it was introduced a half century ago.”

Studies point to significant concerns about this chemical’s impact on wildlife, babies, and developing children,” said Wu, “reinforcing the fact that this chemical has no place in our drinking water. Today’s action should be the first in a series of necessary steps to fix this problem and clean up our water.”

We definitely think the science is there to get atrazine off the market, and there aren’t really economic benefits that outweigh that consideration,” said Wu, who points to studies that show not using atrazine may have, at most, a one percent impact on crop yields.

The NRDC report showed that atrazine was found in all of the watersheds monitored by EPA and 90 percent of the drinking water sampled in the monitored areas.
USGS scientists conducted a study of atrazine and other herbicides in Midwestern agricultural fields.

Contamination was most severe in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, and Nebraska. A previous study by the U.S. Geological Survey found that 75 percent of stream water and about 40 percent of all groundwater samples from agricultural areas contained atrazine.

The NRDC report suggests that the EPA has been ignoring atrazine contamination, that the monitoring of the herbicide is misleading and its regulation insufficient.

The monitoring programs were not designed to find the biggest problems, the screening levels are too permissive, and the monitoring ignores more than 1,000 vulnerable watersheds.

One of the chief findings of the NRDC report was that the way atrazine is now regulated allows levels in drinking water to peak at high concentrations but still fall within an allowable “average.”

Atrazine has been denied regulatory approval by the European Union and is banned in Europe, even in Switzerland, the home of primary manufacturer, Sygenta.

Syngenta defends the safety of its product, saying, “As a popular herbicide in more than 60 countries around the world, atrazine has been carefully studied for years. In 2008, none of the 122 community water systems monitored in 10 states where atrazine is used most exceeded the federal standards set for atrazine in drinking water or raw water.”

Atrazine can be occasionally detected in water at extraordinarily low concentrations (parts per billion), but these low levels pose no threat to human health. A person could drink thousands of gallons of water containing 3 parts per billion atrazine every day for a lifetime, and still not be affected by atrazine,” said Tim Pastoor, Ph.D., principal scientist for Syngenta.

But the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity complains, “Although required by court order in 2003 to further assess atrazine, the EPA entered into a private deal whereby the atrazine manufacturer Syngenta was allowed to conduct contaminant monitoring, assessing just three percent of the watersheds identified as “at risk” of atrazine contamination.”

A new class action lawsuit representing water districts throughout Illinois cites recent research showing that atrazine in drinking water is unsafe at any level, even at concentrations below EPA guidelines.

Attorney Stephen Tillery, who represents the class action plaintiffs, said “The U.S. EPA conducted more than 40 private meetings with the leading manufacturer of atrazine to devise a testing protocol that manipulatively distorts atrazine levels in water.”

Tillery filed the class action suit in August in the Third Judicial Circuit Court in Madison County on behalf of a rural sanitary district near Edwardsville and other water districts throughout the state. The suit was filed against atrazine manufacturer Syngenta Crop Protection Inc. with headquarters in Switzerland and Growmark Inc. with principal offices in Bloomington doing business under the “FS” name.

It’s time to ban atrazine to protect our drinking water and our most imperiled wildlife,” said Jeff Miller, a conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity. “There is no reason to continue use of this poisonous contaminant given the building evidence of harm to humans and endangered species.”

NRDC recommends that consumers concerned about atrazine in their water use a household water filter, such as one that fits on the tap. Consumers should make sure that the filter they choose is certified by NSF International to meet American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard 53 for the reduction of volatile organic compounds.

Where have I heard about an effort to put BIRTH CONTROL AGENTS IN US DRINKING WATER? Oh Yeah- It was in a film called: Maafa21.

Here is a preview:

Lou Dobbs, John Holdren, NOT Compulsory abortion and birth control – YET?

Posted in Abortion, birth control, Black Genocide, Constitution, Czar, Darwin, Eugenics, Evolution, Health Care, Hitler, Holdren, Margaret Sanger, Nazi, Obama, Planned Parenthood, Population Control, Racism, Religion, Sterilization with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 24, 2009 by saynsumthn

Aired September 21, 2009 – 19:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

DOBBS: Coming up next, forget recycling and hybrid cars, why having fewer children may save the environment, may save the planet. But nobody’s talking about that. Why? We’ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: We have more tonight on a story that we first brought to you last month. There is new evidence of the negative impact of overpopulation on our environment. The biggest threat to the environment isn’t, it turns out, gas-guzzling cars or power plants but rather having too many children all around the world. Casey Wian with our report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The cheapest way to stop global climate change is not converting to solar power or buying a hybrid car. It’s putting on a condom. That’s the conclusion of a London school of economics study showing that money spent on contraception is about five times more efficient than money spent on clean energy technologies. It backs up a recent Oregon State University study that concludes overpopulation is the single biggest threat to the environment.

PROF. PAUL MURTAUGH, OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY: It’s been a lot of attention to the effects of individuals’ lifestyle choices, things like transportation, food choices and so on, but relatively little attention to the effect of having children.

WIAN: The British Medical Journal and Lancet last week both published an editorial stating that the sensitive issue of population stabilization continues to slip off the agenda but is crucial to achieving real reductions in global co2 emissions.

VICKY MARKHAM, DIR. CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENT AND POPULATION: There is a large body of scientific evidence that shows links between population factors and climate change as well as many other environmental issues but climate change is especially.

WIAN: Supporters of the idea are not advocating laws that would restrict individual family planning choices or encourage government funding with birth control. They want developed and developing nations to at least discuss the issue. Rapidly rising population is a greater threat in third world nations while the environmental impact of each child in developmental countries is greater because they use much more energy.

PROF. BEN ZUCKERMAN, UCLA: People should be made aware of both by the environmental organizations and by the media that it’s good for a couple to stop at two or fewer non-adopted children and then to outline some of the good environmental things that would accrue.

WIAN: Yet, many environmental groups are reluctant to tacking the issue, so is the United Nations, which is overseeing global change negotiations. “The Washington Post” reports it asked a U.N. official about family planning and the environment and the official replied “to bring the issue up would be an insult to developing countries.”

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WIAN: President Obama plans to speak at the U.N. tomorrow about climate change, in advance of I global conference on the issue in December. Scholars who are concerned about the rural overpopulation plays in climate change are still hope forge a seat at the table during those talks. Lou?

DOBBS: Yeah, I mean what we’re really talking about here is, you can almost hear the shudders of politically correct quarters all over the country as you report on that as we bring that knowledge to the American public. Because there’s such high-bound orthodoxies in this country, ideological, partisan, politically correct constraints on lines in this country. That’s the real problem here, isn’t it?

WIAN: Absolutely. The scholars we talked to say it’s been absolutely ignored by the environmental community, Lou.

DOBBS: All right. Thank you very much, Casey. As always, we’re awfully sensitive to those orthodoxies there. Thanks very much, Casey Wian.

And a reminder to join me on the radio Monday through Fridays for the Lou Dobbs Show, 2:00 to 4:00 each afternoon on WOR radio in New York. And go to loudobbs.com to sign up for our podcast.

Thanks for being with us.

Next, Campbell Brown.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hmmm. They are not advocating FORCED or COMPULSORY abortion and birth control any more than Obama’s Science Czar was when he suggested that if the population did not curb, we could see force:

He writes:

cHANGING aMERICAN iNSTITUTIONS837_full

Perhaps we have forgotten that over 31 states had Eugenics Laws and Eugenic Courts and Forced Sterilizations on thousands of people. Think it couldn’t happen again?

If you doubt that forced birth control can happen – Listen to Elaine Riddick:

And if you want more proof watch Maafa21 (Trailer) :

Beyond Family Planning

Bernard Berelson
Science 7 February 1969: 533-543
DOI: 10.1126/science.163.3867.533

Beyond Family Planning 533