Hey...
A rightard quote mine.
Let's see...
We'll take the first on the page just to make it simple.
"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"
Man... That sounds damning.
But wait a sec...
"human weeds"? Why is it removed from it's context?
Curious that...
Well, let's put it back into it's context.
"If plants, and live stock as well, require space and air, sunlight
and love, children need them even more. The only real wealth of our
country lies in the men and women of the next generation. A farmer
would rather produce a thousand thoroughbreds than a million runts.
How are we to breed a race of human thoroughbreds unless we follow the
same plan? We must make this country into a garden of children instead
of a disorderly back lot overrun with human weeds.
In a home where there are too many children in proportion to the
living space, the air and sunlight, the children are usually
overcrowded and underfed. They are a constant burden on their mother's
overtaxed strength and the father's earning capacity. Such homes
cannot be gardens in any sense of the word."
Gee, rightard...
I don't see anything that's especially racist there.
Do you, rightard?
It seems to me that she's talking about the number of children
outstripping necessary resources required to raise them, and the
detrimental effects that results.
What do you think?
Next, "reckless breeders". Once again, it's removed from it's
context.
Again, let's put it back into context.
"Competent authorities tell us that no less than 75 per cent. of
American children leave school between the ages of fourteen and
sixteen to go to work. This number is increasing. According to the
recently published report on "The Administration of the First Child
Labor Law," in five states in which it was necessary for the
Children's Bureau to handle directly the working certificates of
children, one-fifth of the 25,000 children who applied for
certificates left school when they were in the fourth grade; nearly a
tenth of them had never attended school at all or had not gone beyond
the first grade; and only one-twenty-fifth had gone as far as the
eighth grade. But their educational equipment was even more limited
than the grade they attended would indicate. Of the children applying
to go to work 1,803 had not advanced further than the first grade even
when they had gone to school at all; 3,379 could not even sign their
own names legibly, and nearly 2,000 of them could not write at all.
The report brings automatically into view the vicious circle of
child-labor, illiteracy, bodily and mental defect, poverty and
delinquency. And like all reports on child labor, the large family and
reckless breeding looms large in the background as one of the chief
factors in the problem."
Gosh, rightard...
Once again, there's nothing racist there, just talk of the detrimental
effects of poverty.
Do you disagree that children raised in poverty tend to suffer from
the effects of poverty, rightard?
Now let's tackle the last bit.
"'spawning... human beings who never should have been born."
Once again, the quote is removed from it's context.
Once again, let's put it back into it's context.
"Eugenics is chiefly valuable in its negative aspects. It is "negative
Eugenics" that has studied the histories of such families as the
Jukeses and the Kallikaks, that has pointed out the network of
imbecility and feeble-mindedness that has been sedulously spread
through all strata of society. On its so-called positive or
constructive side, it fails to awaken any permanent interest.
"Constructive" Eugenics aims to arouse the enthusiasm or the interest
of the people in the welfare of the world fifteen or twenty
generations in the future. On its negative side it shows us that we
are paying for and even submitting to the dictates of an ever
increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never
should have been born at all�that the wealth of individuals and of
states is being diverted from the development and the progress of
human expression and civilization."
Again, there's nothing racist there.
While I'm not personally a fan of eugenics, Sanger was a woman of her
times, and it would be unsurprising if she held some views that we
currently find distasteful, as so many of her era did.
And, among those who would find such views distasteful, aside from
myself, is the current current leadership of Planned Parenthood.
The president of Planned Parenthood is Cecile Richards, the daughter
of former Texas governor Ann Richards.
Do you have any evidence, rightard, any at all, that Cecile Richards
harbors racist views or is a eugenicist?
I've no need to wait for an answer.
You do not.
You should perhaps spend a little less time listening to anti-abortion
activists, rightard, and spend a bit more time finding out reality.
The above bit of dishonesty isn't a singular event in the
anti-abortion community.
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists...
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.