The Value of Birth Control

[GBFan]

Seemingly every new approach to the great problem of the human race must manifest its vitality by running the gauntlet of prejudice, ridicule and misinterpretation. Eugenists may remember that not many years ago this program for race regeneration was subjected to the cruel ridicule of stupidity and ignorance. Today Eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems. The most intransigent and daring teachers and scientists have lent their support to this great biological interpretation of the human race. The war has emphasized its necessity.

The doctrine of Birth Control is now passing through the stage of ridicule, prejudice and misunderstanding. A few years ago this new weapon of civilization and freedom was condemned as immoral, destructive, obscene. Gradually the criticisms are lessening-–understanding is taking the place of misunderstanding. The eugenic and civilizational value of Birth Control is becoming apparent to the enlightened and the intelligent.

In the limited space of the present paper, I have time only to touch upon some of the fundamental convictions that form the basis of our Birth Control propaganda, and which, as I think you must agree, indicate that the campaign for Birth Control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical in ideal, with the final aims of Eugenics.

First: we are convinced that racial regeneration like individual regeneration, must come "from within." That is, it must be autonomous, self-directive, and not imposed from without. In other words, every potential parent, and especially every potential mother, must be brought to an acute realization of the primary and central importance of bringing children into this world.

Secondly: Not until the parents of the world are thus given control over their reproductive faculties will it ever be possible not alone to improve the quality of the generations of the future, but even to maintain civilization even at its present level. Only by self-control of this type, only by intelligent mastery of the procreative powers can the great mass of humanity be awakened to the great responsibility of parenthood.

Thirdly: we have come to the conclusion, based on widespread investigation and experience, that this education for parenthood and of parenthood must be based upon the needs and demands of the people themselves. An idealistic code of sexual ethics, imposed from above, a set of rules devised by high-minded theorists who fail to take into account the living conditions and desires of the submerged masses, can never be of the slightest value in effecting any changes in the mores of the people. Such systems have in the past revealed their woeful inability to prevent the sexual and racial chaos into which the world has today drifted.

 

[Lagboltz]

That is from Margaret Sanger, "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda," Oct 1921.
Do you agree with her or not?

 

[GBFan]

Do I believe in eugenics? No ... but then, I'm anti-abortion, so it shouldn't come as any surprise.

I curious how pro-abortionists can rationalize between the two.

 

[Lagboltz]

Do I believe in eugenics? No ... but then, I'm anti-abortion, so it shouldn't come as any surprise.

I curious how pro-abortionists can rationalize between the two.

Margaret was referring to birth control in general and not specifically to abortion. Margaret was also referring to self-regulation which is currently practiced by some when they find that their spouse has the same recessive genes that have been found to trigger a serious hereditary disease. This is eugenics in a sense, but I agree that eugenics imposed by an outside governing body is repugnant.

In that light I don't know what type of rationalization you are referring to.

 

[GBFan]

Margaret was referring to birth control in general and not specifically to abortion. Margaret was also referring to self-regulation which is currently practiced by some when they find that their spouse has the same recessive genes that have been found to trigger a serious hereditary disease. This is eugenics in a sense, but I agree that eugenics imposed by an outside governing body is repugnant.

In that light I don't know what type of rationalization you are referring to.

Since you are familiar with the source document, then I'm sure you're familiar with the next portion in which Ms Sanger clearly advocates for government mandated eugenics, and used this as the basis for establishment of the organization known today as Planned Parenthood.

If you're not ... here it is.

"Birth Control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the Eugenic educator. In answering the needs of these thousands upon thousands of submerged mothers, it is possible to use this interest as the foundation for education in prophylaxis, sexual hygiene, and infant welfare. The potential mother is to be shown that maternity need not be slavery but the most effective avenue toward self-development and self-realization. Upon this basis only may we improve the quality of the race.

As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity 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 to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.

Birth Control is not advanced as a panacea by which past and present evils of dysgenic breeding can be magically eliminated. Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupidly cruel sentimentalism.

But to prevent the repetition, to effect the salvation of the generations of the future–nay of the generations of today–our greatest need is first of all the ability to face the situation without flinching, and to cooperate in the formation of a code of sexual ethics based upon a thorough biological and psychological understanding of human nature; and then to answer the questions and the needs of the people with all the intelligence and honesty at our command. If we can summon the bravery to do this, we shall best be serving the true interests of Eugenics, because our work will then have a practical and pragmatic value."

 

[Lagboltz]

Since you are familiar with the source document, then I'm sure you're familiar with the next portion in which Ms Sanger clearly advocates for government mandated eugenics, and used this as the basis for establishment of the organization known today as Planned Parenthood.

If you're not ... here it is.

No I did not fully read her article. I only looked at the first few sentences to verify the source. I don't know fully what the philosophy of Planned Parenthood is.

...Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupidly cruel sentimentalism. ...

The above excerpt seems to be the crux of her philosophy that you are referring to. I disagree with it. If Planned Parenthood advocates voluntary family planning I see no problem, but I have not seen any media objection that states that PP advocates forced eugenics in the way Sanger does.

 

[manolete]

Do I believe in eugenics? No ... but then, I'm anti-abortion, so it shouldn't come as any surprise.

I curious how pro-abortionists can rationalize between the two.

The only logical thing any people must do is preserve the best elements of its society. Nature has only one desire ,and that is to procreate and expand life on planet earth. It doesn't pick and choose which elements survive and which do not. The consequences of this natural selection are felt by all humanity at some point.
It remains for the sane and rational to do for mankind what nature will not. For the sake of human progress.

 

[Lagboltz]

The only logical thing any people must do is preserve the best elements of its society. Nature has only one desire ,and that is to procreate and expand life on planet earth. It doesn't pick and choose which elements survive and which do not. The consequences of this natural selection are felt by all humanity at some point.
It remains for the sane and rational to do for mankind what nature will not. For the sake of human progress.

It sounds like you endorse eugenics. If so how would you go about it.

You are not exactly correct when you say “[Nature] doesn't pick and choose which elements survive and which do not.” because nature indirectly does that through the slow process of natural selection. Are you for speeding it up through eugenics?

 

[manolete]

It sounds like you endorse eugenics. If so how would you go about it.

You are not exactly correct when you say “[Nature] doesn't pick and choose which elements survive and which do not.” because nature indirectly does that through the slow process of natural selection. Are you for speeding it up through eugenics?

How would nature choose ...on what basis. ? Nature's concern, as I stated, is to promote life. It doesn't matter what kind of life it is. In nature ,the ability to procreate the most ,is regarded as the "fittest" to survive.

Nature cares nothing at all about human misery and suffering.
If you don't know how you would go about creating a eugenics program it tells me you haven't spent much time on the subject or you have little regard for the untold benefits it would accrue to future generations ;who would bless all those implementing such a scheme.

You need to know that the mentally retarded have the same sex drives that you do and all healthy people.

Does that mean they should have children and pass on their genetic defects to their offspring ,so that future generations would have to cope in a greater way than we are doing now?

 

[Lagboltz]

How would nature choose ...on what basis. ? Nature's concern, as I stated, is to promote life. It doesn't matter what kind of life it is. In nature ,the ability to procreate the most ,is regarded as the "fittest" to survive.

Nature cares nothing at all about human misery and suffering.
If you don't know how you would go about creating a eugenics program it tells me you haven't spent much time on the subject or you have little regard for the untold benefits it would accrue to future generations ;who would bless all those implementing such a scheme.

You need to know that the mentally retarded have the same sex drives that you do and all healthy people.

Does that mean they should have children and pass on their genetic defects to their offspring ,so that future generations would have to cope in a greater way than we are doing now?

You are reading way too much more in my post than I posted. I am not asking what the benefits are. I'm asking you what method you would use to provide eugenics. That concept would be political suicide in most free countries, so either you have an idea on how it could be done or it remains just an intellectual exercise.

 

[dogtowner]

An evolution denier ? Curious. Are we stoll cto mangons ? Looks like nature has mote say than uou hive credit for

 

[Lagboltz]

An evolution denier ? Curious. Are we stoll cto mangons ? Looks like nature has mote say than uou hive credit for

Other than your typos, that is well said. It is hard to see where manolete is coming from.

 

[dogtowner]

Other than your typos, that is well said. It is hard to see where manolete is coming from.

My typing is never great but worse on a phone. I think i sort if get whete he is coming from but it just doesnt add up. Nature wouldnaturaly select on humans same as plants etc.

 

[manolete]

You are reading way too much more in my post than I posted. I am not asking what the benefits are. I'm asking you what method you would use to provide eugenics. That concept would be political suicide in most free countries, so either you have an idea on how it could be done or it remains just an intellectual exercise.

What method? What methods are used now by schools and public health agencies to ensure kids entering public and private schools get immunized ?

All children born in America and are diagnosed as autistic, mongoloid ,or imbecilic must be sterilized. asap.

 

[Texas_tea]

Great ..... another NAZI piece of shit new member to put on the ignore list!