LA Times Writer Eludes Truth On Planned Parenthood Founder

  • Bookmark and Share

An article by Stephanie Simon in today's Los Angeles Times (Wednesday, March 21, 2007) states that Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger "did not support coerced birth control." However, Sanger's own words suggest otherwise (all emphasis mine):

"[M]odern society ... is now confronted with the problem of protecting itself and its future generations against the inevitable consequences of this long-practised policy of LAISSER-FAIRE.

"The emergency problem of segregation and sterilization must be faced immediately. Every feeble-minded girl or woman of the hereditary type, especially of the moron class, should be segregated during the reproductive period. Otherwise, she is almost certain to bear imbecile children, who in turn are just as certain to breed other defectives. The male defectives are no less dangerous. Segregation carried out for one or two generations would give us only partial control of the problem. Moreover, when we realize that each feeble-minded person is a potential source of an endless progeny of defect, we prefer the policy of immediate sterilization, of making sure that parenthood is absolutely prohibited to the feeble-minded.

"This, I say, is an emergency measure ..."

(From Chapter 4, "The Fertility of the Feeble-Minded," from the book by Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization (1922).) (link)

The Times' Simon also wrote that Sanger merely "associate[d] with proponents of eugenics, the philosophy that only the most worthy should be allowed to reproduce" (emphasis mine). Again, Sanger's own words reveal that she actually advocated the philosophy.

"Society is divided into three groups ... The third group are those irresponsible and reckless ones having little regard for the consequences of their acts, or whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent upon the normal and fit members of society for their support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped. For if they are not able to support and care for themselves, they should certainly not be allowed to bring offspring into this world for others to look after." (Speech quoted in "Birth Control: What It Is, How It Works, What It Will Do." The Proceedings of the First American Birth Control Conference. Held at the Hotel Plaza, New York City, November 11-12, 1921. Published by the Birth Control Review, Gothic Press, pages 172 and 174.) (The speech was delivered on November 18, 1921. link)

And:

Eugenics: "the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems." ("The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda," Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5) (link) (link)

There's a lot more. (Did I mention that Sanger once spoke to the women's branch of the Ku Klux Klan in Silver Lake, New Jersey in 1926?)

From today's Los Angeles Times (all emphasis mine):

Antiabortion activists are fighting back with their own appeals to black pride. In particular, they target Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger, as a racist intent on eliminating people of color. One popular flier — recently mailed to 10,000 homes in minority neighborhoods in Waco, Texas — declares, "Lynching is for amateurs" and compares "Klan Parenthood" clinics to Nazi death camps.

Sanger did associate with proponents of eugenics, the philosophy that only the most worthy should be allowed to reproduce. But she did not support coerced birth control ..."

Any chance we'll see a correction from the Times? Anyone? ... Hello?

—Dave Pierre is the creator of TheMediaReport.com and a contributor to NewsBusters.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I'd love to know what Stephan

I'd love to know what Stephanie means by "associate(d) with proponents of eugenics". Is this suppose to mean Sanger was merely having dinner parties with the eugenics crowd?

Geez, if conservatives even remotely "associate" with other conservatives that the lib media doesn't like (Antonin Scalia and Jack Abramoff anyone?), they're branded as being in bed with them for evil purposes.

MSM hypocricy at its finest!

Any digging at all into the l

Any digging at all into the life of the founder of PP reveals that she was a racist advocate of eugenics.  She is also commonly referred to as a nurse (she wasn't).  The actual truth must be hidden at all costs while referring to her in the media.  I wonder if they know but don't tell, or if they are just willfully ignorant.  You will NEVER see a an accurate 60 minutes segment expose on Margaret Sanger.   That would break from the agenda.

On October 19, 1939, Sanger o

On October 19, 1939, Sanger outlined a plan for stopping the growth of the Black community. She predicted that "the most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. 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 rebellious members."

Goldstein, David, L.L.D., Suicide Bent: Sangerizing Mankind (Radio Replies Press, 1945) Drogin, p. 33

Eugenics was very popular bac

Eugenics was very popular back in the 1920's and 30's, and fully embraced by many politicians even here in the US, it was the Global Warming issue dejour of that time.  Hitler's thinking was on the same page, just he brought it to the next level by actually carrying it out on a national scale.  Virginia and other states had sterilization laws on the books I believe well into the 50's which followed the ideas of Sanger.  The sterilized poor Blacks, poor Whites (hotenany - Appliachians), retarded, prostitutes, etc. 

Without the stats at my fingers, I seem to remember blacks are disproportionately represented in abortions well in excess of their demographics in society.

What's truly sick is there is a resurgence of the Eugenics movement underway that totally discounts what occured in the past.  Sanger's rationale has not lost it's potency when it comes to those who are not contributors to society. 

How does one argue with this thought: For if they are not able to support and care for themselves, they should certainly not be allowed to bring offspring into this world for others to look after. 

This we should fear more than anything else, logic without context.  Partial Birth Abortion, Embryonic Stem Cell research, and what other monsterous procedures will be rationalized in the name of science and society to declare life is just a utilitarian convenience for those in power.

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius