Hillary Clinton’s Bizarre “Margaret Sanger’s Work is Not Done”

Margaret Sanger: Birth Control, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics

“The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race
(Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

Just who was Margaret Sanger? Patron saint of a woman’s right to choose, or evil collaborator in the field of eugenics, those who believed society had the right to use birth control, sterilize, or abort the “unfit” or force them to live on government farms for the rest of their lives?

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, has been touted as a “hero” and “visionary”, including recent remarks by Hillary Clinton.

Revisionist history usually works after a lengthy span of time or historical documentation is missing. Unfortunately for Planned Parenthood, historical documentation is plentiful on the “work” of founder Margaret Sanger and eugenics, whose efforts succeeded in the legalization of mass sterilization of thousands of “unfit” men, women, and children.

On March 27, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepted Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger award. Here is an excerpt from Clinton’s acceptance speech:

“The 20th century reproductive rights movement, really embodied in the life and leadership of Margaret Sanger, was one of the most transformational in the entire history of the human race. It has changed the lives of tens of millions of women. It has changed attitudes and perceptions about women and our roles in society. It ushered in demographic and social changes that have brought us closer to gender equality than at any time.

Yet we know that Margaret Sanger’s work here in the United States and certainly across our globe is not done. Here at home, there are still too many women who are denied their rights because of income, because of opposition, because of attitudes that they harbor. But around the world, too many women are denied even the opportunity to know about how to plan and space their families. They’re denied the power to do anything about the most intimate of decisions.”
–Hillary Clinton, Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger Award – March 27, 2009

Clinton’s acceptance speech was laced with glowing adjectives of Sanger while Clinton proclaimed that Sanger’s “work is not done”. And yet, Sanger’s “work” has many questioning as to why Sanger continues to be touted as a “visionary” such as this further excerpt from Clinton’s speech:

“Now, I have to tell you that it was a great privilege when I was told that I would receive this award. I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision. Another of my great friends, Ellen Chesler, is here, who wrote a magnificent biography of Margaret Sanger called Woman of Valor. And when I think about what she did all those years ago in Brooklyn, taking on archetypes, taking on attitudes and accusations flowing from all directions, I am really in awe of her.”

No only did Clinton proclaim that Sanger had “vision” but that Clinton was in “awe” of Sanger. Which begs the question: which part of Sanger’s “vision” was Clinton referring to? Was it the right for a woman to choose, or was it the vision of a society expunged of “over-fertile mentally and physically defectives” by way of mass sterilization with birth control as one component?

More on eugenic’s sterlization goals:

“Sterilization could be applied to an ever widening circle of social discards, beginning always with the criminal, the diseased and the insane, and extending gradually to types which may be called weaklings rather than defectives, and perhaps ultimately to worthless race types.”
From The Passing of the Great Race by Madison Grant, co-founder American Eugenics Society
-Everything2.com

The result: 32 states enacted forced sterilization laws which governors later apolozed.

From InclusionDaily.com:

December 2, 2002

SALEM, OREGON–”Today, I am here to acknowledge a great wrong done to more than 2,600 Oregonians over a period of about 60 years-forced sterilization in accordance with a doctrine called eugenics,” Governor John Kitzhaber told a group of reporters in a prepared statement Monday.

Kitzhaber noted that most of those sterilized between 1917 and 1983 were people with “mental disorders and disabilities” housed in state-run institutions. Many were forced, by state law, to undergo surgery to be made sterile before they could be allowed to leave such facilities. Others who were sterilized included criminals, homosexuals, and teenage girls who “misbehaved”.

“The time has come to apologize for misdeeds that resulted from widespread misconceptions, ignorance and bigotry. It’s the right thing to do, the just thing to do. The time has come to apologize for public policies that labeled people as ‘defective’ simply because they were ill, and declared them unworthy to have children of their own.”

“To those who suffered, I say, The people of Oregon are sorry. Our hearts are heavy for the pain you endured.”

Kitzhaber is the second governor to formally apologize for a state’s part in the eugenics movement of the 20th century. In May of this year, Virginia’s Governor Mark R. Warner officially apologized for the forced sterilizations of 8,300 people in his state. Thirty-one other states in the U.S., along with two Canadian provinces, were responsible for sterilizing more than 60,000 men and women, boys and girls. Germany’s dictator Adolph Hitler modeled his massive Nazi sterilization law in part on that of Virginia.

Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood who holds her in high esteem:

Planned Parenthood is rooted in the courage and tenacity of American women and men willing to fight for women’s health, rights, and equality. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, is one of the movement’s great heroes. Sanger’s early efforts remain the hallmark of Planned Parenthood’s mission:

* providing contraception and other health services to women and men

* funding research on birth control and educating specialists and the public about the results

* advancing access to family planning in the United States and around the world

Women’s progress in recent decades — in education, in the workplace, in political and economic power — can be directly linked to Sanger’s crusade and women’s ability to control their own fertility.

Just how is it that Sanger, a woman who proposed forced sterilization of society’s “misfits” and was a member of the group that led to the forced sterilization of thousands, become a great “hero” to PPH?

Planned Parenthood has discarded Sanger’s eugenic’s past, reshaping Sanger’s memory into an illusion of a woman warrior whose main goal was to ensure women had to the right to birth control. Yet Sanger’s own words, tying her work with birth control to eugenics, dispels the myth of a woman “hero” whose motives were “pure”:

– Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization , 1922. Chapter on “The
Cruelty of Charity,” pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library
edition.

“Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems. “I think you must agree … that the campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims
of eugenics … Birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the
eugenic educator.

“As an advocate of birth control I wish … to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the ‘unfit’ and the ‘fit,’ admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feebleminded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation.

“On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”
– Margaret Sanger. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.”
Birth Control Review , October 1921, page 5.
–Gateway.org

Why would Planned Parenthood continue to maintain the illusion that Sanger’s work was solely a woman’s right to birth control? Perhaps some insight into PPH’s own history involving eugenics may shed some light:

“Sanger was not the only eugenicist involved with Planned Parenthood. Alan Guttmacher, president of Planned Parenthood from 1962-1974, once told a Planned Parenthood gathering, “The mentally retarded and the mentally defective . . . insidiously are replacing the people of normal mentality.”

Guttmacher, Sanger, and others in Planned Parenthood actively courted the involvement of eugenicists. In the 1920s, the “National Council” of her American Birth Control League had at least 23 persons involved at a prominent level in eugenics-nearly one-half the entire council!

The American Eugenic Society (AES) officially endorsed her group in 1932, and Sanger was a dues-paying member of the AES through the 1960s. Among those on her council was Lothrop Stoddard, a prominent racist who wrote The Rising Tide of Color Against White Supremacy and who also published eugenic articles in Sanger’s magazine.”
-nrlc.org

While the 1920′s may seem to be shrouded in the mists of time, the 60′s, when Sanger was still a card-carrying member of the American Eugenics Society, and the 1970′s, where eugenics proponent Alan Guttmacher was President of PPH, was not so long ago.

The irony is that some are now attempting to claim that while Sanger was involved in eugenics, she wasn’t so awful, just merely “myopic”.

Here is an excerpt from Margaret Sanger’s The Pivot of Civilization, Chapter 12 – Women and the Future:

Parallel with the awakening of woman’s interest in her own fundamental nature, in her realization that her greatest duty to society lies in self-realization, will come a greater and deeper love for all of humanity. For in attaining a true individuality of her own she will understand that we are individuals, that each human being is essentially implicated in every question or problem which involves the well-being of the humblest of us.

So to-day we are not to meet the great problems of defect and delinquency in any merely sentimental or superficial manner, but with the firmest and most unflinching attitude toward the true interest of our fellow beings. It is from no mere feeling of brotherly love or sentimental philanthropy that we women must insist upon enhancing the value of child life. It is because we know that, if our children are to develop to their full capabilities, all children must be assured a similar opportunity. Every single case of inherited defect, every malformed child, every congenitally tainted human being brought into this world is of infinite importance to that poor individual; but it is of scarcely less importance to the rest of us and to all of our children who must pay in one way or another for these biological and racial mistakes. We look forward in our vision of the future to children brought into the world because they are desired, called from the unknown by a fearless and conscious passion, because women and men need children to complete the symmetry of their own development, no less than to perpetuate the race.”

Sanger wrote that a woman’s greatest duty to society was that of “self-realization”, from which would evolve a “greater and deeper love for all humanity”. That “deeper love” included birth control and mass sterilization of the “unfit” as well as government farms where the “unfit” were to be warehoused for life.

Sanger wrote about the “true interest of our fellow beings”, of women and men needing to children to “complete the symmetry of their own development” and “no less than to perpetuate the race”.

I assume Sanger was implying her “race” of intellectual well-to-dos.

Sanger wrote that there needed needed to be a firm and “unflinching attitude” towards this “true interest”. Meaning, chin-up, mass sterilization is for the good of all “humanity”.

Sanger wrote of the “cause” which impeded the completion of the symmetry of one’s own development and the perpetuation of Sanger’s envisioned race:

“Every single case of inherited defect, every malformed child, every congenitally tainted human being brought into this world is of infinite importance to that poor individual; but it is of scarcely less importance to the rest of us and to all of our children who must pay in one way or another for these biological and racial mistakes.”

The solution, the eradication of the “mistakes” described by Ms. Sanger, by way of forced sterilizations, abortion, and birth control. Sites such as About.com completely ignore that Sanger, a former nurse, was in bed with the American Eugenics Society, as a member for over 30 years, well into the 60′s, while mentioning this:

“Today, organizations and individuals which oppose abortion and, sometimes, birth control, have charged Sanger with eugenicism and racism. Sanger supporters consider the charges exaggerated or false.”

And yet this is a false assertion. In fact, About.com attempts to deflect the very real criticism of Sanger and Planned Parenthood of their once very public support of eugenics as coming from those who are anti-abortion critics attempting to discredit Sanger and PP.

Are the “charges” against Sanger “exaggerated” or “false”? Perhaps. But then again here’s more from Sanger about eugenics in her own words:

Margaret Sangers’ “Plan for Peace”, published in Sanger’s Birth Control Review (April 1932, pp. 107-108

A Plan for Peace
by MARGARET SANGER

First, put into action President Wilson’s fourteen points, upon which terms Germany and Austria surrendered to the Allies in 1918.

Second, have Congress set up a special department for the study of population problems and appoint a Parliament of Population, the directors representing the various branches of science: this body to direct and control the population through birth rates and immigration, and to direct its distribution over the country according to national needs consistent with taste, fitness and interest of individuals. The main objects of the Population Congress would be:

a. to raise the level and increase the general intelligence of population.

b. to increase the population slowly by keeping the birth rate at its present level of fifteen per thousand, decreasing the death rate below its present mark of 11 per thousand.

c. to keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.

d. to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

e. to insure the country against future burdens of maintenance for numerous offspring as may be born of feebleminded parents, by pensioning all persons with transmissible disease who voluntarily consent to sterilization.

f. to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.

g. to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.

The first step would thus be to control the intake and output of morons, mental defectives, epileptics.

The second step would be to take an inventory of the secondary group such as illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, dope-fiends; classify them in special departments under government medical protection, and segregate them on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct.

Having corralled this enormous part of our population and placed it on a basis of health instead of punishment, it is safe to say that fifteen or twenty millions of our population would then be organized into soldiers of defense—defending the unborn against their own disabilities.

The third step would be to give special attention to the mothers’ health, to see that women who are suffering from tuberculosis, heart or kidney disease, toxic goitre, gonorrhea, or any disease where the condition of pregnancy disturbs their health are placed under public health nurses to instruct them in practical, scientific methods of contraception in order to safeguard their lives—thus reducing maternal mortality.

The above steps may seem to place emphasis on a health program instead of on tariffs, moratoriums and debts, but I believe that national health is the first essential factor in any program for universal peace.

With the future citizen safeguarded from hereditary taints, with five million mental and moral degenerates segregated, with ten million women and ten million children receiving adequate care, we could then turn our attention to the basic needs for international peace.

There would then be a definite effort to make population increase slowly and at a specified rate, in order to accommodate and adjust increasing numbers to the best social and economic system.

In the meantime we should organize and join an International League of Low Birth Rate Nations to secure and maintain World Peace.

Summary of address before the New History Society, January 17th, New York City
-Spectacle.org

This is a prime example of Sanger’s “vision”. Written by Sanger, published in her Birth Control Review.

Double Myopic Vision

It seems quite bizarre that some would call Sanger “myopic” in that she was one of the leading advocates of eugenics and was a card-carrying member into the 60′s, where she died in 1966.
And yet, it also seems bizarre that Hillary Clinton seems to be suffering from a severe case myopia in regards to Sanger’s well-documented association with eugenics and forced sterilization.

From Sanger’s “Plan for Peace”:

“f. to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.

g. to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.”

Then there’s the rather offensive matter, of calling those who find Sanger’s “work” in eugenics obscene and horrific, as being merely anti-abortion foes. This is purely a risky defensive measure designed to eliminate well-deserved criticism and gives pause as to why they have chosen this tactic rather than admitting the truth of their “roots”.

Far from “exaggerations”, Sanger’s “work” and the role of early Planned Parenthood in eugenics is well documented. Sanger proposed that the federal government implement a “Parliament of Population” which would “direct” and “measure” population. Where the government would turn away immigrants based on sickness, intellect, or feeblemindedness. Others would be classified and put on special government “farms” where they would remain until they were to be taught and “reclassified” as fit for society if they “passed”. Citizens who didn’t “pass” would be forced into sterilization and segregated, kept on government farms for the “period of their entire lives”.

This wasn’t some pie in the sky scheme, it was adapted by some states where thousands of men, women, and children were forcibly sterilized under orders by state governments. Governments which recently “apologized”.

Sanger Speaking to the KKK

To now tout Sanger as a “hero” and as a “visionary” is bizarre. Sanger didn’t have a split personality, of the “good” Margaret, whose motives were “pure” and who sought to fight for women’s rights, and the “bad” Margaret, who wanted to government to implement its Parliament of Population. In her own words, Margaret Sanger believed that only “some” women had the right to choose, while others, who were deemed “unfit” by Sanger’s “standards”, should be forcibly sterilized by the government and that birth control, Sanger’s forte, was just one component for achieving her “plan”.

Hillary Clinton has since called Sanger “flawed”, comparing Sanger to Thomas Jefferson whom Clinton also “admired”. Which was interesting to say the least.

Jefferson inherited slaves, which under Virginia law, he was not allowed to free. Jefferson’s first act after being elected was an attempt to overturn the law. When Jefferson was asked to help pen the Virginia constitution he proposed a clause that all those born on Virginia soil would be free. When Jefferson wrote the Ordinance of 1784, a preliminary draft of the Northwest Ordinance, he proposed that those who lived in the new territory would be free. The measure was blocked by one vote which Jefferson lamented. Jefferson included an amendment in the Declaration of Independence a condemnation of King George’s slave trade. And yet, this is the man whom Hillary Clinton said was “flawed” in the same manner as Margaret Sanger.

Clinton was, at best, intellectually sloppy, at worst, intellectually dishonest.

Jefferson didn’t make it his life’s work to promote slavery. Sanger’s life’s work revolved around eugenics, birth control, and the government implementing forced sterilization on those deemed “unfit” or the wrong race.

By LBG

Source – Reformed-Theology – Thomas Jefferson
Image - Pamplet – American Eugenics Society
Source - dianedew.com – Margaret Sanger, in her own words
Image – Eugenics Marriage Certificate
Image – Sanger Speaking to KKK

Tags: abortions, birth control, eugenics, Hillary Clinton, Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood