It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama to Reverse Bush Abortion Regulation

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood,


On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born." Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

On sterilization & racial purification:
Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial "purification," couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.

On the right of married couples to bear children:
Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review, April 1932

On the purpose of birth control:
The purpose in promoting birth control was "to create a race of thoroughbreds," she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)

On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities:
"More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control." Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

On religious convictions regarding sex outside of marriage:
"This book aims to answer the needs expressed in thousands on thousands of letters to me in the solution of marriage problems... Knowledge of sex truths frankly and plainly presented cannot possibly injure healthy, normal, young minds. Concealment, suppression, futile attempts to veil the unveilable - these work injury, as they seldom succeed and only render those who indulge in them ridiculous. For myself, I have full confidence in the cleanliness, the open-mindedness, the promise of the younger generation." Margaret Sanger, Happiness in Marriage (Bretano's, New York, 1927)

On the extermination of blacks:
"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

On respecting the rights of the mentally ill:
In her "Plan for Peace," Sanger outlined her strategy for eradication of those she deemed "feebleminded." Among the steps included in her evil scheme were immigration restrictions; compulsory sterilization; segregation to a lifetime of farm work; etc. Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 107

On adultery:
A woman's physical satisfaction was more important than any marriage vow, Sanger believed. Birth Control in America, p. 11

On marital sex:
"The marriage bed is the most degenerating influence in the social order," Sanger said. (p. 23) [Quite the opposite of God's view on the matter: "Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled; but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." (Hebrews 13:4)

On abortion:
"Criminal' abortions arise from a perverted sex relationship under the stress of economic necessity, and their greatest frequency is among married women." The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.

On the YMCA and YWCA:
"...brothels of the Spirit and morgues of Freedom!"), The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.

On the Catholic Church's view of contraception:
"...enforce SUBJUGATION by TURNING WOMAN INTO A MERE INCUBATOR." The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.

On motherhood:
"I cannot refrain from saying that women must come to recognize there is some function of womanhood other than being a child-bearing machine." What Every Girl Should Know, by Margaret Sanger (Max Maisel, Publisher, 1915) [Jesus said: "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep... for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed (happy) are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the breasts which never gave suck." (Luke 23:24)]

"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)


www.dianedew.com...




posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   
shame on you Obama

Margaret Sanger, through Planned Parenthood, advocated abortions on Afro-Americans in order to eliminate what she called "socially undesirable people". This site is an excellent Afro-American response against Sanger's racist eugenics: Genocide against Afro-Americans

blackgenocide.org...


Margaret Sanger aligned herself with the eugenicists whose ideology prevailed in the early 20th century. Eugenicists strongly espoused racial supremacy and "purtiy"," particularly of the "Aryan" race. Eugenicists hoped to purify the bloodlines and improve the race by encouraging the "fit" to reproduce and the "unfit" to restrict their reproduction. They sought to contain the "inferior" races through segregation, sterilization, birth control and abortion.

Sanger embraced Malthusian eugenics. Thomas Robert Malthus, a 19th century cleric and professor of political economy, believed a population time bomb threatened the existence of the human race. He viewed social problems such as poverty, deprivation and hunger as evidence of this "population crisis." According to writer George Grant, Malthus condemned charities and other forms of benevolence, because he believed they only exacerbated the problems. His answer was to restrict population growth of certain groups of people. His theories of population growth and economic stability became the basis for national and international social policy. Grant quotes from Malthus’ magnum opus, An Essay on the Principle of Population, published in six editions from 1798 to 1826:



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


The PTB are more subtle than this. It was easy to target Hitler who openly tried to implement many of the "solutions" from this kind of ideology.

But this ideology is subtly implemented through triple circles of interpretations and legal/economical reasoning - it is aiming at making people "taking care of their own", rather than doing it directly through state authority. Very clever, and working fine...



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   
I always knew our disregard for the sanctity of the most helpless and innocent, the unborn, would come back to haunt us.

Within the near future the old and ill will too be disposable,

With universal health care purposed by OBAMA, they will decide who deserves treatment, who is worthy to live by being a functioning member of society.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


The PTB are more subtle than this. It was easy to target Hitler who openly tried to implement many of the "solutions" from this kind of ideology.

But this ideology is subtly implemented through triple circles of interpretations and legal/economical reasoning - it is aiming at making people "taking care of their own", rather than doing it directly through state authority. Very clever, and working fine...





Yes, it all stems from Hitler, and if you research enough, you can trace it to darwinism.

Late 1800's early 1900's occult movement was involved too.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   


Malthus condemned charities and other forms of benevolence, because he believed they only exacerbated the problems. His answer was to restrict population growth of certain groups of people.


Notice this quote
philanthropy.com...

There is something terribly wrong with the man.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
I always knew our disregard for the sanctity of the most helpless and innocent, the unborn, would come back to haunt us.

Within the near future the old and ill will too be disposable,

With universal health care purposed by OBAMA, they will decide who deserves treatment, who is worthy to live by being a functioning member of society.


Legalizing euthanasia?
Same solution as in the OP?



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
I always knew our disregard for the sanctity of the most helpless and innocent, the unborn, would come back to haunt us.

Within the near future the old and ill will too be disposable,

With universal health care purposed by OBAMA, they will decide who deserves treatment, who is worthy to live by being a functioning member of society.


Legalizing euthanasia?
Same solution as in the OP?


OH?

How so?



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Which particular quote do you mean?

I think that Hussein and Emanuel are attempting to give more control to the state and take that control (money) from the rich. Charitable organizations are very suitable for money laundering, we all know that.

There have been different versions of socialism so far. Basically, socialism will try to satisfy people's basic needs as its primary goal. But this goal is really reduced to minimum. In truth, socialism is a trust of the few (party members and their higher functionaries) who exercise power through privilege rather that through the medium of money (as in capitalism).



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by DangerDeath

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
I always knew our disregard for the sanctity of the most helpless and innocent, the unborn, would come back to haunt us.

Within the near future the old and ill will too be disposable,

With universal health care purposed by OBAMA, they will decide who deserves treatment, who is worthy to live by being a functioning member of society.


Legalizing euthanasia?
Same solution as in the OP?


OH?

How so?


By throwing the hot potato into the hands of poor doctors, make them decide who is to live or to die.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by DangerDeath
 



Yes they do danger,

Plus I cannot think of anything more dictatorial then fourcing a doctor of all people, to go against their conscience.


www.webster.edu...

I hope America survives Obama.

The Nazi propagandists used medical metaphors to convince the medical establishment that euthanasia helped society. The argument was that just as a doctor has to remove a cancerous tumor or inflamed appendix to keep a patient alive, so doctors have to remove those drains on society in order for it to survive.

Here's Dr. Hoche again:


The state organism is a whole with its own laws and rights, much like the self-contained organism, which, in the interest of the welfare of the whole, as we doctors know, must abandon and reject parts or particles that have become worthless or dangerous.

Arguments made today in Europe and the United States go like this: As the cost of health care skyrockets, the medical establishment must ration it to those who can benefit from it the most.



[edit on 113131p://bTuesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Organicist theory is not uncommon. Church often uses this method to explain its purpose and structure to believers. Nationalists also like it very much.

Of course, analogy is not a tool which can prove anything, it just helps people who don't know much to accept decisions of those above by making those decisions sound "familiar" and "reasonable".

It is amazing to what extent will criminals go to "rationalize" their behavior and deny responsibility.
But this is not entirely true.
Because, no matter how unconventional this may sound, it is the ideas that do the work, and not people.
Ideas are projections, a foreign mind as Castaneda called it, and they consume humans, making them do whatever they demand.
Same goes for emotions.

Both ideas and emotions constitute a "schizophrenic mind", and whether schizophrenia as inserted into human beings in a form of virus or something else, I don't know, but I don't see any other explanation which can explain the above mentioned behavior and enormous denial which prevents us from understanding and controlling affections.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   
"Primum Non Nocere"

"Above all, do no harm"

There's a word that seems to be missing from a lot of these kinds of posts. That word is bioethics. The dictionary defines this as:



a discipline dealing with the ethical implications of biological research and applications especially in medicine
- www.merriam-webster.com...

There are entire classes available on the topic and an important study on the road to becoming a physician.



In 1948 the Nuremberg trials were fresh in the public memory. These had demonstrated that some doctors had decided that certain human beings were of less value than others because of race, religion, handicap, age, infirmity etc., hence it was not unethical to experiment on and to kill them. The World Medical Association, to which the BMA was affiliated, aimed to ensure that doctors would never again be diverted from their proper function; but the traditional medical ethic is once again under attack.

www.donoharm.org.uk...

[edit on 3-3-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   
There is a hierarchy among ideas.
The idea of authority is one of the highest.
Besides, the idea of bioethics is, guaranteed, not clear as it should be, therefore it is subject to various interpretations (especially if legislation starts molding its true meaning).



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I have a question for those of you who are against Pro-Choice, are you for or against Universal Health Care?

I am Pro-Choice, and very glad that Obama is stepping up to the plate and dealing with this very controversial issue.

Edit to add (sorry, not trying to derail, just trying to make a point which ties in with the controversy of birth control and abortion with appropriate sex education and health care)

[edit on 3-3-2009 by amazed]



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 08:00 AM
link   
Whenever there is a proposition towards nationalization, I think it best to look at what similar programs have been nationalized and compare whether it works. Is it a good or bad thing? It seems to me HMO's were the first step towards nationwide governmental healthcare. I'm sure we all have our own opinion about HMO's, but I haven't heard one yet that is good.

Also, one can look at global and historical models. It has been argued back and forth regarding Sweden's program, which seems good for some but not for others. The former Soviet Union had nationalize just about everything. Notice they are 'former'. I remember in the 80's the images being beamed over the television set and interviews with Soviet citizens. I doubt it's an image I can forget.

I believe the government does a good job at being 'the regulator'. To set the rules in place so that companies don't cheat. When they try to take over a whole system, it appears they honestly don't know what they're doing and feel more sympathy for them than anything else.

[edit on 4-3-2009 by saint4God]



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Although this is now cosidered a "done deal" and a win for those seeking the death of babies, it is not forgotten. Vocally, there's not more to add, other than I hope there is a change in our president's position in regards to abortion.




top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join