Nixon would have aborted Obama
When I watched the new documentary Maafa 21 last weekend (read my snapshot review here and Matt Abbott’s in-depth review here) I was shocked to learn President Nixon was pro-abortion and pro-population control of blacks. The above still shot comes from that film.
Then on June 23 the Nixon Presidential Library released 154 hours of secret audiotapes Nixon made during the most critical point in U.S. history re: abortion, January and February 1973.
Reported the New York Times on June 23…
On Jan. 22, 1973, when the Supreme Court struck down laws criminalizing abortion in Roe v. Wade… Nixon made no public statement. But the next day, newly released tapes reveal, he privately expressed ambivalence.
Nixon worried that greater access to abortions would foster “permissiveness,” and said that “it breaks the family.” But he also saw a need for abortion in some cases – like interracial pregnancies, he said.
“There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,” he told an aide, before adding, “Or a rape.”
About that Gregg Cunningham at the Center for Bioethical Reform blog noted:
Ah, as regards the former, that would be Pres. Barack Obama, who “had a black and a white” parent [pictured right]. It is also stunning that Mr. Nixon assessed a bi-racial couple as an evil on the same order of magnitude as a sexual assault. Both, in his view, justified killing the resulting but innocent baby.
Earlier in the same conversation he expressed concern that abortion was undesirable because “it breaks the family.” He apparently believed that the need to kill mixed-race babies was so compelling that it justified “breaking” inter-racial families.
But as Maafa 21 revealed, from tapes released previously, Nixon was also interested in targeting blacks. (Thanks to Matt Abbott for transcribing.)
March 30, 1972
Nixon: A majority of people in CO voted for abortion, I think a majority of people in MI are for abortion, I think in both cases, well, certainly in MI they will vote for it because they think that what’s going to be aborted generally are the little black bastards.
Unidentified Staff: Sure.
April 3, 1972
Nixon: … as I told you and we talked about it earlier, that a hell of a lot of people want to control all the Negro bastards.
Unidentified Staff: Yeah.
Nixon: Isn’t that really true?
Unidentified Staff: Yeah
April 3, 1972
Nixon: You know what we are talking about – population control?
Unidentified Staff: Sure
Nixon: We’re talking really – and what John Rockefeller really realizes – look, the people in what we call the “our class” control their populations. Sometimes they’ll have a family of 6, or 7, or 8, or 9, but it’s exception.
Unidentified Staff: Sure.
Nixon: People who don’t control their families are people in – the people who shouldn’t have kids. Now that’s…
Unidentified Staff: The black population in the city of San Francisco has gone from 3k – right after World War II – to where they represent 30% of the population of San Francisco.
Nixon: What?
Unidentified Staff: Yes sir.
About the newly released tapes The Los Angeles Times wrote on June 24:
Discussing Nixon’s political opposition, [then-aide Chuck] Colson says it included “the blacks and the poor.”
In the 60s and 70s past and present presidents from both parties – Eisenhower, Ford, Johnson, Nixon, and Truman – worked with eugenics organizations, particularly Planned Parenthood, to push preborn genocide of blacks.
As prolifeprolove at the SuzyB blog noted yesterday, the new information on Nixon and abortion “holds significant weight for the pro-life cause because it re-emphasizes the foundations of the reasoning behind abortion clinics – population control and race control.”
I note neither the NARAL blog, nor the NOW website, nor the Planned Parenthood blog have touched the new information about Nixon’s support for aborting biracial babies.
They absolutely cannot. If they condemn any elective abortion committed for any reason they open a Pandora’s box for themselves.
Interestingly, Obama hasn’t and can’t say anything either.
Well, he could, but we’d be right there asking why he opposes the abortion of a particular “fetus” nonperson. What makes one fetus different or more special than another?
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I am interested to hear the pro-abortion response to this article and the new information about Nixon, supposing there will be any.
Oh wow……makes me glad Nixon was forced to resign. And I am SHOCKED at Eisenhower and Truman being supporters of PP!
I read about this yesterday at Pandagon where the “pro-abortion” response was essentially, “Wow, Nixon was a real bastard.” (http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/nixon_and_ninjas_agree_i_am_too_sexy_to_live/)
I don’t see Nixon’s example as having any relevance one way or the other on today’s abortion debate.
There’a a bit of pro-abortion commentary at RH Reality Check at http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/06/23/new-tapes-reveal-nixon-antichoice-with-a-disturbing-exception
Further pro-life insight on the Nixon-racism-abortion connection can be read at http://spuc-director.blogspot.com/2009/06/nixon-comments-highlight-abortion.html
The first time I heard any mention of Nixon’s thoughts on abortion was from Monica Crowley who worked for him after he left office. She said Nixon was very pro choice in that he thought abortion was such a private matter that the govt. had no business being involved in that decision.
I did not realize that he was so prejudiced against blacks. I think you have to come at this understanding the time frame of these comments. Also, PP started out representing as a good place for people. This did not show their ugly side immediately.
Interesting to think about Obama being the target of abortion. His mother was surely a hippie type and he should oppose abortion but he is all about the support they offer. Let us also remember he was raised by an atheist mother.
I read about this yesterday at Pandagon where the “pro-abortion” response was essentially, “Wow, Nixon was a real bastard.” (http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/nixon_and_ninjas_agree_i_am_too_sexy_to_live/)
I don’t see Nixon’s example as having any relevance one way or the other on today’s abortion debate.
On what basis, prochoicer? He was only insulting fetuses, right?
And he was for the CHOICE of a woman in a biracial relationship to abort her fetus.
I’m not sure what a pro-abortionist could find offensive about that. They support that.
Prochoicer, you do realize that Planned Parenthood’s founder was the same as nixon, and Planned Parenthood still honors her for it? And that right now African American babies are the most likely to be aborted, by three times?
Check this out, Prochoicer…
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57526
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62504
Has anyone seen the movie The Hospital?
There’s a scene where a rag tag group of protesters are meeting with the head of the hospital. Mostly they are black panther types who oppose the hospital’s expansion as it did away with low income housing.
There is one feminist there yelling about “the abortion issue.”
One of the young black women yells back “We don’t want your damn abortions or birth control!”
The movie was made in 1971. During that time there was a definite push for eugenic abortion.
Lauren, how interesting.
I am totally unimpressed with the “abortion = genocide” argument. I simply do not buy the notion that black women are committing genocide against their own race. That’s silly on its face.
I think that poverty has a lot to do with the higher rate of abortion among African-Americans. I don’t think that forcing African-American women to give birth against their will is helpful.
I am not really interested in whether Margaret Sanger had racist views. She may well have, given the era she lived in. So what? So do a lot of other people I admire. Heck, Thomas Jefferson owned slaves for goodness sakes but that doesn’t mean we throw out the Declaration of Independence.
So you are also fine with Nixon’s quotes, Prochoier?
I remember the Lila Rose thing when it happened. As a PP donor, I wrote to express my dismay that they don’t have their act together given that they should be EXPECTING these “gotcha” tactics. Based on my own knowledge of people involved with PP, I don’t believe it is a racist organization. I think the staffer just didn’t know what to do and didn’t want to responsible for losing a large donation by alienating the caller. Doesn’t make it right, but doesn’t mean that PP itself is motivated by racism.
I am totally unimpressed with the “abortion = genocide” argument. I simply do not buy the notion that black women are committing genocide against their own race. That’s silly on its face.
I can’t help it if you ignore the evidence that is right in front of you. The fact is that almost HALF of all African American babies end up being aborted. That is not the case with white babies, and there are more white people. And this was the objective of Margaret Sanger and still is the objective of Planned Parenthood today.
As for your “oh they lived in the times where lots of people believed that so it’s okay”, that’s ridiculous. That doesn’t make it okay.
Sorry. And slavery was not the premise of the Declaration of Independance, however, eliminating the poor and minorities was and still is the premise of Planned Parenthood.
Prochoicer, I am glad to hear that you wrote to Planned Parenthood about it. However, I disagree that they were innocent as you seem to believe. Speaking of Lila Rose… what do you think about the fact that time and time again Planned Parenthood has been caught protecting pedophiles? It’s happened so many times that even Hal has taken a stand against them and stopped donating to them.
Do you really think it’s just an innocent mistake that happens to repeat itself in every single planned parenthood that Lila Rose walks into?
Bethany,
Sigh. No I am obviously NOT fine with Nixon’s quotes, nor am I fine with any racism Sanger may have expressed.
Of course, Nixon and Sanger AREN’T the same. Nixon didn’t express ANY respect for women’s rights to choose. Indeed, he expressed a desire to control women by using forced pregnancy to curb “permissiveness” and by conceding abortion might be okay only in situations HE approved of. Hardly, a pro-choice position. A real bastard that guy.
(not to mention the 800 clinics that were called in a life dynamics investigation, and over 90 percent of them protected the rapist/pedophile and advised the girl not to give out her boyfriend’s age).
Of course, Nixon and Sanger AREN’T the same. Nixon didn’t express ANY respect for women’s rights to choose. Indeed, he expressed a desire to control women by using forced pregnancy to curb “permissiveness” and by conceding abortion might be okay only in situations HE approved of. Hardly, a pro-choice position. A real bastard that guy.
Prochoicer, have you never read Margaret Sanger’s “American Baby Code”?
I’m really stunned by this info and by the past Presidents who supported this awful agenda. :(
“Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”
Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.
“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the 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 more rebellious members.”
Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.
“Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”
Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review.
“Eugenics is … the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.
Margaret Sanger. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.
“Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.”
[no source available at this time…]
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 feeble-minded, 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.
“The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics.”
Margaret Sanger. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.
“Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying … demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism … [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. 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 … 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.”
Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Chapter on “The Cruelty of Charity,” pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.
“The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind.”
Margaret Sanger, quoted in Charles Valenza. “Was Margaret Sanger a Racist?” Family Planning Perspectives, January-February 1985, page 44.
“The third group [of society] 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.”
Margaret Sanger. 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 marriage bed is the most degenerative influence in the social order…”
Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.
“[Our objective is] unlimited sexual gratification without the burden of unwanted children…”
Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.
“Give dysgenic groups [people with ‘bad genes’] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization.”
Margaret Sanger, April 1932 Birth Control Review.
Bethany at 8:56 am —
I am not ignoring anything. You are ignoring the black women who are SEEKING abortions. I refuse to believe that they hate their own race and are committing genocide.
I don’t think it’s a good thing at all that more black women are getting abortions. I wouldn’t wish an unwanted pregnancy on any woman of any race or class.
That’s why I think PP is doing a good thing in providing reproductive services (which include contraception and counseling as well as abortion) in underprivileged areas. When I was poor, PP was a god-send. Because of them I never even had to consider abortion. Now that I am well-off, I don’t need PP but I know a lot of women do. Sadly in our society, underprivileged often correlates with “African-American.” But PP did not create that situation.
I am not ignoring anything. You are ignoring the black women who are SEEKING abortions. I refuse to believe that they hate their own race and are committing genocide.
“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the 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 more rebellious members.”
Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.
I gotta run for a bit but will be back if you respond later. :)
Before I leave, I’m going to ask this question though- why do you think it would be a sad thing for you to have to consider abortion?
Why is it a good thing that Planned Parenthood “saved you” from having to have an abortion?
Would that not just be an opportunity to get to express your freedom, and a right that all women should have?
Before I leave, I’m going to ask this question though- why do you think it would be a sad thing for you to have to consider abortion?
Why is it a good thing that Planned Parenthood “saved you” from having to have an abortion?
Would that not just be an opportunity to get to express your freedom, and a right that all women should have?
Bethany, I didn’t say undergoing an abortion would be “sad” for me. But I wouldn’t wish myself or any other woman to face an unwanted pregnancy. Do I need to point out that abortion is invasive and unpleasant compared to not getting pregnant in the first place?
And I don’t even know how to respond to the notion of getting an abortion just to express myself. I can think of more fun ways to express myself — like commenting on blogs!
As for the Margaret Sanger stuff, I said already that I am not overly concerned one way or the other about what this woman said in the 1920s or 1930s. I don’t think that her ideas about “eugenics” were out of line with mainstream thought at the time.Also, my sense is that her idea of eugenics was less about favoring certain races (as in blacks-versus-whites) and more about favoring the healthy over the unhealthy. That’s not a value I hold, but it isn’t the same as promoting genocide. (Remember that the term “race” was used more frequently to refer to the “human race” rather than blacks versus Asians versus whites, etc.)
By the way, I don’t believe for a second that she wanted to “exterminate the Negro race.” I believe that she didn’t want the word to go out that she wanted to exterminate the Negro race. In other words, she was concerned about people saying something false about her.
But again, I don’t really care. I mean I am constantly disappointed by the gross racism and sexism of MANY historical figures I otherwise admire. So what.
Lincoln was actually a racist also. You should read some of his quotes. He even used the N word multiple times.
Interesting exchange and dialogue. I like this so much better than slurs and yelling at each other. As someone who used to be pro choice it is more helpful to dialogue than accuse. Most have not thought the issue through or gotten beyond the sound bites. Prochoicer is a thinker though and that is good. For me when I examined the evidence with an open mind instead of an agenda and grasped that the pre born are living human beings, that regardless of the circumstances were being killed….it all fell apart…the other sound bites about freedom and women’s rights etc.
“Some people have 5, 6, 7, etc. children, but that’s the exception”! Wow! He would have had in mind Catholics then … to also be regulated.
Wonder what he would now say about that, when his more approved Western populations are not reproducing themselves. Certainly he would have another category to stifle – the Muslims!
Oh, and I almost forgot to address the “protecting pedophiles” accusation. I have gone into this before on other threads in this blog.
I have been involved in investigating and prosecuting people who have failed to abide by mandated reporting laws. These people have included guidance counselors, ministers, doctors, and others in the helping professions (not abortion related). Mostly, they are good people who felt that they would discourage the young girls who came to them from getting help if they reported their situation. While I have worked to support these laws, I also believe that it is human nature to want to support a young girl who comes to you for help if she says she desparately does not want her situation reported. It can seem like a violation of her trust if you turn around and report it.
Now, to be clear, I am not advocating that people break the mandated reporting law. In fact, I have spent many days and hours of my life prosecuting such people. But I can understand why otherwise good people have difficulty with the law. I don’t view these nice but misguided doctors and clergymen and counselors as evil people who wanted to protect pedophiles.
That having been said, I think PP needs to get its act together. I am not going to stop donating though, because I think they are doing important work.
Thank you, Maria. I do like delving into how the other side thinks — but I converted the other way from a kinda sorta pro-life stance (admittedly ambivalent) to pro-choice.
we pro aborts chuckled a bit when we heard that Nixon tape. We see abortions for related to spousal-abuse, personal, economic, and serious genetic defects. The first part of what Nixon said is 100% true – there is a need for abortion in some cases. Then he revealed an old belief that mixed babies were somehow malformed (interesting for a Californian born to a Quaker mother). We do condemn what he said, with no harm of our permanent argument that both elective and necessary abortions must remain legal and safe in this civilized country, or else risk becoming an uncivilized country where only affluent women can have undocumented or off-shore abortions. If only the rich can correct mistakes then the poor to doomed to live with theirs. That’s a foundation for a more corrupt and unfair society.
Just expressed to my children on Father’s day how
watching Nixon resign on TV was one of my saddest
memories – for my country.
Makes one wonder whether his dark heart led to his demise.
Prochoicer – consider making a gift to NAF. If you want to know which group is best in preserving the practice, developing the next generation of doctors, and protecting their safety and privacy, NAF is the organization to support.
” If only the rich can correct mistakes then the poor to doomed to live with theirs.”
Well, my 5 brothers and sisters and myself, “mistakes” in a poor family all, had quite a wonderful time being “doomed” and living with each other.
You’re twisted.
And Maria, I kind of got an uncomfortable feeling with this that you said to kick things off:
“Let us also remember he was raised by an atheist mother.”
My kids are raised by an atheist mother. It doesn’t mean I’m not going to try my hardest to instill proper values in my children, including respecting all human life whether it be in the womb or out. Being raised by an atheist isn’t some moral handicap that should be pitied.
Sadly in our society, underprivileged often correlates with “African-American.” But PP did not create that situation. Nah, PP didn’t create the situation but they sure exploit it!
I understand your points of view but many of yoru points are misplaced compassion. To say that you can easily dismiss what Sanger said about black people “because it was the times” is equivalent to saying that slavery was ok because “it was just the times.” Or that what Hitler thought (whom he adored Sanger) to kill off Jews was ok because that was “just the times.”
Prochoicer, you contradict yourself in your own post (the one from 9:47) with the paragraph about Sanger thinks it’s ok to exterminate blacks but just didn’t want others to find out. From what I’ve read of her (Read Grand Illusions), she didn’t care that others found out about her thoughts on black people. She hated them and wanted them dead and she put the tools in their hands to allow them to kill off their own race and PP is continuing that today.
The mentality of M. Sanger runs through PP because it’s what she started. While I believe the underlying intent to help women and families was the noble genesis which many wanted, Sanger perverted that idea and ran with it, which unfortunately has left our society with Planned Parenthood.
Black women are choosing abortion for the same reason any woman chooses abortion. She believes the lies she’s be indoctrinated with. She believes she can lead a life of promiscuity without consequences, including STDs, sterility, and cancer (HPV). She believes there are no side effects to abortion. When in reality side effects include breast cancer, sterility and emotional problems and more, too numerous to mention here.
The fact that abortion is rooted in racism is hidden from all women. It is not something to be shoved under the table, considering one out of every two black children are abort in the U.S.
I will indeed look into donating to NAF.
Lauren, 8:23a: You gotta get Maafa 21. I was blown away to learn the black activists of the 60s and early 70s – the Black Panthers, Jesse Jackson, etc. – understood the push for birth control and abortion was all about black genocide. The movie is so well documented. The evidence that black genocide is still today the goal of the abortion/population control industry is irrefutable.
Crutcher brought up a great example. After Katrina the first thing offered to the people was free morning-after pills and abortion. Now imagine had the same catastrophe happened at Martha’s Vineyard or La Jolla.
Dirtdartwife, Don’t know where I contradicted myself.
I do think that the pro-life movement is cynically exploiting the racial problems in this country. I am sure my own ancestry (half Italian, half Jewish) would have been considered undesirable by many during Sanger’s era. But I can tell the difference between someone wanting to impose sterilization on me and someone wanting to give me the freedom to make my own decisions.
PP helps a lot of underprivileged black people?
Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.
Huh? I think that morning after pills and abortions WOULD be provided if people in Martha’s Vineyard or La Jolla were suddenly stranded and isolated with no way out. But that scenario is less likely to happen in the first place because people in Martha’s Vineyard and La Jolla generally have money.
You don’t think it’s kind of insulting, Prochoicer, to have a natural disaster happen in your community and immediately have a bunch of people who are better off than the people in your poor community swoop in and say, “Alright, we’re here to help terminate your unwanteds now, since you probably didn’t have the ability to keep your pants on through this traumatic event, you dumb poor people. You’re so poor, and so black.” (I didn’t come up with that last part. That last sentence is properly credited to Wolf Blitzer. I’m not kidding. He really said that.)
This quote sums up the pro-choice side better than any I’ve heard, I think:
“Nothing in the world is more dangerous
than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.
Well, I don’t think they swooped in and said anything like that. I think they said this service is available if anyone wants it or needs it.
Xalisae, Another reason I never viewed Planned Parenthood’s distribution of abortion and contraceptive servcies as insulting is that it never occurred to me to think that having sex in the wake of a disaster is a dumb thing to do. To me, it seems both understandable and natural to turn to a husband or boyfriend for comfort, including sexual comfort, after going through something like that.
I’ll raise my hand here and say I too, am completely bored and non-plussed with the consistent reminders of how racist the roots of PP was. I’m over it.
Yep, Margaret Sanger sounds like she had some pretty jacked up, disturbing viewpoints on communities and women of color. But so did the original suffrage movement. So did Lincoln. So did our ‘Founding Fathers’. Rockefeller. Probably even Kennedy. So did LOTS of people, organizations and institutes of power from back then, before then and yes, still today. The point is NOW. What were the fruits of that time now? Lots of good. Voting Rights for women. Opening the Armed Forces to minority men. Vaccinations for communicable diseases. Access to legal abortion. All born from an unseemly and distasteful past? Of course. As most of our history is.
If I were to condemn any and all pillars of my country that had roots and tentacles in the discrimination, elimination and oppression of another people, I would be left with very, very little to celebrate. I accept that in a very different time and place, many, if not most, of the things/people we exault today looked and sounded a lot different then.
If I were pushing forward a pro-life agenda, I would concentrate my message on the health and support of pregnant women. I’m really not sure how much traction there is on continuing playing this racism card (which is ironic, given how vehemently most conservatives push back on EVER bring up race at any other time).
“…it never occurred to me to think that having sex in the wake of a disaster is a dumb thing to do. To me, it seems both understandable and natural to turn to a husband or boyfriend for comfort, including sexual comfort, after going through something like that.”
Umm…well…if you’re having trouble securing even the BASICS for YOURSELF, let alone your loved ones, friends, etc…I think sex would be the LAST thing on my mind…like…ever. But then again, I’ve always tried to be the responsible one. Just seems to me like dead bodies everywhere and the prospect of starving to death or dying of dehydration with little to no privacy or place to live…kind of a mood-killer.
I think Nixon’s statements encourage some backwards thinking:
If abortion is an acceptable option for an unwanted pregnancy, why is it considered offensive to abort because of the unborn baby’s race? By claiming offense to aborting due to race, one has necessarily assigned value to the unborn. If race is an unacceptable motive, then what makes killing based on gender, disability or biological father an acceptable motive? Just like race, these are all genetically determined traits. Why do many have the knee-jerk reaction to race discrimination via abortion, but no such reaction to other forms of discrimination via abortion, like Down Syndrome? Is the political potency behind certain discrimination causing this reaction? Doesn’t the reaction itself imply a sense of injustice towards the unborn in some instances? Why is it only injustice sometimes? If research uncovered a fetal genetic test that predicted homosexual tendencies, would it be wrong of the parent’s to abort? If it is wrong, would that mean that a heterosexual has less of a right to live than a homosexual? If the mother is the only one who can assign value to her unborn baby, then who cares what arbitrary reason, even if it is blatant discrimination, she uses to abort?
Before I leave, I’m going to ask this question though- why do you think it would be a sad thing for you to have to consider abortion?
Why is it a good thing that Planned Parenthood “saved you” from having to have an abortion?
Would that not just be an opportunity to get to express your freedom, and a right that all women should have?
Posted by: Bethany at June 25, 2009 9:15 AM
Great questions Bethany. Freedom is good!!!!
There are no good answers though, because the “choice” to keep or kill a baby is “good” only in the lexicon of the abortion industry.
* * *
“I will indeed look into donating to NAF.”
Posted by: Prochoicer at June 25, 2009 10:22 AM
I assume you are referring to the National Abortion Federation. You are beyond pro-choice, you are a pro-abort. Why not give to a pregnancy resource center or a church that ministers to pregnant women instead?
Xalisae – Perhaps, but I think the goal of the relief efforts was to make it so survivors DIDN’T have to worry about the basics, so that they could start to feel human beings again, which includes having sex.
“If I were pushing forward a pro-life agenda, I would concentrate my message on the health and support of pregnant women.”
Danielle, I pretty much agree here. I have no qualms with discussing various critcisms of the abortion movement and those involved, historically and presently, if that subject comes up. But I don’t see that as a particularly convincing pro-life argument or a major pro-life tenant – it’s more of a supplemental point, kind of background information. It often becomes a distraction from the heart of the argument and tends to foster a spiteful reaction. Yes, the health and support of pregnant woman and their unborn children should be the primary focus of the pro-life cause.
Janette @ 11:47,
Excellent points.
“…DIDN’T have to worry about the basics, so that they could start to feel human beings again, which includes having sex.”
But assuming that they needed abortions would be assuming that they’d already been having sex willy-nilly and without having procured the basics. Only people who’ve already been having sex would need abortions, right?
Janette at 11:47 a.m.
What makes Nixon’s statement so offensive is that he is presuming to tell women that they CAN’T abort except in particular situations where HIS racial prejudices come to the fore. His is a fundamentally ANTI-choice position, because he only wants to allow women to have abortions in situations that HE approves of.
I DO support the right of a woman to choose abortion (or childbirth) for ANY reason, even if they are reasons I disapprove of. The point is that it is HER choice, not mine.
And when does the person whose life cycle is being ended get a choice?
Xalisae,
I was referring to the fact that abortion is not the only service PP provides.
But people DO have sex that results in unintended pregnancy whether in New Orleans or Martha’s Vineyard, whether in the wake of an emergency or not. If it is insulting to provide these services after Hurricane Katrina, then it is always insulting to provide these services anytime anywhere.
The other thing about Katrina was that the whole infrastructure broke down, which means that there was a general increase in crime, which included rape. So that was part of it too.
Posted by: Prochoicer at June 25, 2009 12:12 PM
So you’re more offended that you feel he is imposing his mostly pro-life views, with particular exceptions than happen to be racist, on others than that he’s a fan of sanctioned killing for certain races. Well, all right.
As a side note, I believe that justice is everyone’s business. It is a scientific fact that human life begins with conception, the moment where a genetically unique human entity is created, and the goal of abortion is to destroy these individuals. It strikes me as a gross oversimplification to chalk it up as another “none of your business” issue, as if it carries no more importance than one’s personal grooming habits.
(My baby just woke up, so I may not be quick to respond.)
I think Nixon’s statements encourage some backwards thinking: If abortion is an acceptable option for an unwanted pregnancy, why is it considered offensive to abort because of the unborn baby’s race?…
Posted by: Janette at June 25, 2009 11:47 AM
Janette, for the record, I somewhat agree with you – let me also say that I do not support the promotion and advancement of eugenics – for race, gender, Downs, homosexuality, anything. But that assumes that I know the reasons behind why any one person aborts – this goes back to a previous thread discussing the privacy of this issue. My position is, it may indeed be personally offensive to me, it’s not for you and I to judge or know why she’s doing it(excluding family, doctor, etc).
I think the reasons behind why someone chooses to abort( or not) almost says more about than whether or not they do (or don’t). It’s a lot easier to ‘drum up empathy’ for a young teen or a rape victim, abuse survivor, etc, than it is for a woman who doesn’t like red-haired girls and therefore aborts. The same sort of judgements are reserved for women who DO choose to have children…ex, a couple struggling w/infertility who finally get pregnant vs. a girlfriend who uses babies as manipulation tactics in multiple relationships. Those judgements and assumptions color your opinion of not only the woman, but programs in place that support her choice (abortion services, welfare and child support laws, etc).
Even though there are those who ‘abuse’ both sides of this issue, or are not the kind of people you would associate yourself with does not negate my support of their ability to have or not have children. Of course they are laws in place that try to curb that but I think that’s the best they can do, is curb. Anything more becomes intrusive and would infringe on one’s reproductive rights.
I tried reading all the comments, but it is still unclear to me… Prochoicer: yes or no, do you support a woman’s right to choose in cases of gender selection, race selection (maybe just the wrong father), or selection based on future disability? (any…all…?)
oh, the sweet irony.
Well, after searching quite a bit, I have yet to find another instance of PP being mentioned in the same breath as a natural disaster besides Katrina, so if you do happen to find a natural disaster that PP trolled for customers that didn’t involve primarily African-Americans, let me know.
Also, as much as I can understand emergency contraception being provided to rape victims after such a tragedy, I have a problem with the way it sounds like things were done…like…just giving pills to women without a thorough examination…taking pills like that while you’re father along in a pregnancy than you or a PP worker might realize (or even taking pills like that without knowing whether or not you’re pregnant to begin with) can be exceedingly harmful, both to a baby and a mother.
But I guess when your company creed is “Throw pills at the problem. If that doesn’t work, we can always abort!”, you really don’t worry about things like that.
*farther
Danielle, why are you so afraid to call a spade a spade?
It is unquestionably wrong to kill someone because of his genetics. Were this killing performed outside the womb, it would be a hate crime.
Society judges the actions people take. We don’t all set back and say “well I find shooting toddlers personally offensive, but it’s not for me to judge another person’s actions.”
We call the toddler shooter a murderer and throw them in jail. We must not be afraid to call an evil action out.
I tried reading all the comments, but it is still unclear to me… Prochoicer: yes or no, do you support a woman’s right to choose in cases of gender selection, race selection (maybe just the wrong father), or selection based on future disability? (any…all…?)
Yes!
That doesn’t mean that I approve of racism or sexism or ableism. It means I believe in a woman’s right to control what happens to her own body.
Xalisae, I am not aware of any other natural disasters in America in the past 100 years on teh scale of Katrina. I recell reading that reproductive health centers all along the Gulf Coast were shut down, and people were stranded for a very long time. That isn’t typical.
Henry Ford was a well-known racist and supported Adolf Hitler 100%
Does this mean that the current Ford Company and its employees are racist anti-semites? Does it mean that anyone who drives a Ford supports racism and the extermination of Jews?
Do any of you drive Fords??
Do the employees of Ford prey upon African-Americans? Do they sell them shoddy cars?
This is a completely different situation. Planned Parenthood specifically targets urban, poor areas which hold more of the African-American population. To this day, they do it. As recently as last year, they were caught in racist acts, and there are recordings of telephone conversations to prove it.
We’re not saying that all people who use PP are racist. We’re saying the company preys upon the black race, in that it aborts about half of their children. That’s pretty frightening.
What’s also frightening is that you’ve tried to compare a company who sells abortions (the slaughter of unborn human beings) to one that sells cars.
Well, after searching quite a bit, I have yet to find another instance of PP being mentioned in the same breath as a natural disaster besides Katrina, so if you do happen to find a natural disaster that PP trolled for customers that didn’t involve primarily African-Americans, let me know.
Just as an FYI, Planned Parenthood in NYC offered free services shortly after 9/11. Birth control, testing, emergency contraception, gyn exams, and abortion.
I do know that FORD company supports
homosexuality / same sex marriage.
Janet: why would a pro-choicer give $ to a church organization that helps women in crisis pregnancies? Or a Pregnancy resource center which provides free baby supplies? They generally don’t like those organizations, because they actually encourage the woman to CHOOSE LIFE.
There are better places to get TRUE and necessary health care other than PP. I think hospitals should offer free or very low cost mammograms at least once a month for low income women so they aren’t forced to go to PP.
Did Henry Ford build his factories to support his racist agenda and support Hitler?
Margaret Sanger did.
Does this mean that the current PP and its employees are racist and pro-abortion ?
With the Live Action films and the sting operations result…you tell me.
I was responding to the many Sanger quotes posted above and that Sanger wanted to “extermate the negro population.”
I do not believe this is the goal of Planned Parenthood today, or that the organization ‘targets’ African Americans.
We call the toddler shooter a murderer and throw them in jail. We must not be afraid to call an evil action out.
Posted by: Lauren at June 25, 2009 12:43 PM
-I do not consider abortion to be an evil action.
Planned Parenthood specifically targets urban, poor areas which hold more of the African-American population…We’re not saying that all people who use PP are racist. We’re saying the company preys upon the black race, in that it aborts about half of their children. That’s pretty frightening.
Posted by: Kel at June 25, 2009 1:35 PM
-Planned Parenthood has clinics in traditionally urban and poor neighborhoods. Most of the time the majority of the residents in urban/poor neighborhoods are Black (or Hispanic). You are drawing the conclusion that as of today, PP is putting clinics up in areas to provide abortions specifically for Black women and babies, rather than Black women and babies living disproportionately in areas where free or government assisted services, such as PP, are. Those are two totally different things, with two different motivations. If you believe that, then you must also agree that the food industry is also guilty of racism, by slowing debilitating minority communities because they ship junk food and soft drinks disproportionately to those neighborhoods.
Faye Wattleton, who is Black, was the President of PP for decades. So you’re suggesting that the elimination of the Black race was a part of her annual mission statement to the board?
We’re not saying that all people who use PP are racist. We’re saying the company preys upon the black race, in that it aborts about half of their children. That’s pretty frightening.
The problem with this theory is that it completely ignores the agency of black women who choose abortion (and black women who head agencies like PP).
“Even though there are those who ‘abuse’ both sides of this issue, or are not the kind of people you would associate yourself with does not negate my support of their ability to have or not have children”
Posted by: Danielle at June 25, 2009 12:34 PM
I understand this point, and do somewhat agree with it. I realize that racism is an unflattering argument for anything and that one can completely abhor it without removing their general support for the thing (in this case, abortion). My thing with people reacting negatively to racism and abortion was not that their reaction was inappropriate, but that it proves that they do assign value to the unborn. I realize that abortion supporters vary in opinion on the value of the unborn. I am referring mainly to those who would deny the unborn have anything but arbitrary value bestowed by the mother and yet are offended by racial motivations to abort. Racism is detestable because of the affects on the victim. If there is no victim, or the would be victim does not have any measurable significance, then racism is only a detriment to the person haboring those sentiments and no injustice has taken place. My point is that those who deny the inherent value of the unborn, yet have a problem with the unborn being aborted for racial motivations, are contradicting themselves or not being completely honest. Now, I realize many pro-choicers do believe that the unborn have inherent value, but still believe that certain situations merit the destruction of that life and/or that the woman’s privacy trumps the inherent value of the child – my exercise in “backwards thinking” doesn’t necessarily apply to this group.
As for the privacy issue you mentioned previously and presently, I think that’s where we’ll always disagree. I do think it’s our business, as members of society and citizens of a democracy, to point out injustice – not to assert moral superiority or unfeelingly impose my views, but to protect the innocent and seek solutions to aid desperate women. I see the “right to privacy and choice” vs. “right to life” argument not as a clear cut, good vs. evil situation, but rather two conflicting moral principles. In many situations, the right to choice and privacy is the best option for society, even if I personally disagree with the choices some make. But abortion is not included in that category for me.
Danielle and PC
Black women are prominent in PP? Did Faye Wattleton and present day black women of PP know of Sanger’s racist agenda and of her addressing the women’s auxillary of the KKK? How nice the ladies could take a day off from lynching black citizens and burning crosses to attend.
Margaret Sanger could hardly claim blissful ignorance of the klan and what it stood for. It was a large and powerful organization that made no secret of its agenda of racial hatred.
The real irony of this is that Sanger, the woman Ms.Wattleton claimed to so admire, would have assumed Ms. Wattleton was in her office to clean it or to serve her coffee.
What ever happened to Ms.Wattleton and her fanatical dedication to PP and its agenda? Did she finally hear the truth about the woman she so admired?
I think hospitals should offer free or very low cost mammograms at least once a month for low income women so they aren’t forced to go to PP.
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 25, 2009 1:44 PM
They do. Or, rather, the state does. I’m on a low-income woman’s healthcare plan that’s an offshoot of traditional medicaid that provides mammograms, pap smears, contraception, etc., by several providers who accept the state-funded plan.
Richard Nixon’s comment is so true of the mentality of that day. I’m proud to say I was no fan of his. The following arguments were used as a battle cry for legal abortion:
“How would you feel if your wife was raped by a drunken Indian?”
“How would you feel if your wife was raped by a n—–?”
Apparently sexual assault by a white man was far more desirable.
Blatant racism was a shamefully powerful tool in the war to legalize abortion. So was elitism. Remember all the “concern” for the poor?
In this era, white women impregnated by black men, like Obama’s mother, were vermin, their children undesirable and inferior, better off dead.
RSD 1:48PM
Good point. Didn’t a caller, pretending to be a donor, specify he wanted a black baby aborted and PP was only too happy to oblige? Didn’t this happen more than once? He said something about affirmative action and wanting his white child to have a chance when he grows up. Whatever, it was blatantly racist.
As for the privacy issue you mentioned previously and presently, I think that’s where we’ll always disagree. I do think it’s our business, as members of society and citizens of a democracy, to point out injustice – not to assert moral superiority or unfeelingly impose my views, but to protect the innocent and seek solutions to aid desperate women. I see the “right to privacy and choice” vs. “right to life” argument not as a clear cut, good vs. evil situation, but rather two conflicting moral principles. In many situations, the right to choice and privacy is the best option for society, even if I personally disagree with the choices some make. But abortion is not included in that category for me.
Posted by: Janette at June 25, 2009 3:33 PM
Beautifully said.
Mary,
I can’t speak for Faye Wattleton but I think when you are a minority, by necessity you get used to being part of institutions that would have excluded you in the past and admiring people who would have looked down on you.
For example, I am a woman and I am half-Jewish, so I deal with this all the time. I have proudly attended schools, joined organizations, and obtained employment with institutions that wouldn’t have given me the time of day 50 years ago. Yeah, I am disappointed a lot to find out someone who has influenced me is a virulent sexist or looked down on Jews in the 1930s (a time when anti-Semitism was considered acceptable in polite society). But that was the reality of the era and the people in it. They weren’t perfect. People can still admire and appreciate the contributions these imperfect people made to human freedom. Again, Thomas Jefferson owned slaves and repeatedly raped one of them, but I still admire and am grateful for the Declaration of Independence.
Prochoicer, the difference is that the Declaration of Indepedence wasn’t created to specifically destroy any group of people.
Planned Parenthood was designed to keep the poor or “unfit” from reproducing.
Hi PC 4:54PM
You make some good points about people and prejudices of the past, especially as someone of Jewish heritage. The Jewish people have seen more than their fair share of it.
A black person may overlook the possiblity that Lincoln was racist, as some historians argue, and admire his issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation.
Should black people have an issue with the emotional appeal racism played in promoting legal abortion? Should it concern them that this mentality might still be alive and doing well?
Should black people overlook the PP employee only being too happy to accept a donation from a donor with a racist agenda?
Excluding people is one thing, almost most ethnic and racial minorities have been subjected to this. Calling for their extermination is quite another.
You may be interested in the website http://www.blackgenocide.org. You will find more extensive coverage of this issue and the concerns of many black Americans.
I don’t think that the PP of today is hoping to systematically exterminate black people, but I do think they know who their target audience is, and they are building clinics in places where demographics suggest that the most abortions will occur. Here in Aurora IL, that giant clinic was built in a middle class mixed-leaning-toward predominantly African American community. It was not built in the impoverished primarily Hispanic part of Aurora near downtown. This would suggest that PP is not acting as a beneficiary to the poorest of the poor who desperately need health care.
I don’t think that the PP of today is hoping to systematically exterminate black people, but I do think they know who their target audience is, and they are building clinics in places where demographics suggest that the most abortions will occur.
Posted by: EH at June 25, 2009 5:57 PM
This is most likely the case. It’s a similar situation in my state. There are two PP’s, neither of them located in the poorest areas of the state (not by a long shot, actually), but both in areas with a high African American population.
Sorry, my attention was diverted by other matters but I did want to respond. I am not sure I have much to say that isn’t repetitive but here is sort of a summary:
— Eugenics is not a mainstream position in the United States as it was in the 1920s and 1930s, certainly not in socially liberal circles. To believe that eugenics is on PP’s agenda would require a belief that some secret cabal within PP has been trying to fool the public, their donors, their volunteers, their employees and even their own former President of 15 years(Ms. Wattleton) with a secret racist conspiracy. This seems highly unlikely, in fact impossible. I do not believe it at all.
— I wouldn’t presume to tell black people what they should or shouldn’t overlook. I can understand a black person not wanting to support PP, but I can also understand a black person having no problem continuing to support PP. To continue the Jewish analogy, it is kind of like some Jews not wanting to drive a Mercedes-Benz or other German cars because of their pastties to the Nazis. But plenty of Jews recognize that these companies no longer have anything to do with Anti-Semitism. (I myself drive a VW, a car pretty much originally invented and promoted by Hitler.)
— As for Sanger, again I am not overly concerned with what she may have said 70 or 80 years ago. But for whatever it matters, I am not convinced that she ever wanted to exterminate the black race. I also think she was more motivated by her desire to help women make decisions for their own quality of life and health. I think that she was shaped by seeing her mother’s struggles with multiple childbirth. For her contributions to women’s quality of life, including my own, I am personally grateful to her regardless of whether she approved of my race or not.
Hi PC,
One must draw their own conclusions from historical fact and the facts as they exist today.
PP was founded on a racist, elitist belief.
According to the black genocide.org website, 78% of PP clinics are located in minority communities.
PP has been sued for not reporting the rape of a 14y/o girl by her 21y/o soccer coach. They performed an abortion without her parents’ consent, in direct violation of the law.
Working undercover, PL college students have time and again exposed PP’s protecting of adult/minor sex, in violation of the law.
In other undercover calls, PP was happy to guarantee a black baby would be aborted with donation money in a blatantly racist request.
One can draw their own conclusions.
Margaret Sanger also believed infidelity / adultery was okay.
On adultery:
A woman’s physical satisfaction was more important than any marriage vow, Sanger believed. Birth Control in America, p. 11
“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)
my dad came from a family of 7 children, specifically the 5th of 7.
My mom came from a family of 7, the 2nd of 7.
If she really was concerned about women’s health, then why not fight for better standards of care at hospitals like cleanliness, etc?
Even before this new info, Nixon is one Republican I did not and would never vote for.
Obama would have aborted Nixon too.
As someone whose mother is the second oldest of a family of 9 children, and is herself the oldest of a family of 6 children…It is my personal, professional, and overwhelmingly scientific conclusion that Margaret Sanger can roll up her Planned Parenthood, stick it where the sun don’t shine, then proceed to suck a rock, or something that rhymes with rock.
What a terrible person.
This is all based on eugenics. The average IQ in Africa is about 82 according to latest review of research. African American IQ is somewhat higher but includes mixed race individuals.
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/visualizations/estimated-black-iq-by-state
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/visualizations/estimated-white-iq-by-state-us
Back in those days, people discussed such topics openly.
Prochoicer, I understand that you don’t want to believe this, but if you can’t believe the things the woman said with her own mouth, there’s not really much else I can do to help you see it. The only thing I can advise is for you to try reading her books in full though- all of them. I have read most of them. You can read many of them online for free.
“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)”
Now this is a woman who needs to take a math class.
Demographically speaking, a few large families, even with 10 kids, can’t make up for the 20% of women who have no children.
If it is okay for 20% to have no children, why is it a problem for 0.1% to have 10?
Short answer, it is not.
at Secular Right that suggest that abortion is dysgenic:
1. A study found that after an unwanted pregnancy has occurred, higher IQ couples are more likely to obtain abortions [Cohen, Joel (1971). “Legal abortions, socioeconomic status and measured intelligence in the United States”. Social Biology 18(1): 55-63].
2. Umarried teenage girls who become pregnant are found to be more likely to carry their babies to term if they are doing poorly in school.[Olson, Lucy (1980). “Social and psychological correlates of pregnancy resolution among adolescent women: a review” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 50(3): 432-445]
3. “The most striking differences were that women who had an abortion were much more likely than others to have been rated good students at age 9-11 and to have well-educated mothers (odds ratios, 2.0 and 1.7, respectively).” (Early predictors of nonmarital first pregnancy and abortion. By: Udry JR, Kovenock J, Morris NM, Family Planning) Perspectives, 0014-7354, 1996 May-Jun, Vol. 28, Issue 3)
4. http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2009/02/abortion-is-dysgenic-national.html
Hippie, that all makes sense. Those girls probably face more pressure from their parents to not “throw it all away.”
I know I was told in highschool that if I got pregnant, I would be forced to have an abortion.
It never happened, but I imagine many girls who do become pregnant hear a similar ultimatum.
Lauren,
The point I am making is that Margaret Sanger always said there should be more from the fit and less from the unfit, but the birth control she advocated has the opposite effect. She thought she could cheat mother nature.
She seemed to despise religion, yet her ideas have no friend in science or nature either.
Bethany,
It is not really a matter of what I do or don’t want to believe about Sanger. Frankly, as I have said, I don’t much care aeither way about her beliefs and attitudes in 1930, though I believe the pro-lifers exaggerate them.
It really doesn’t matter because I do not believe that PP is secretly a white supremacist organization, or that choice is inherently a racist philosophy. The eugenics movement in the U.S. died as a mainstream point of view after the horror of Hitler’s death camps were revealed.
With all due respect, Prochoicer, I’ll just repeat- read her books. If you really feel we’re exaggerating, read them for yourself and see.
I get the idea that the eugenics movement is still alive and well, given that in some places parents can pick and choose gender and certain genetic traits that are desirable to them, and babies diagnosed in utero with “undesirable” conditions such as Down’s syndrome or cleft palate, etc. are aborted. Yes, I think the eugenics movement is alive and well.
Lauren I was told the same thing. That “mistake” is now 16-1/2 and made me dinner tonight so I can get out the door to work in a few minutes!
“at Secular Right that suggest that abortion is dysgenic:”
hippie @ 8:29,
One can conclude with more certainty now than ever that the person destined to find the cure for cancer may have been aborted. Think of all of the other wonderful people who may have not done such nobel deeds, but who are “missed” because they were aborted. How tragic.