Poorly Planned Parenthood
History behind the federation demonstrates legacy of racism
JOSH MOENNING is a
sophomore advertising
and political science
major and a Daily
Nebraskan columnist.
As I was flipping through this
fine publication on Monday after
noon, I came across an advertisement
that seized my attention.
The headline for the Planned
Parenthood ad on page 6 of
Monday s Daily Nebraskan stated
boldly and informatively: “We’re
More Than You Think!” The ad
seemed to be aimed directly at me.
You see, I’ve entertained the idea
of writing a column about Planned
Parenthood’s little-known, sordid
past all semester, and now with this
disturbingly factual advertisement,
the folks at Planned Parenthood
seemed to be daring me to do it.
“We’re more than you think!”
How true indeed. Planned
Parenthood’s sinister past (and pre
sent) includes a whole heck of a lot
more than people think. Allow me to
explain.
The Planned Parenthood
Federation of America began as the
American Birth Control League in
1921. Among its founding members
was Margaret Sanger, a much cele
brated heroine of feminists because
of her pioneering role in the birth
control movement.
Throughout her life, Ms. Sanger
established many birth control clinics
and followed the birth control move
ment with an almost religious devo
tion. But in looking closely at
Sanger’s personal life and world
views, one begins to question
Sanger’s underlying motivations.
I say this because Maigaret
Sanger and her cronies at the
American Birth Control League were
active supporters of the eugenics
movement, whose main goal was to
create a super race of man.
Sanger and her friends tended to
1 \T *_• 1. ' i
ut i^uu.i*d^mpauii£ui^ wmic
supremacists, and they didn’t go to
great lengths to hide it. Sanger
coined the term “birth control” and
bluntly defined it as “the process of
weeding out the unfit” aimed at “the
creation of a superman.”
The historical evidence of her
racist and hate-filled motivation to
spread birth control among “inferior”
races is endless.
She was a favorite speaker at Ku
Klux Klan rallies, and she was
responsible for the creation of a plan
she called the “Negro Project,”
designed to sterilize blacks and
reduce the number of black children
being bom in the South.
Sanger labeled the urban poor
“an ever widening margin of biologi
cal waste,” and created the motto of
birth control and eugenics supporters
worldwide: “More from the fit, less
from the unfit.”
Sanger also was the founder of
the publication Birth Control Review,
a magazine that showcased the incur
ably racist views of her eugenicist
friends and colleagues. Thanks to
Human Life International, I was able
to find a compilation of some of the
racist excerpts featured in the maga
zine. Here are just a few examples of
the sentiments on which Planned
Parenthood was founded:
■ “The social and biological
worth of the individual is determined
by his inheritance... the different
races are radically unequal in mental
endowment, and that civilization in
America is inreaxenea... mrougn me
unrestricted reproduction of persons
of bad heredity and inferior racial
constitution.” - a review of the book
“Heredity and Human Affairs” by
L.C. Dunn, November 1930
■ “We must get rid of the inferior
colored races (the Blacks, the Yellow
and the Red races must be extermi
nated)” - “Overpopulation,” Bernard
Sacks, M.D., September 1924
■ “The human race will degener
ate if the superior races and the supe
rior classes among civilized races
will curtail the number of their off
spring while inferior races ... will
continue their high birthrate.” -
Editorial in The Critic and Guide,
September 1931
■ “The least fit to carry on the
race are increasing most rapidly...
Funds that should be used to raise the
standard of our civilization are
diverted to maintenance of those who
should never have been bom.” -
“Pivot of Civilization,” Margaret
Sanger, 1922
All this comes straight from the
mouths of the early founders and
supporters of Planned Parenthood.
If these quotes are not shocking
enough, there’s more dark informa
tion lying within the death trap that is
Planned Parenthood.
It seems as if the organization has
not let go of its deep-seated racism.
Indeed, statistics reveal that abortion,
Planned Parenthood’s modem popu
lation control tool, is most undeni
ably a racist institution in itself.
According to the U.S. Census
Bureau and the Alan Guttmacher
Institute, a pregnant minority woman
* cn_a_1!1_A_* i
la j un&iy iu auuu iiu
baby than a pregnant white woman.
The average abortion rate among
minority women is 2 1/2 times higher
than that of white women.
A Human Life International
research team found that in the 11
major U.S. cities with less than 10
percent minority populations, there
are only about 15 abortionists present
per million people. But in the 11
major U.S. cities with more than 70
percent minority populations, there is
an average of 53 abortionists per mil
lion people.
This means that cities with high I
minority populations have nearly
four times the number of abortionists r
than cities with low populations of j
minorities.
If this isn’t evidence of blatant ?
racial bias, I don’t know what is. It’s
time for the people at Planned
Parenthood to explain themselves.
In fact, if anyone associated with
the Lincoln chapter is reading this
today, I wholeheartedly invite them
to write in and try to explain away
their organization’s racist past and >
bloodstained present.
I’m willing to bet that won’t hap
pen though. When Planned
Parenthood does acknowledge its
sordid past, it doesn’t apologize or
try to offer explanations.
Quite the contrary, it praises the
name of its cherished founder and
spokesperson, Ms. Sanger.
Former Planned Parenthood pres
ident Faye Wattelton exalted the
eugenicist during an annual organi
zational meeting. “First as vou
know, as we celebrate the 100th birth- :
day of Margaret Sanger, our outra- j
geous and our courageous leader;..
we should be very proud of what we
are and what our mission is. It is a ,
very grand mission ... abortion is
only the tip of the iceberg... I
believe Margaret Sanger would have
been proud of us today if she had
seen the directions that we have most >
recently in this organization taken.”
I’m sure she would be very
proud.
Human nature
^ / • • . j ^ ^ :. ^ Ik h ^'^'''-rl ‘L
LORI ROBISON is a senior
news-editorial major and
a Daily Nebraskan colum
nist.
Lunging beasts snarled, bearing
fangs and claws, as they circled
around each other before pouncing
for the kill.
Others feigned retreat only to
attack from their opponent’s blind
spot, using the advantage of surprise
to get the best of their enemies.
Still others chose to participate in
a peculiar rite of humiliation, thereby
establishing their place of superiority
in the group hierarchy.
Life sure can be rough in the wild,
but nature’s got nothing on daytime
television.
On the shows inhabiting that time
slot there are no exciting camera
shots showmg the speed of the chee
urn in a cnase ior 11s prey, no views oi
African hyenas fighting over a dead
carcass, no insights into the hunting
rituals of the wild wolf pack.
This show is MUCH more basic
than that, and every day millions of
anxious viewers tune in to see this
bizarre bloodsport - who will come
out on top, who will lose, who will be
humiliated, who will strike first.
And instead of a smiling Marlen
Perkins popping up between commer
cials with the Mutual of Omaha logo
in the background, a content Jerry
Springer (or Montel Williams, Ricki
Lake, etc.) strolls among the aisles as
his devoted audience sits chanting his
name in a wild frenzy of adulation.
Specimens of all sizes, shapes and
backgrounds are paraded before the
cheering crowd before disclosing
their stories. The more shocking their
confessions, the better their chances
of getting out of this alive - and with
all their limbs (and hair) still intact.
It’s enough to make all that high
minded stuff learned in human
behavior courses seem trivial and out
dated. For the real low-down, in-your
face instruction about what keeps us
firmly entrenched in the roots of the
wild - egotism, betrayal and depravi
ty - one afternoon of talk show enter
tainment will be all the instruction
you’ll ever need.
Little did I realize that so much
valuable insight into our species at its
finest, and for far fewer dollars than
an average textbook, could be had
through television. I mean, where else
can a viewer attain such an up-front
view of hair-pulling, shirt-ripping,
chair-swinging battles of the fittest?
Score another point for Darwin.
The sheer popularity of these shows
seems to back up the view of survival
of die fittest (or at least, survival of
the one who can swing his or her fist
or chair faster than the bouncers can
react and tackle).
And like Nero lounging on his
velvet pillows preparing to announce
the fate of a defeated gladiator in the
Pnman arpno ftiA r*rmirr1 noccoc itc
verdict of each specimen paraded on
the stage. Screams of encouragement
erupt as opponents vie for a piece of
scalp or a bit of clothing.
I would like to report that I sat
dispassionately by as my friends were
swept up in the long-awaited and
much-sought-after uncensored Jerry
Springer’s “Too Hot For Television”
video (now being heavily marketed
on a station near you).
I would like to report that the call
of the wild and primitive collective
memory of humankind didn’t affect
MY place in so-called civilized soci
ety.
But the truth is that, even though
I’ve always found these screeching,
name-calling, nail-scratching contests
tiresome after about, oh, three min
utes, I found myself caught up with
and incorporated into the mob of
viewers in my living room while
watching this no-holds-barred specta
cle.
Forgive me. It was a moment of
weakness brought about by the disbe
lief that grown adults would be will
ing to indulge primitive impulses and
disclose the most intimate of personal
facts before millions of viewers.
I guess my excuse, my defense,
would revolve around a temporary
memorization, in which I could not
be held responsible for my viewing
choice.
Because it all seemed too unreal
to be real, reminding me of a pro
wrestling blowout. The guests didn’t
appear at least to be acting (unlike the
award-winning performances of the
WWF), but the outbursts of violence
were about as spontaneously planned
as a three-count win for Hulk Hogan.
It’s not that Jerry’s colorful speci
mens of human nature were insincere
in their hatred for each other. But
when the show’s producers sit a man
beside the gent that stole his last three
wives and is now making goo-goo
eyes at the guy’s new pet lizard, it’s
not an honest, open dialogue that’s
being sought after.
But thank God for the disclaimer
at the end of “Too Hot....” If it
weren’t for the fact that Jerry
explained that the video was not
meant to endorse such behavior, I
may have walked away with the
wrong impression.
As it turned out, I came to under
stand that Jerry and others like him
aren’t promoting that kind of behav
ior, they’re just exploiting it for our
entertainment (and for the consequent
load of money).
Well, that makes me feel a lot bet
ter. And after I returned the video to
the friend I borrowed it from (he had
others lined up who were anxiously
awaiting to watch the tape), I tried sit
ting down on occasion to find out just
what some of these other shows were
like.
But, alas, the thrill was gone. The
momentary journey into the recesses
of primitive delight was fleeting. You
see, it was the SAME show! Channel
after channel, time slot after time slot
- the same! Oh, there were different
people, different topics, but die plot
never really ventured very far away
from its true nature of eliciting plea
sure and shock.
I can’t help but wonder if anyone
in Roman audiences also found it
hard to keep from yawning after the
thousandth show.
But at least we can change the
channel.
