Planned Parenthood Accepts Funds to Abort Black Children
I've become aware of something that has to be heard to be believed. Click on the above for actual recordings of an actor calling various Planned Parenthood offices, pretending to want to donate money exclusively to abort black babies. Prepared to be blown away by the responses you hear. (After you listen you may want to read on to see how this fits with the history of Planned Parenthood and the beliefs of its founder Margaret Sanger.)
I'm including the following information from my book Prolife Answers to Prochoice Arguments, which contains many footnotes to the original sources. It isn't practical to include all these footnotes in a blog, but trust me, the quotes are directly from original publications, which I held in my own hands while researching this in the early 1990's. I thoroughly revised and updated the book several years ago, but it still contains this material.
If what follows seems like one of those slanderous internet hoaxes full of false claims (such as Barack Obama being Muslim), see Prolife Answers for all the footnotes, then go to a large library and check the source documents yourself. To be honest, I don't think I'd believe it if I hadn't done the research. Here we go:
Planned Parenthood’s abortion advocacy was rooted in the eugenics movement and its bias against the mentally and physically handicapped and minorities.
Margaret Sanger was the direction-setter and first president of Planned Parenthood, the world’s largest abortion promoter and provider. Although in her earlier writings she condemned abortion, ultimately her organization ended up viewing abortion as just one more means of controlling the birthrate of those considered inferior. I have in front of me a stack of Sanger’s original writings, as well as copies of her magazine, Birth Control Review. I encourage readers to review these writings and decide for themselves the beliefs and attitudes that gave birth to Planned Parenthood and the American abortion movement.
Margaret Sanger spoke of the poor and handicapped as the “sinister forces of the hordes of irresponsibility and imbecility,” claiming their existence constituted an “attack upon the stocks of intelligence and racial health.” She warned of “indiscriminate breeding” among the less fit that would bring into the world future voters “who may destroy our liberties, and who may thus be the most far-reaching peril to the future of civilization." She called the less privileged members of society “a dead weight of human waste.”
In a chapter called the “Cruelty of Charity,” Sanger argued that groups dedicated to helping pregnant women decide to give birth to their children were “positively injurious to the community and the future of the race.” She claimed, “the effect of maternity endowments and maternity centers supported by private philanthropy would have, perhaps already have had, exactly the most dysgenic tendency.” Her use of the technical term dysgenic clearly indicates her belief that these woman-helping efforts violated Darwin’s doctrine of the survival of the fittest, by which the weaker were naturally eliminated by virtue of their inferiority.
This same spirit permeates Sanger’s magazine, Birth Control Review. It is full of articles with titles such as “The World’s Racial Problem,” “Toward Race Betterment,” and “Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need.” The latter article was written in 1933 by Dr. Ernst Rudin, a leader in the German eugenics movement that was at the time busily laying the foundation for the Nazi’s acts of “racial improvement” and “ethnic cleansing.”
Elsewhere in that issue an article titled “Defective Families” calls the “American Gypsies” a “family of degenerates” started by a man and “a half-breed woman,” and warns that “their germ plasm has been traced throughout seven middle-western states.” Also in the same issue, in his article “Birth Control and Sterilization,” Sanger’s companion and lover, Dr. Havelock Ellis, stated, “sterilization would be... helpful, although it could not be possible in this way to eliminate the mentally unfit element in the population. It would only be a beginning.” Students of history know where that “beginning” ended only a decade later, under the leadership of a eugenic devotee name Adolf Hitler. (Though Sanger did not write these specific articles herself, as founder and director she was responsible for the ideas promoted by the magazine.)
In fact, the international eugenics movement, of which Margaret Sanger was inarguably a part, was openly praising Nazi racial policies at least as late as 1938. Sanger gave the welcoming address to a 1925 international eugenics conference. According to Marvin Olasky, Margaret Sanger’s “Negro Project” of the 1930s was “hailed for its work in spreading contraception among those whom eugenicists most deeply feared.” When it became evident that contraceptives were not sufficiently curtailing the black population and other target groups, the eugenicists turned to abortion as a solution to the spread of unwanted races and families.
In Margaret Sanger’s own words, to help the weaker and less privileged survive and to allow them to reproduce was to take a step backward in human evolution: “Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant.” These “stocks” were the poor and uneducated, a large portion of whom were ethnic minorities. Sanger was more interested in “aiming to eliminate” these “stocks” (read people) than in helping them.
This history helps to explain why to this day Planned Parenthood does virtually nothing to promote adoption or help poor and minority women who choose to give their children life rather than abort them. Planned Parenthood has even brought legal action to shut down alternative pregnancy centers that give women other choices besides abortion.
Though I have read many Planned Parenthood materials, I have never seen any that renounce or apologize for Sanger’s blatant eugenicism, her bias against the poor and the mentally and physically handicapped, and her implicit racism, all of which characterized Planned Parenthood’s philosophy from its inception. The fact that there are some highly visible blacks and other minority leaders in Planned Parenthood does not change its heritage or philosophy. It simply makes it easier to carry out its policies among target groups.
I do not believe Margaret Sanger was insincere or incorrect in everything she said and did. Nor do I believe most people who support abortion rights are racists, any more than I believe there are no racists among prolifers. I do believe that regardless of motives, a closer look at both the history and present strategies of the prochoice movement suggests that “abortion for the minorities” may not serve the cause of racial equality nearly as much as the cause of white supremacy.
Randy Alcorn

16 comments:
>>> Why is it against the law if you acidently break an eagle’s egg but it is okay to kill a human being
Good question. Our laws are pro-life when it comes to destroying a bald eagle’s eggs. Yet our law’s are pro-choice when it comes to abortion. Most everyone on here is pro-life in the case of abortion, and is probably pro-life in the case of eagle’s eggs. Why is this? I allege 2 things:
1) Suppose, hypothetically, that in order for that eagle egg to live, you would be responsible for it. Let’s go further and imagine that the eagle embryo’s life would demand all the sacrifices on your part that pregnancy demands. If this were the case, we’d quickly become pro-choice with regards to eagle egg destruction.
2) Suppose, hypothetically, that somehow the responsibility to care for an unwed mother’s fetus was somehow completely transferred to us. Let’s say there was some medical procedure that would allow us to transfer the fetus from her body to our’s. It’s a scenario difficult to imagine. But let us just say that you would have to become pregnant through no fault of your own. If the burden of someone else’s pregnancy were somehow shifted to us, we’d probably become a little less pro-life with regards to abortion.
I ask you questions such as these:
1) How many children have you adopted?
2) How many down-syndrome children have you adopted?
3) Would you be willing to go through the shame of having to have a rapist’s baby?
4) Would you be willing to give up any future plans (marriage, college) to have a baby you did not want?
5) Would your family be willing to pay higher taxes to support babies of unwed mother’s who choose not to get an abortion?
My point is simply this: If you can’t answer “Yes” to all of them, get off your high horse and stop criticizing women who have abortions. You’re acting the classical self-righteous Pharisee: “I thank thee oh God that I’m not unholy like other women who have abortions”. Recognize you’re a sinner.
PS - On a lighter note, (I need a break, too,) would you believe it if I told you that I, like you, have a dog named Moses?
1. One so far. He's the child of two crack addicts in Washington DC, and is a minority.
2. None, though we've fostered and otherwise supported several.
3. Yes, if it were possible.
4. Yes.
5. Yes.
Does this mean I win a prize?
Talk about a high horse - maybe M.C. might read Randy's Bio and realize that not only WOULD he put his life on the line for the unborn, he has. And he's paid a steep price for it.
M.C. is right that if we are going to stand up for the unborn, we need to also stand up for those born into less-than-ideal situations.
Not surprisingly, a large number of those who support life DO adopt, foster, and help unwed mothers.
How, exactly is Planned Parenthood "helping" them? By killing half the women that come through their doors?
m.c.
So your criteria is so high that no pro-lifer can justify being pro-life. But think about this for a second, what about the child in your questions do they get no consideration of life beyond my comfort or my shame?
"Planned Parenthood’s abortion advocacy was rooted in the eugenics movement and its bias against the mentally and physically handicapped and minorities."
My son has been given one of these labels as a result of testing done at school. When I was given the paper work by a kind a caring school psychologist my first thoughts were of the true descriptions of the Special Needs characters in your fiction books, Randy. Thank you. They are dear to the heart of God and my son shows the tender-hearted simplicity that Jesus values. For we must all come to him like a child, for such is the kingdom of God. It is no sacrifice to raise my darling child. He has contributions to this broken world that no other person can make. I see it every day and eagerly await his adulthood.
m.c. -
We've taken in several children over the years - mostly short term but raised one from 2 yrs to her present age of 19 (parents would not sign for adoption although we tried!)
You don't see many Downs Syndrome people around anymore do you? Up to 90% of these babies are aborted.
The shame of having a rapist's baby? If I was the one who was raped, that baby is also a part of me, right?
The pro-life community heavily supports those who choose to give life to their babies. We support both the mother and her child.
First, in regards to the Planned Parenthood/Margeret Sanger post: Nothing should surprise us. They are in the baby killing business, after all.
As for M.C.'s remarks, why do you think when you make the situation more difficult, it would change a pro-lifer's position? It shouldn't.
Are you, and other pro choice people not compelled to do good, i.e. adopt children, act sacrificially to save a life because you are PC? How convenient.
As for saying Randy is acting like a self righteous Pharisee believing he is better than women who have had abortions.....Whoa, Nelly! I'll forgive you because you don't know what you are saying, but I do. I am a woman who was homeless and pregnant when the Alcorn family took me in. I had an abortion before that time and sadly, one later. Never once did they make me feel anything other than what I was, a beloved daughter of the Savior-King. Randy knows better than anyone that he is a sinner in need of forgiveness, for all the "humorous" pranks he pulls if for no other reason.
Seriously, we can have debate and discussion of this issue that we feel so strongly about, without resorting to trashing someone's character.
And, by the way, I used to have a dog named Moses, too. :-)
m.c., you make the classic (and false) argument that we shouldn't complain about abortion if we aren’t willing to adopt unwanted children or help with the problem.
It fails in two ways.
First, protesting an immoral act does not require taking ownership of the problem. Examples: Being against the abuse of children, spouses or animals does not require one to adopt the children, marry the abused spouses, or adopt the animals.
Also, what does my character have to do with whether abortion kills an innocent human being?
Second, even though they don’t have to, pro-lifers do help before and after the children are born.
Pro-lifers spend a great deal of time and money to help women and the unborn via Crisis Pregnancy Centers and adoption programs. There are more Pregnancy Centers than abortion clinics.
I've seen this video before and it never ceases to astound me what these people will do in order to promote Abortion on demand!
Keep up your wonderful work Randy.. Your writings are blessing many people today..
Jackie M
Grass Valley, Calif
ps, please write a sequel to "Deception".. We've got to see Ollie come to accept Christ. Maybe he can find his other daughter as well.. Your books have totally touched my heart! God Bless you Randy!
Randy, thank you for your courage and your humility. God bless you...
Planned Parenthood is awful and I appreciate you laying out the history and effect of their efforts.
On a different note, I wanted to ask about the presidential election. Now that John McCain is the Republican nominee, how will you vote? Will you vote for him? Will you not vote at all? Will you write in a name?
I can't vote for McCain because he is for stem cell research and is against the Human Life Amendment and the Marriage Amendment.
In the comments on Margeret Sanger and her involvement with Planned Parenthood, it's easy to overlook one of her first "claims to fame" -the invention and promotion of birth control. That is where she began and we see what followed.Was the philosophy Margeret used to persuade women when she first introduced birth control, the same used today by a young woman entering an abortion clinic: "Babies are fine, as long as it's convenient for me"? As a mother of 7, who is quickly approaching the age considered dangerous to have any more children, I would value your thoughts, Randy. My desire is to stand before the Lord and hear "Well Done."
This video is truly shocking. How sad this is that the Democratic Party, which claims to be about racial non-discrimination, funds and supports an organization involved in the outright killing of black unborn children.
I never thought highly of Planned Parenthood, but this lowers my opinion of them even further.
I am a single young woman (late 20's) who is trying to adopt.
In the last year, I have had 2 fall through - and one fall through in my early 20's (private family adoption). This child was later abandoned by her mother (and so were the other 2 siblings). Now they are being neglected by their dad - and he has another one on the way with a woman who abandoned her daughter also).
I am actively trying to get custody of these 3 children now, but the dad won't surrender.
The child that I am trying to adopt now will be born in May to a drug addict mother.
I am concerned, but I know that God has called me to adopt.
Also, I am adopted - only child. I was abandoned at the hospital at birth. I have 2 cousins that are adopted also - they were abandoned at the same hospital that I was.b
It means the world to me to be able to adopt - to rescue a child that may be abandoned, abused, or neglected.
And to MC - your question of carrying a child concieved of rape - yes I would. Not a second thought about it. Also, my best friend as a little boy who was conceived of rape.
I know several women who have carried and even raised their child when they were conceived through rape.
m.c.
I had an abortion that I regret. In no way do I read that Randy Alcorn is criticizing women who have had abortions.
Thank you Randy. Keep up the good work!
Ken,
In regards to your question about voting, please send us an e-mail at stephanie@epm.org so we can send you some info in response to your question.
Blessings,
Stephanie Hallman
Promotions Director
Eternal Perspective Ministries
Hmm... there are some intense comments left on this blog. Randy, I'd be interested in reading a blog post on post-abortive women since some people here seem to think that post-abortive women just go into PP like it's a nail salon and walk out like it's any other day of their life.
It's not self-righteous to devote your life in trying to protect the helpless and innocent. No one is tooting their own horn.
As for Sanger, that's not entirely shocking. Reminds me of Hitler and the Holocaust. Especially considering that some abortion procedures come from concentration camps during Holocaust.
Post a Comment