Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger whose objective was to eradicate the black and igorant populations via abortion and sterilization...ie.ethnic cleansing and black genocide. Some might be shocked to read her theories...
http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html

You can download her short book "The Pivot of Civilization" for free at this website.
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1689

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger whose objective was to eradicate the black and igorant populations via abortion and sterilization...ie.ethnic cleansing and black genocide. Some might be shocked to read her theories...
http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html

You can download her short book "The Pivot of Civilization" for free at this website.
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1689

"Here’s what Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine: “Frankly I had thought that at the time [Roe v. Wade] was decided,” Ginsburg told her interviewer, Emily Bazelon, “there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

The comment, which bizarrely elicited no follow-up from Bazelon or any further coverage from the New York Times — or any other major news outlet — was in the context of Medicaid funding for abortion. Ginsburg was surprised when the Supreme Court in 1980 barred taxpayer support for abortions for poor women. After all, if poverty partly described the population you had “too many of,” you would want to subsidize it in order to expedite the reduction of unwanted populations."

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...jonah-goldberg

Read this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44928812.../#.TpyQWbKVq0o

...and tell me we (as humanity) don't need family planning - and that in some areas it's more than critical. (My preferred method would be education so people don't get unwanted pregnancies in the first place)

And beware about thinking that a founder of an organization represents the current views of that organization.

Washington and Jefferson were slave-owning plantation masters.

Heck, even more recently, Ronald Reagan was a deal-making liberal by today's GOP standards.

Originally Posted by djplong

Read this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44928812.../#.TpyQWbKVq0o

...and tell me we (as humanity) don't need family planning - and that in some areas it's more than critical. (My preferred method would be education so people don't get unwanted pregnancies in the first place)

And beware about thinking that a founder of an organization represents the current views of that organization.

Washington and Jefferson were slave-owning plantation masters.

Heck, even more recently, Ronald Reagan was a deal-making liberal by today's GOP standards.

Family planning is one thing. Abortion is quite another.

As for the article titled "Can we handle it?"........."WE" don't handle (control) the planet.

Our Creator, God, handles the planet and its inhabitants. The planet was created with its own regenerating properties built into it.

Of course we should care for the planet and curb things that destroy it such as pollution, etc. However, human life is not a pollution nor disease/malignancy to the planet.

Originally Posted by ilovetv

Family planning is one thing. Abortion is quite another.

As for the article titled "Can we handle it?"........."WE" don't handle (control) the planet.

Our Creator, God, handles the planet and its inhabitants. The planet was created with its own regenerating properties built into it.

Of course we should care for the planet and curb things that destroy it such as pollution, etc. However, human life is not a pollution nor disease/malignancy to the planet.

How about letting every woman make her own choices and let her and her God deal with it? You say God handles the planet and its inhabitants....so let him handle it.

Originally Posted by djplong

Read this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44928812.../#.TpyQWbKVq0o

...and tell me we (as humanity) don't need family planning - and that in some areas it's more than critical. (My preferred method would be education so people don't get unwanted pregnancies in the first place)

And beware about thinking that a founder of an organization represents the current views of that organization.

Washington and Jefferson were slave-owning plantation masters.

Heck, even more recently, Ronald Reagan was a deal-making liberal by today's GOP standards.

Well said. I don't get why limiting the number of children you have to the number you can afford to feed and educate is seen as wrong. Family planning is a necessity...we are almost at 7 billion inhabitants....

In theory, if trends continue in Ireland and Italy both nationalities could disappear in 200 years because their birth rate is in negative figures and any population growth stems from immigration. it is why both of these countries and in fact many European countries have become campaigns to limit immigration.

It so happens that both the white and black population here are being diminished while the asian increase and hispanics far outpacing all others.

Making adjustments to a country's immigration policies is one thing but intentionally controlling population growth is quite another.

I personally don't believe that a government gets the right to say who can and cannot be born. China did that with their female population and now they are feeling the adverse effects.

If Planned Parenthood's original goal was as reported then it may give liberals a reason to pause and rethink Roe v Wade

As the commerical says "its not nice to fool mother nature". If a woman does not want a baby then don't get pregnant. If you do get pregnant then carry it to full term and then decide if you want to retain your motherhood or allow carrying people who want a child to adopt.

Rubicon says, "I personally don't believe that a government gets the right to say who can and cannot be born. China did that with their female population and now they are feeling the adverse effects.

If Planned Parenthood's original goal was as reported then it may give liberals a reason to pause and rethink Roe v Wade

As the commerical says "its not nice to fool mother nature". If a woman does not want a baby then don't get pregnant. If you do get pregnant then carry it to full term and then decide if you want to retain your motherhood or allow carrying people who want a child to adopt."

1, The Chinese government did not say they would not allow female babies to be born nor did they make it legal to kill female babies. It is against the law in China to kill a baby. Based on the size of their country, the Chinese government decided to allow one child per couple.

2. Planned Parenthood's original goal was to do away with blacks? That is just a lie. The "Big Lie" is a form of propaganda and the goal is to say it long enough and loud enough and people will start to believe it. Anyone who repeats this particular Big Lie should be ashamed of themself - as we are of them.

3. Allow each mother the choice if she wants to keep her unborn child or not. It is not up to legislation or to public officials but up to each individual woman to decide for herself. Get this out of the political arena. Too many other things to be done politically instead of this.

I do think some of you give God a little too much credit.

Originally Posted by djplong

Read this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44928812.../#.TpyQWbKVq0o

...and tell me we (as humanity) don't need family planning - and that in some areas it's more than critical. (My preferred method would be education so people don't get unwanted pregnancies in the first place)

And beware about thinking that a founder of an organization represents the current views of that organization.

Washington and Jefferson were slave-owning plantation masters.

Heck, even more recently, Ronald Reagan was a deal-making liberal by today's GOP standards.

Well said!

Originally Posted by ladydoc

Well said. I don't get why limiting the number of children you have to the number you can afford to feed and educate is seen as wrong. Family planning is a necessity...we are almost at 7 billion inhabitants....

Promoting that families limit the number of children is one thing; deceptively or forcefully imposing it on them due to the color or IQ of that family is quite another. The latter is what PP was founded to do, and still does as shown by ilovetv's post. Have any of you even read the links? I doubt it as the language in these writings is utterly offensive to blacks and those with lower intelligence (moron and imbecile are the terms used)

Originally Posted by rubicon

In theory, if trends continue in Ireland and Italy both nationalities could disappear in 200 years because their birth rate is in negative figures and any population growth stems from immigration. it is why both of these countries and in fact many European countries have become campaigns to limit immigration.

It so happens that both the white and black population here are being diminished while the asian increase and hispanics far outpacing all others.

Making adjustments to a country's immigration policies is one thing but intentionally controlling population growth is quite another.

I personally don't believe that a government gets the right to say who can and cannot be born. China did that with their female population and now they are feeling the adverse effects.

If Planned Parenthood's original goal was as reported then it may give liberals a reason to pause and rethink Roe v Wade

As the commerical says "its not nice to fool mother nature". If a woman does not want a baby then don't get pregnant. If you do get pregnant then carry it to full term and then decide if you want to retain your motherhood or allow carrying people who want a child to adopt.

with all due respect -- I am open to hearing someone's views but those views become discredited when they are backed up by hearsay or misinformation -- China did not limit the female population, they limited the number of children one could have (by the way, that is no longer in effect) -- what happened is that because families could only have one child (what do you think happened to the other pregnancies --male and femake -- no one was adopting!) parents terminated female-child pregnancies because they would not be family assets in the same way as male children. So, no matter what government says, some people are going to terminate pregnancies. I remember when young women were doing it with hangers --often terminating their own lives as well. Every religion allows for free will -- if someone makes a poor choice, he or she can answer to God -- he did not appoint any of us to interfere with individual choices -- "judgment is mine, saith the Lord"

Originally Posted by HelenLCSW

with all due respect -- I am open to hearing someone's views but those views become discredited when they are backed up by hearsay or misinformation -- China did not limit the female population, they limited the number of children one could have (by the way, that is no longer in effect) -- what happened is that because families could only have one child (what do you think happened to the other pregnancies --male and femake -- no one was adopting!) parents terminated female-child pregnancies because they would not be family assets in the same way as male children. So, no matter what government says, some people are going to terminate pregnancies. I remember when young women were doing it with hangers --often terminating their own lives as well. Every religion allows for free will -- if someone makes a poor choice, he or she can answer to God -- he did not appoint any of us to interfere with individual choices -- "judgment is mine, saith the Lord"

China mandated a one child family policy. The Cadres (govenor/mayor) in each province have historically been measured by his boss for promotion or pay increase, on how closely his province adhered to this policy. It is therefore more often than not, that these Cadres take matters into their own hands to insure that the policy is taken seriously one way or the other. While the Chinese goverrnment does not condone this, it has certainly turned a blind eye

As far as people terminating the lives of their own unborn children, that is still murder and we live in a moral society who should hold these people accountable. Roe v Wade needs to be overturned as it is an errant law.

Originally Posted by rubicon

In theory, if trends continue in Ireland and Italy both nationalities could disappear in 200 years because their birth rate is in negative figures and any population growth stems from immigration. it is why both of these countries and in fact many European countries have become campaigns to limit immigration.

It so happens that both the white and black population here are being diminished while the asian increase and hispanics far outpacing all others.

Making adjustments to a country's immigration policies is one thing but intentionally controlling population growth is quite another.

I personally don't believe that a government gets the right to say who can and cannot be born. China did that with their female population and now they are feeling the adverse effects.

If Planned Parenthood's original goal was as reported then it may give liberals a reason to pause and rethink Roe v Wade

As the commerical says "its not nice to fool mother nature". If a woman does not want a baby then don't get pregnant. If you do get pregnant then carry it to full term and then decide if you want to retain your motherhood or allow carrying people who want a child to adopt.

Yes, Caucasian population is down everywhere. Muslim population is exploding all around the earth. Check out England when you have the chance. WE have killed around 40 million babies in USA and now they say we need immigration to make up the difference. What a world.

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

Promoting that families limit the number of children is one thing; deceptively or forcefully imposing it on them due to the color or IQ of that family is quite another. The latter is what PP was founded to do, and still does as shown by ilovetv's post. Have any of you even read the links? I doubt it as the language in these writings is utterly offensive to blacks and those with lower intelligence (moron and imbecile are the terms used)

Where are you getting this information?! If you are following links, you are connecting to biased views. If you connect to the Planned Parenthood website, you will see nothing even remotely similar to the language you are expressing. I know several people who have used their services -- one is black -- and they would strongly disagree with you. What did you use Planned Parenthood for -- what was your direct experience? If you have a personal point of view on abortion, I am more that willing to listen, but unless you have had direct experience, please don't perpetuate hate-mongering -- it is a dangerous thing to do.