Archive for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Roe v. Wade of Marriage ?

Posted in Gay Marriage Opposed, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 27, 2015 by saynsumthn

Pro-family leaders are calling it the Roe v. Wade of Marriage.

The Supreme Court will begin to hear arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges, on Tuesday, and will most likely announce in June whether to uphold a state’s right to ban same-sex marriage.

Roe vs. Wade is the Supreme Court decision which forced abortion on the nation and triggered decades of activism and division in the country over the killing of unborn babies in the womb and pro-family leaders believe that if the Supreme Court forces gay marriage on the country it will have a similar affect as the infamous abortion decision.

Leaders across the country are calling upon Congress to use the authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to restrain federal judges and the Supreme Court, “from undermining marriage any further!”

Monday, April 27th, the day before the oral arguments on marriage, pro-family leaders from across the nation will host a press conference at the steps of the Supreme Court.

The group says that they will be delivering 300,000 “Restraining Orders” calling for passage of HR 1968, Congressman Steve King’s (R, Iowa) “Restrain the Judges on Marriage Act” and S 1080, Senator Ted Cruz’s (R, Texas) “Protect Marriage from the Courts Act.”

Restraining order

According to Faith2Action, one of the groups organizing the event, the following leaders will be in attendance:

    Janet Porter, President, Faith2Action,
    Dr. Steven Hotze, President, Conservative Republicans of Texas
    Pastor Charles Flowers, Faith Outreach, San Antonio
    Andy Schlafly, Attorney, Eagle Forum
    Dr. Scott Lively, Abiding Truth Ministries
    Greg Quinlan, Ex-Homosexual, New Jersey Family Policy Council
    Pastor Constant Cooley, United Temple Church of God in Christ
    Pastor Corey Shankleton, Ex-homosexual, Emerging Streams
    Peter LaBarbera, Americans for Truth
    David Pickup, LMFT/Reparative Therapy Center of Dallas
    Janet Boynes, Ex-lesbian, Janet Boynes Ministries
    Rev. Dean Nelson, Fredrick Douglas Foundation
    Grace Harley, Ex-transgender, One Solitary Voice International
    Mark Gurley, The Oak Initiative
    Bill Johnson, American Decency
    Kay Daly, Coalition for a Fair Judiciary
    Diane Gramley, American Family Association, PA
    Rev. Pat Mahoney, Faith In Action

Faith2Action says that Article 3 Section 2 of the Constitution, which states, “The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make,” gives them a remedy used many times in Congress including the 2004 “Marriage Protection Act” to remove from the federal courts the jurisdiction to undermine DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act), which passed the House, but not the Senate.

In 2003, Senator Tom Daschle implemented this remedy in a law to remove jurisdiction from all federal courts to hear cases regarding brush fires in South Dakota.

“Marriage matters more than bush fires,” stated Faith2Actions founder, Janet Porter. “When judges strike down the vote of the people to protect marriage, it ignites a brush fire against our liberty–which has now reached the doors of the church–and must be extinguished immediately by Congress.”

The group plans to hold this banner:


The National Organization for Marriage and the American Family Association (AFA) are calling on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Elena Kagan to recuse themselves from hearing the case after officiating same-sex marriages.

Restraining order delivered

“Both of these justices’ personal and private actions that actively endorse gay marriage clearly indicate how they would vote on same-sex marriage cases before the Supreme Court,said AFA President Tim Wildmon. “Congress has directed that federal judicial officers must disqualify themselves from hearing cases in specified circumstances. Both Kagan and Ginsburg have not only been partial to same-sex marriage but they have also proven themselves to be activists in favor of it. In order to ensure the Court’s integrity and impartiality, both should recuse themselves from same-sex marriage cases. Congress has an obligation to Americans to see that members of the Supreme Court are held to the highest standards of integrity. The law demands it, and the people deserve it.


Ginsburg has performed several gay marriages. In this clip Ginsburg asks about our past and “who counted as people” however, the same Justice refuses to count unborn babies as people in her radical support for abortion.

Media Matters, a liberal think tank, has been critical of Fox News and Bill O’Reilly for also calling for the Justices to recuse themselves:

WorldNet Daily has more on the justices and their activism for gay marriage – read it here.

Ginsburg: Abortion restrictions target poor, the populations we don’t want too many of

Posted in Ginsburg with tags , , , , , , on February 13, 2015 by saynsumthn

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once 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.”


When she made that statement in 2009 people were stunned.

It eventually made it into the powerful documentary on eugenics and the racism of abortion, Maafa21, because her statement proved that abortion was created to get rid of “certain” populations.

And now the good Justice has told us which populations those are – the poor !

Ruth Ginsburg and Bloomberg 2015 abortion

In an interview with Bloomberg’s Greg Stohr and Matthew Winkler, the radically pro-abortion Justice says that restricting abortion targets the poor – uh – the exact same people she once said abortion was created for.

Is that not ironic?

Ginsburg was asked if American women should be concerned about all the abortion restrictions across the county.

Ginsburg replied, “Women should be concerned because abortion restrictions in practical effect target poor women and poor women only.”

Poor women only – why- we don’t want poor women to not be able to get abortions, now do we?

Ginsburg pulled out the illegal abortion days when so-called “rich” women could jump from state to state to continue to obtain abortions.

She also wrongly presumed that abortions are “safe” today yet- women are dying in abortion clinics still. In fact, they are also being raped and maimed- but- then again, from a eugenics point of view, it’s only the poor ones dying from abortion now – so who cares, right?

Planned Parenthood “Heck Yes” to Ginsburg comes on heels of Gruber abortion comments

Posted in Abortion saves taxpayers, Gruber, Maafa21, Mark Crutcher, Planned Parenthood Ginsburg, Planned Parenthood poor care, Planned Parenthood Poor Women, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Saves Taxpayers with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 10, 2014 by saynsumthn

On the heels of a video by disgraced ObamaCare architect, Jonathan Gruber who said that abortion would save the taxpayers money because it would basically eliminate the poor, comes Planned Parenthood’s “Heck Yes” on another eugenics leader who said something similar.

No sooner did eugenics documentary and Planned Parenthood history film producer, Mark Crutcher release a statement comparing Jonathan Gruber’s comments on abortion to statements made by Supreme Court Justice and radical abortion advocate Ruth Bader Ginsburg – that – abortion giant Planned Parenthood gave her the “Heck Yes” award.

Planned Parenthood Ginsburg Heck Yes

There were times in 2014 when we just wanted to stand up and give a round of applause,” writes the eugenics founded Planned Parenthood organization,”When people spoke up for women’s health and rights so boldly, so bravely, so perfectly, we couldn’t help but cheer them on. As this year comes to a close, we took a look back with Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s Best and Worst of 2014, and asked you to vote for the top “Heck Yes!” moment of the year.

Drumroll please…
And the Winner Is:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg!

Planned Parenthood continues, “U.S Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg gave us our “Heck Yes!” Moment of the Year for her scathing dissent in the Court’s decision in favor of Hobby Lobby. In June, she wrote that the Court’s ruling — which lets some bosses deny their employees birth control coverage — is so startlingly broad that it can override the health care needs of employees and their dependents across the country.

“There were so many gripping lines from her 35-page dissent it’s hard to pick our favorite. In one of the most ominous, she warned that the precedent being set “would deny legions of women who do not hold their employers’ beliefs access to contraceptive coverage. The Court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield.”

Maafa21 logo

Life Dynamics president, Mark Crutcher writes on his blog, “In 2009, we released Maafa 21 – a 2 hour documentary in which we proved that the legalization of abortion had nothing to do with women’s rights, or choice, or reproductive freedom or any of the other sales pitches you hear from the abortion lobby. The truth is, abortion was legalized as an instrument of eugenics and racial genocide.


“Ironically, within a few months after we released Maafa21, the most radical abortion enthusiast on the U.S. Supreme Court issued a statement to the New York Times that confirmed exactly what we were saying. Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated, “Frankly 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.”

“Here’s my question: when she said that abortion was legalized to deal with populations we don’t want to have too many of, do you get the feeling she was suggesting that there might be too many rich white people in the world? Or is it possible she might have had some other folks in mind?

And the answer is clear – YES she did. if you want to know who Ginsburg was referring to- watch the film Maafa21 – which is available to view in full on the website

Jonathan Gruber CSPAN Hearings Dec 9 2014

Ironically, just yesterday during a Congressional hearing with ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber, Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie exposed the very thing that Ginsburg stated in 2009 during his questioning of Gruber.

(Partial Transcript Below: )

MASSIE:I have a question for you have you. Have you had any ethics training at MIT or Harvard ?

GRUBER: I as a condition for receiving federal grants we have to take a human subjects

MASSIE: okay so this is a little bit philosophical what I’m gonna ask you now but you’re doctor of philosophy so to speak. Under what circumstances is it ethical to deceive someone for their own benefit?

GRUBER: Uh…I’m not aware circumstances in which I ..

MASSIE: Could you could you imagine maybe an adult could withhold information from children for their own benefit?

GRUBER: I guess

MASSIE: Now so if you understand that then you understand why my constituents are so offended by your proposition that it’s okay to deceive or obfuscate for somebody’s benefit compounding the insulted you delivered to them is the fact that they pay your salary . Do you did you understand fully why it was so insulting? You patronize them you were condescending.


MASSIE: And my colleagues on the Democrat side of the isle are upset with you simply because you committed candor- you said what you thought- you said what they were all thinking -when they wrote road Obamacare – that they knew what was best for my constituents. I submit to you my constituents are not your children. And they have the right to self-determination. So this gets me to another instance where you commit candor.

In 1997 you co-authored a paper entitled , “Abortion legalization and child living circumstances who was the marginal child?” On page twenty you conclude that abortion legalization appears to be associated with an improvement in the average living circumstances and birth outcomes among a birth cohort and on page 26 you state that your research indicates that the legalization of abortion saved the government fourteen billion dollars in welfare payments through 1994.

Is providing more access to abortion – is that a worthy social outcome to achieve cost savings for the government?

GRUBER: That is uh not what my paper was about. It was a philosophical paper it was about empirical facts…

MASSIE: tell us what you meant by this sentence by 1993 all cohorts under the age 18 were born under legalized abortion and we estimate steady state savings of 1.6 billion dollars per year from positive selection. What did you mean by positive selection? Because in this paper you’re talking about providing more access to abortions to a socio-economic strata of our constituents.

MASSIE: What did you mean by positive selection?

GRUBER: In that paper, we were studying the characteristics of children who were born before and after abortion was legalized. By comparing those characteristics you can infer the characteristics as a ….

MASSIE: So what’s you inferred I find chilling. What you inferred is that if we reduce the number of people of children born life would be better for the rest of us still living. Specifically, you seem to suggest that if we eliminate or reduce the number of poor people that are born this will make life better for all Americans. And this gets me to my final point, which is the Independent Payment Advisory Board, my constituents fear that this is in fact a method by which Obamacare will ration health care for the elderly and therefore implement cost savings for Medicare. So, my question to you is, is your philosophy on abortion, that it can save money and improve outcomes, have any implications in the realm with end of life care? You argue that abortions for poor (?) children raise the average living circumstances in your paper, for the rest of us and save the government money. So, Dr. Gruber, if there are fewer elderly people, particularly poor elderly people, wouldn’t that save a ton of money to? As an economist wouldn’t that would save money too and do you understand the dangerous implications of going down this path?

GRUBER: I have no philosophy of abortion. I have no philosophy of end of life care. My job’s an economist is to deliver the empirical facts ( ??) can make the necessary..

MASSIE: And what would your facts be on the elderly?

GRUBER: I don’t understand the question?

MASSIE: the end of Life Care? Do you advocate that the federal government should ration that?

GRUBER: no I …

MASSIE: as an economist would it save money?

GRUBER: I do not advocate the federal government’s should ration end of life care.

MASSIE: thank you, I yield back.

Crutcher summarized Gruber’s comments well, “Gruber tried bobbing and weaving around Congressman Massie’s questions but, in the end, it was clear his position was that legalized abortion has allowed our country to kill off the children of the poor and, thereby, provide a higher quality of life for those who are still living. In one of his previous writings he had described the victims of abortion as “marginal children” and referred to the process of eliminating them as “positive selection.” During his testimony he refused to define exactly what “positive selection” means, but you’d have to actually be as stupid as Gruber thinks you are not to understand what he was saying.

“So let’s recap. Now we have not one, but two, radical, high-profile, godless abortion supporters, confirming what we documented in Maafa 21. First, Ruth Bader Ginsburg admits that eugenics was the driving force behind the legalization of abortion, and then Jonathan Gruber admits that it’s working exactly as it was intended. And make no mistake, everyone at the top of the abortion lobby food chain has also known that this was the agenda since day one. They know that this issue is about political power, money, race and eugenics, but unlike Ginsburg and Gruber, they don’t go out in the public and talk about it.”

Read Crutcher’s full statements here.

Worth reading is my blog: Margaret Sanger and Ruth Bader Ginsburg : population control a national policy

Abortion giant Planned Parenthood slobbers over baby dressed as Ruth “Baby” Ginsburg

Posted in Halloween with tags , , , , , , on November 4, 2014 by saynsumthn

Last week, I reported that abortion giant Planned Parenthood, founded in racist eugenics suggested girls dress up as Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for Halloween.

The shocker is that someone actually listened to the abortion giant.

Planned Parenthood called this picture of Ruth “Baby” Ginsburg the best costume ever.

Best Costume PP Ginsburg

So much is wrong with this beginning with the fact that Planned Parenthood kills thousands of these cute babies each year and Ruth Bader Ginsburg supports it.

Ginsburg once 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.”


I suppose that nothing pleases Planned Parenthood more than to see a baby which escaped their abortion grip imitating the most eugenics oriented Justice on the court !

Focus on the Family Citizen: Endangered species

Posted in Abortion, Black Babies, Black Conservative, Black Genocide, Black History Month, Black Neighborhood, Black Pastor, Eugenics, Life Dynamics, Maafa21, Margaret Sanger, Mark Crutcher, Planned Parenthood with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 1, 2010 by saynsumthn

Endangered species

by Karla Dial / Focus on the Family Citizen June/July 2010

A billboard campaign in Georgia is educating people about abortion’s roots — and fueling a national movement aiming to end it once and for all.

The message was simple and powerful. A tight shot of a black infant’s face, accompanied by the words “Black children are an endangered species. TooMany” A message stretched across a billboard 48 feet wide and repeated 80 times.

That’s what drivers on highways throughout Georgia’s DeKalb and Fulton counties saw between Jan. 21 and March 31 of this year, a grim acknowledgement of the fact that the Peach State leads the nation in abortions performed on black women — 20,886 in 2008 alone. And DeKalb and Fulton counties, which are predominantly black, also happen to be where most of the state’s abortion clinics are concentrated.

It would be an amazing coincidence, the billboards’ creators say, if not for the fact that it’s so insidiously intentional.

The billboard campaign is the brainchild of Ryan Bomberger, the 38-year-old co-founder of The Radiance Foundation, an urban outreach ministry headquartered in Atlanta. For Bomberger, a biracial kid who grew up in a diverse family that includes 13 adoptees, abortion strikes closer to home than most: His biological mother was a rape victim who chose life.

“I wanted to get the message out there that the black community is being devastated by abortion,” he says simply. “Black children are an endangered human species, more so than any other demographic in America, through abortion.”

Bomberger’s efforts, supported by Georgia Right to Life, paid off. As papers from as far away as New York City ran stories, he and Georgia Right to Life Minority Outreach Coordinator Catherine Davis spoke to black colleges and churches around the state about the impact abortion is having on their community. Several began showing a new documentary produced by Life Dynamics, a pro-life group in Denton, Texas. Maafa 21 details the Nazi-style eugenics philosophy employed by Margaret Sanger, the woman who founded the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Though the Georgia billboards were only up for two months, their impact is exactly the kind of momentum other states are hoping to build on. Pro-life groups from California, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee are all hoping to replicate those results and build a strong grassroots movement in their own African-American communities. They say targeting black women for abortion is as much a civil rights issue as anything that took place in the 1960s — and a bill making its way through the Georgia Legislature at press time aims to treat it as such.

And that’s most likely what it will take: Though the nation’s first black president has repeatedly vowed to make abortion “safe, legal and rare,” his landmark health care bill passed with taxpayer funding for it fully intact, and Planned Parenthood still receives $350 million a year from the federal government.

“I am so glad [Barack Obama] was not involved in the civil rights movement,” says Johnny Hunter, president of the Life Education and Resource Network, a pro-life group based in Fayetteville, N.C., that’s working to bring the billboard campaign to the Tar Heel State. “What if we’d had him in there saying we need to make lynching ‘safe, legal and rare’?”
The evolution of Planned Parenthood

What few people realize about Planned Parenthood — and what Maafa 21 reveals — is that abortion had nothing to do with women’s rights when Sanger established the group in the early 20th century. It had everything to do with controlling and even eliminating the black population. In 1939, Sanger established something called “The Negro Project” as a joint effort between her Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau and the American Birth Control League. The goal, as she testified before Congress in 1932, was simply to “apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.” In other words, weed out the undesirables of society and exterminate them.

Those views weren’t shocking coming from an open eugenicist like Sanger. After all, just a few short years later, the same views would lead to the extermination of 6 million Jews in Nazi Germany. But what was shocking — even incomprehensible — is the fact that Sanger was able to sell those views to the American black population through their own churches. Several influential African-American leaders, including Mary McLeod Bethune, W.E.B. DuBois and the Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Jr., worked with her as liaisons to the black community.
“The ministers’ work is also important,” Sanger wrote in a December 1939 letter to Clarence Gamble, grandson of one of the co-founders of Procter & Gamble and a family-planning advocate. “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

Such obfuscation, critics argue, is as foundational to Planned Parenthood as its roots in eugenics. Consider that in an October 1952 “family planning” pamphlet, the group acknowledged the humanity of preborn children, describing abortion as an “operation” that “kills the life of a baby after it has begun.” Today, in order to better market its “services” to the public at large, it refers to preborn babies simply as “pregnancy tissue” and never discusses abortion in terms of taking a human life.

If there is one thing Planned Parenthood has been consistent about over time, however, it has been the way it goes about targeting blacks. According to a analysis of a Centers for Disease Control report, black women have three times as many abortions as white women and twice as many as all other racial groups combined. The analysis reveals that abortion is the leading cause of death in the black community (286,581 in 2006), exceeding deaths from heart disease, cancer, accidents, homicides, suicides and diabetes combined.
In other words, it’s a holocaust. But it’s one to which many people — even in the black community — are turning a blind eye.

“The pro-abortion community is painting me as a traitor to my people, and that bothers me,” says Davis of Georgia Right to Life. “I don’t understand why they would not want to know the truth. It’s not that a woman can’t still get an abortion if that’s what she wants to do — but shouldn’t she be able to know the facts, to get understanding about the decision she’s making? There are forces out there that have an interest in limiting the birthrate of black women. Shouldn’t she understand that?”

Day Gardner, president of the National Black Pro-Life Union in Washington, D.C., does. But she also understands the process by which generations of Americans have been brainwashed into denying the humanity of preborn children.

“We’ve been taught ever since Roe v. Wade that this was the right thing. They’re not yet children, not fully human, just balls of tissue, not a child there yet. We’ve been told this from a very young age, and it’s very hard to unlearn something,” she explains. “It’s just like being in a cult in the sense that your mind and thought process is altered regarding abortion. Some people really don’t want to know the truth because it’s so ugly and so horrible.”

However, sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg actually pointed out that ugly truth in a July 7, 2009, New York Times Magazine article.
“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,” she said.

The interviewer did not ask her to elaborate the point.

A growing movement

Pro-life blacks say one need look no further than the location of most abortion clinics to find evidence that the industry continues to target African-American women: According to a 2004 article in the Fordham Urban Law Journal, 94 percent of all abortion clinics nationwide are located in urban areas.

“Show me a place in North Carolina without a heavy black population,” Hunter says, “and I’ll show you a place without an abortion clinic.”

And that is certainly the case in Georgia, where 58.2 percent of the 35,888 abortions performed in 2008 were on black women, despite the fact that they only constitute 30 percent of the state’s population. Of those, 79 percent were performed in either DeKalb or Fulton counties, which have the highest concentrations of blacks statewide.

Those numbers inspired state Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Cassville, to sponsor a bill allowing the state to prosecute doctors who abort children based on their race or gender, or knowing the woman is being coerced into having the abortion.

SB 529, which passed the state Senate on March 26, was making its way through the House at press time. Though the bill isn’t directly related to the billboard campaign — Loudermilk began working on the language last June, after seeing reports of coerced and gender-based abortion — the timing is propitious because of the new awareness the billboards have raised.
“We had testimony by females that were minors when they became pregnant and their guardians threatened to kick them out of the home if they didn’t have (an abortion), and the abortionists were aware of it,” Loudermilk explains. “We’re making it to where the doctor is not allowed to perform the abortion if he has knowledge she was coerced or her intent is to abort it because of its gender or race. If he does, then he has performed a criminal abortion.

“Doctors ask you all kinds of questions, and the doctors in Georgia generally ask the coercion question, but there’s been no law to oppose it — so we’re going to have them ask these other questions, too. That will show actual knowledge.”

As a result of the billboards, young black women throughout Georgia are beginning to change the way they think about abortion.

“Before we saw [Maafa 21], I was pro-choice,” Markita Eddy, a sophomore at Morris Brown College in Atlanta, told The New York Times in late February. But if she got pregnant, she said, “it showed me that maybe I should want to keep my child no matter what my position was, just because of the conspiracy.”
Bomberger, Davis and other African-American leaders are hoping to use churches to spread their life-affirming message.

“The only way to move the African-American community is to get black pastors and churches involved,” Bomberger says. “I know just from working with foster care and adoption advocacy, the social workers who see the worst of the worst, that black social workers had no idea how profound the impact of abortion was. And I knew that if we reached the black civic leaders, they can effect change.

“The campaign was effective in so many ways,” he adds. “When the billboards go down, it doesn’t end, because we continue to fight the causes that would make someone choose abortion. The heart of the campaign is not only decrying abortion’s impact, but saying, ‘Here is the solution — adoption.’ ”

Visit or
Karla Dial is a freelance reporter in Colorado Springs, Colo.

Margaret Sanger’s shop now open in East Knox

Posted in Abortion, Anti-abortion, Black Conservative, Black Neighborhood, Black Pastor, Black Women, Maafa21, Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood, Population Control, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Racism with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 19, 2010 by saynsumthn

Johnson: Margaret Sanger’s shop now open in East Knox
Friday, March 19, 2010

The message of the advertisement was ominous, one that should send shivers down the spine of a civilized nation. “More than 2,000,000 babies will be born in America this year,” the ad read. “Within 15 years, 738,386 will be dead, crippled, tubercular, mentally deficient, delinquent, maladjusted ‘problem children’… The First Key to Strong National Health [is] BIRTH CONTROL.”

This call to pre-emptively rid America of the diseased and maladjusted, according to the March 31, 1941, issue of Time magazine, was sponsored by the National Committee of Planned Parenthood on behalf of Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Federation of America. Sanger, who founded Planned Parenthood in 1916, was a proponent of eugenics, the belief that humankind would benefit if the “unfit” didn’t reproduce while the “fit” procreated profusely.

Sanger’s philosophy and the foundations of Planned Parenthood matter now that the pro-abortion organization has located a clinic in East Knoxville, an area with a heavy concentration of African-Americans. Pastor Cecil Clark of True Vine Baptist Church, a black congregation, summed up the suspicions of many: “I think (Planned Parenthood) target(s) black neighborhoods and black women, Hispanics and poor people.”

Statistics from the Tennessee Department of Health support Clark’s concerns. In 2008, nonwhite babies were aborted nearly four times more often than white children in Tennessee. In fact, more abortions were performed on nonwhites than whites – 6,986 vs. 6,876 – even though white females between the ages of 10 and 44 outnumbered nonwhites by more than 830,000. In Knox County, nonwhites suffered abortion at twice the rate of whites.

With signs cropping up that call black children an “endangered species” and Web sites decrying a “black genocide,” Planned Parenthood continues Sanger’s practice of locating clinics in nonwhite neighborhoods. As Pastor Johnny Watson of Bethel AME Church said, “Seventy percent of their clinics are in minority neighborhoods, and that alone should tell you something.”

Though Planned Parenthood President Jeff Teague often notes that his clinic doesn’t perform abortions, he doesn’t tell the whole story: Planned Parenthood freely refers clients to clinics that do.

Planned Parenthood doesn’t tell the complete truth about its founder either. Economist Julianne Malveaux, who writes commentary for USA Today, wrote approvingly of Sanger’s work to give women “reproductive freedom” in a 2001 piece for But Malveaux, an African-American, saw Sanger as “a tarnished heroine whose embrace of the eugenics movement showed racial insensitivity.”

Malveaux quoted Sanger’s writings. “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying … demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism,” Sanger wrote in 1922 in “The Pivot of Civilization.” Sanger wrote in a 1921 article, “The most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”
Malveaux posits that Sanger may have changed her views later in life, and Planned Parenthood goes to great lengths to beat back accusations that Sanger was racist and distance itself from Sanger’s embrace of eugenics. But at least one pro-choice liberal hasn’t completely let go of Sanger’s ideas.

In a 2009 interview with the New York Times, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was asked about the court decision that led to the Hyde Amendment, which bans the use of taxpayer funds for abortion. Ginsburg said, “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe (v. Wade) was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

Apparently the spirit of Sanger lives. Now, it has set up shop in East Knoxville.

Greg Johnson’s columns appear on Wednesdays, Fridays and the second Sunday of each month. Read more on his blog at E-mail him at

For Undeniable Evidence that Abortion is RACIST ! Get a copy of Maafa21 Black Genocide in 21st Century America ( Preview Below)