Herman Cain attacks Planned Parenthood for "planned genocide"

He raised the issue during an appearance today on “Face the Nation.”  Details:

Planned Parenthood is fighting back against a claim by Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain that abortion clinics are put in African American communities as part of a “planned genocide” to kill black babies before they are born.

Cain stood by his statement when questioned about it on Sunday, saying he would direct people to the words of Margaret Sanger, the late founder of Planned Parenthood and a supporter of eugenics.

“Seventy-five percent of those facilities were built in the black community. In Margaret Sanger’s own words, she didn’t use the word ‘genocide,’ but she did talk about preventing the increasing number of poor blacks in this country by preventing black babies from being born,” Cain told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

“It is simply unacceptable for those who oppose legal abortion to use inflammatory and divisive language based on race to push an ideological agenda,” Veronica Byrd, director of African American media for the Planned Parenthood Action Fund said in a statement responding to Cain’s remarks.

“Hermain Cain is wrong on the facts and clearly out of the mainstream in his attack on Planned Parenthood,” Byrd said.

Byrd also pointed to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, an organization dedicated to sexual and reproductive health, that shows fewer than one in 10 abortion clinics are located in predominantly African-American neighborhoods.

The Guttmacher Institute said that according to 2008 figures, the most recent data available, 63 percent of abortion clinics — defined as providers of 400 or more abortions annually — are located in predominantly white neighborhoods while 12 percent are located in neighborhoods where one-half or more of the residents are Hispanic. Only 9 percent are located in predominantly black neighborhoods while 15 percent are located in mixed racial and communities.

At the same time, however, the institute notes that the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women and for Hispanics, it is double the rate of whites.

Cain, who has propelled to the top of the GOP presidential primary contest, has had to backtrack on recent statements suggesting that he would support abortions for women who are victims of incest and rape.

Speaking to CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday, Cain said he is “pro-life from conception, period” and does not support abortion for any reason.

He added that many groups besides Planned Parenthood “offer sincere counseling” whereas Planned Parenthood would rather “facilitate” young black women getting abortions.

“What I’m saying is Planned Parenthood isn’t sincere about wanting to try to counsel them not to have abortions,” he said.

Read more.

RELATED: “Every 21 minutes, our next possible leader is aborted”

Comments

  1. Finally!! A Black leader who hasn’t been bought off with Planned Parenthood money and is willing to tell the truth!

  2. Come on, Gerard, I am probably on the same page as you are about Abortion but can you support with sources:

    “Finally!! A Black leader who hasn’t been bought off with Planned Parenthood money and is willing to tell the truth!”

  3. From the article:

    “Byrd also pointed to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, an organization dedicated to sexual and reproductive health, that shows fewer than one in 10 abortion clinics are located in predominantly African-American neighborhoods.”

    This is a typical Planned Parenthood dodge. The truth of the matter is that Planned Parenthood operates 78% of their clinics in black and hispanic neighborhoods. Not all PP clinics perform abortions, but all promote contraception.

    PP represents 1/3 of all abortion clinics in the US. So the issue isn’t one of TOTAL abortion clinics and where they are represented. The issue is where PP operates 78% of their abortion and birth control facilities. They operate 78% of their facilities in neighborhoods that represent 30% of the US population (black and hispanic), the very groups PP founder Margaret Sanger referred to as “human weeds”.

  4. Henry Karlson says:

    It really sounds like he is over-compensating for his real position which he let out earlier, and found out his supporters hated.

  5. HMS,

    Pick out black politicians and look at their donor list. Then look at what they say and don’t say. It ain’t rocket science. There are plenty of pro-life groups who have been following along closely.

    I’ve been working along with the National Black Pro-Life Coalition for a year now. There’s lots there when you sit down and learn the web of political relationships

  6. Deacon John M. Bresnahan says:

    So often when the media covers something Catholic it drags in some perceived mistake the Church may have made 500 years ago.
    But the history of Planned Parenthood is modern and its 20th Century history is one of rampant aggressive racism—yet the media never illustrates or comments in stories on Planned Parenthood with some accurate factual history about the disreputable history of that organization.
    Thus, voters never hear of Margaret Sanger’s speech before the KKK. Nor that one of her favorite lines was that she wants America to become a “nation of greyhounds” by getting rid of racial and ethnic groups she and her group considered “inferior.” Or that many of the early leaders of her group became Nazi activists (because of Hitler’s eugenic policies). Or that, basically, their eugenics attitudes haven’t changed since those policies gave
    aid and comfort to the Nazis.
    They just changed their name and quietly hunkered down until they could safely re-emerge into an American society which is notorious for having amnesia with regard to history.

  7. Gerard:

    Here is the statement that I wish you would verify:

    “A Black leader who hasn’t been bought off with Planned Parenthood money.”

    Can you verify any Black leaders who have been bought off with Planned Parenthood money?

  8. HMS,

    Please call Dr. Alveda King at Priests for Life and have a talk with her. Ask her about the black political leadership at the NAACP and their embrace of PP and PP $$. Ask her to tell you about how the same political leadership at NAACP will not allow Dr. King or the National Black Pro-life Coalition to speak at the annual meetings, about how they are shunned.

    I’m challenging you to get involved beyond this thread and see for yourself. I’ve given you the resources. Now do the work.

  9. HMS, Yes, if you count Obama as a black leader, he has been bought and paid for by planned killing non parenthood for years along with the Democratic Party.

    Of course that does not mean he does not fully believe in the murder of innocent children for as we all know, he even supported those who manage to survive abortion to be killed off. And if one counts the solid support of the congressional black caucus for abortion, you can add them to the list if they have received funds from the abortion mill planned killing non parenthood.

    You can be sure that Cain will get no funding from any of those just wild about abortion.

  10. Gerard:

    Thank you. I will look into this for myself.

  11. The Guttmacher Institute was founded as a semi-autonomous arm of Planned Parenthood. It is named after a former president of Planned Parenthood. This article quotes GI as a neutral third party but essentially it is Planned Parenthood.

  12. naturgesetz says:

    In the 1980′s there was a very dedicated black woman named Barbara Bell who was regularly part of the demonstrations against abortion which were held outside the PP facility in Brookline, Massachusetts, adjacent to Boston. She carried a sign which called abortion “the black genocide.” She also had a very powerful voice and could be clearly heard by those entering the clinic even when a “buffer zone” was created to keep pro-life people from having any contact with those entering. As I recall PP brought a court case to have her silenced (and I think they were successful).

  13. I’ve been a student of Margaret Sanger for years. Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics has produced the most scholarly documentary on Sanger, and Planned Parenthood’s racist eugenics. It’s called Maafa 21

    http://www.maafa21.com/

    It can be seen on YouTube in something like 13 parts.

  14. ron chandonia says:

    #1: Is Herman Cain a “Black leader who . . . ” anything? Obviously Mr. Cain is African American, and obviously he is a leader, but from the reaction to his candidacy in the black community, I think he hardly qualifies as a community leader, which is what the “black leader” term implies. I would very much like to hear a leader who is truly respected in the black community speak out forcefully about the high abortion rate among African Americans, but at the moment even raising the subject is regarded as evidence of racial insensitivity if not outright racism.

  15. Ron are you serious? Over 50% of the American Black Population has been eliminated by abortion and you are concerned about “racial insensitivity?”

    A real leader speaks truth, period. That’s Herman Cain, finally, a black politician with the guts to tell it like it is, a true potential game changer in America.

    Of all of the Obama policies I loathe, I can could never get past the fact that the first black president and first lady have not only stayed silent on black genocide, but encourage it.

  16. Ron,

    Last November I gave testimony to the New York City Council using the city’s own vital statistics.

    60% of black pregnancies end in abortion in NYC, compared to 21% for whites. It needs to be said.

    Blacks have 3x the abortion rate as whites.

    They have 3x the number of premature births after abortion compared to whites.

    They have 3x the rate of cerebral palsy as whites (secondary to extreme premature birth).

    They have 3x the incidence of breast cancer as whites (secondary to abortion and oral contraceptive use).

    They have 3x the infertility rates as whites.

    All of these sequellae are in a dose-dependent manner regarding the precipitating factor:

    Abortion.

    Some may deem it racially insensitive to raise the specter of black genocide, or the effects of abortion on black women and future pregnancies, but Christian charity and scientific integrity demand that we tell the inconvenient truth.

  17. Herman Cain is right! Go Herman go! This makes up for stumbling on abortion last week. He is right on here.

    And great job on those facts Gerard.

  18. Thank you for this post – i was worried about Herman Cain’s stance on abortion because I seem to like just about everything else he says. I feel relieved. Gerard, I am the Respect Life Coordinator for my parish, but have had trouble locating facts, data, etc (like the ones you’ve been speaking of) for my own reference. I know about Sanger and eugenics, but you have a lot of info I would like to have. Is there one or a few central places with data on abortions you could share? I would love to finally have a few central locations I could frequently refer back to. Thank you so much for sharing your insight – always love the comments in these blogs!

  19. His stock just went way up in my book. You tell ‘me Herman. The truth hurts. Christians really need to declare war on the abortion and pornography rackets.

  20. Katherine,

    I’m hoping Deacon Greg doesn’t mind…

    Clicking on my name will take you to my blog, where I have dug up a great deal of the science and historical facts. If you look at the panels on the right side, the “Categories Panel” breaks down my posts into a bunch of categories. I’ll provide the links to two of them:

    Margaret Sanger:
    http://gerardnadal.com/category/margaret-sanger/

    Planned Parenthood:
    http://gerardnadal.com/category/planned-parenthood/

  21. Here’s another example of why, although I am pro-life, I don’t like talking about abortion, at all. Namely, other people who are pro-life.

    Pro-life proponents seriously need to get a grip. I understand and agree that abortion represents a profound moral crisis in our times, probably one of the most profound of many such crises we face. But loading up your rhetorical and argumentative cannons with all the crap you can find laying around isn’t a winning strategy. And there are a lot of really zany and bad arguments that pro-life people make. This whole notion that Planned Parenthood, as it exists today, right now, in the 21st century (Margaret Sanger herself notwithstanding), is somehow undertaking a massive eugenics program racist in intent and design is ridiculous. On its face, it’s utterly ridiculous, not least because it egregiously simplifies a whole host of causal factors that make abortion more prevalent in the African-American community, while conveniently managing to tag our opponents in this fight (pro-choice people) with an unrelated but nonetheless still profound moral depravity: widespread and pervasive racism. Trust me, folks. I grew up in the Deep South. I know what real racism looks like, having been directly confronted and threatened by it (even though I myself am white), personally. And I’m here to tell you, with great love and no intention to discourage all your fervor for the anti-abortion cause, such rhetorical displays make the pro-life community look unhinged from reality.

    Finally, I notice under the “Related posts” part at the end: “‘Every 21 minutes, our next possible leader is aborted’”. I bring it up only to point out that this is another example of really bad (and I mean, not just flawed, but completely silly) arguments one finds pro-life people making. Why? Let me rephrase the catchy slogan: “Everyone 21 minutes, the next possible Idi Amin [or Augustin Bizimungu or Charles Taylor or [insert your favorite non-white Genocidaire here]] is aborted.” Or, if you really want to come to the point: “Every 21 minutes [or whatever the number would be when suitably recalculated], the next possible Hitler is aborted.”

    I’m all for the pro-life community waging a vigorous, impassioned campaign to end one of the great moral scourges of our time. But with a grip. With arguments that make sense. With messages that are calculated to appeal because of their rhetorical force, but not appealing rhetorical messages that on further examination reveal little thought and less insight.

    And finally, one thing we can all be usefully warned of (myself, no doubt, included): not to let our impassioned campaigns (whatever they may be about) lead us to a loss of charity for each other, most especially for those with whom we strenuously disagree. And if there’s one thing the abortion debate sorely needs, because wholly lacking, it’s charity.

  22. Anonsters: Planned Parenthood and other abortion mills do put their offices in predominantly poor, black neighborhoods. I live in the South right now, and right now we are finishing up 40 Days for Life, 40 days of praying in front of abortion mills. This year, as in other years, I took a couple of hours to pray. This year was the same as two years ago, the only “customers” I saw going in were black women. It’s an awful sight to see.

    If you don’t like the truth of the Margaret Sanger connection b/c it’s not current, then how about a sitting US Supreme Court judge? As recently as 2009, Ruth Bader Ginsburg linked abortion to population control with this quote:
    “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion.”.

    She gave that interview to the New York Times if you want to search it yourself. Who are the populations that “we don’t want too many of?”

  23. Anonsters,

    I suppose that Margaret Sanger’s “Negro Project” was no doubt more of this “rhetorical crap” of which you speak, especially her letter to Clarence Gamble, where she states:

    “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.”

    Gamble’s reply:

    “There is a great danger that we will fail because
    the Negroes think it a plan for extermination. Hence lets appear to let the colored run it as we appear to let [the] south do the conference in Atlanta.”

    Then, of course, there were these pearls from Sanger:

    “Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”

    Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review.

    “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

    There’s plenty more where that came from, and I won’t take up space here. It’s all at my blog. Sanger laid out the roadmap ideologically, then set in place her “Negro Project” (Her only such program to target an individual group), and then charted the course her successors followed in operating 78% of their clinics in black and hispanic neighborhoods.

    In Brooklyn, we call that a clue.

  24. Anonsters, do you think that maybe we have become so desensitized and political correct, that it simply is no longer the big deal it once was to kill a human life?

    I believe it’s still a felony to kill the bald eagle. Seaworld in San Diego is currently being sued on “behalf of the dolphins” for “slavery”, under the US Constitution no less.

    One need only to study history (which always repeats itselfs) to learn how many “stayed silent and comfortable” in the making of mass killings. Consequently, part of the success of these horrific acts of inhumanity is getting the culture to accept what once was terribly “unconfortable.”

    Yes, there are always a few fringe nut cases on both sides, but facts are facts, even uncomfortable ones. Your “every 21 minute” argument is a straw man, and contradicts pro life, as ALL life is sacred, evil or not. To not allow the “evil ones” in the world would be against not only the free will of God but probably his master plan of salvation of how it all comes together.

    All said, I still believe the battle of abortion will only be won with the Eucharist, even if it’s one person at a time.
    .

  25. Don from NH says:

    21 Anonsters I like the way you put this in perspective. I agree with you.

  26. I don’t think the abortion “debate” really lacks that much charity. We are talking about killing innocent human beings, so that is going to raise a few hackles from time to time – - to the extent that we are still normal after 40 years of it making it seem humdrum and normal. If anything, I see silence and acceptance settling in.

    We are afraid to bring it up in polite conversation, mostly because the 40-50 million abortions that have taken place directly impact people all around us. A sensitivity to their pain leads to a more common silence now than impassioned argument.

    The one suggestion I would make on this issue is that before getting into the horrors of the industry, why abortion is so wrong, etc., we first always reach out to those women in our midst who have had them, encourage them to remember how much God loves them despite what happened, and persuade them to come back to the Church where they will find an ocean of mercy waiting for them. We should always lead with that because at this point, all of us know probably at least one person who has had one and has probably internalized enormous guilt and fear over it.

  27. Rememeber, Jessie Jackson was at one time pro-life. When he realized he would not get the support of the Democrat Party (and the $$$ that would go with it), he changed his position.

  28. Well said Kevin (26)!

    Indeed, Jessie Jackson was one among the many who caved (27). Here was the pro life view of the late Senator Edward Kennedy (1971) before he discovered that pro choice means more votes, and winning elections.

    Ted Kennedy Quote 1971:

    “While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized – the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

    “On the question of the individual’s freedom of choice there are easily available birth-control methods and information which women may employ to prevent or postpone pregnancy. But once life has begun, no matter at what stage of growth, it is my belief that termination should not be decided merely by desire. …

    “When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.”

    How a man (Catholic no less), could go from that to a champion of not only abortion rights but partial birth abortion speaks volumes.

  29. That quote from Kennedy always amazes me. It has all the eloquence of his brothers’ speeches on civil rights, but Ted just walked away from it.

    Keep in mind that 1971 is two years after Chappaquiddick and Roe had not come down. I think he would have been cashiered by the electorate at that point if he looked cavalier about the value of human life in any respect. One iota. So we got that great letter.

    As time went by, however, as Thomas More says in A Man For All Seasons, Teddy had his “But for Wales” moment.

  30. Anonsters,

    Ten years ago, I would have written exactly as you have. The pro-life movement has had, and still does, its fair share of loons. However, I became a student of Sanger and Planned Parenthood, of Guttmacher and the CDC.

    The corruption of our politics, of our scientific and medical societies, of our medical schools and hospitals is literally breathtaking. It’s a dark, dark road to walk, and one that I recommend daily communion and frequent confession as the only protection from.

    I didn’t want to believe what I was being told by others, and undertook an extensive, full-time effort to read and discern for myself. I overcame the high hurdle of skepticism.

    It isn’t rhetorical crap. I wish it were. I became involved full time only when I realized how deadly real it is.

  31. Cain is correct- see all the proof in the documented film: Maafa21 found here http://www.maafa21.com

  32. I want to respond to all those who think I’m somehow trying to sweep Sanger’s insanity under the rug, because I was going to include something about that in my first comment, but it was already becoming intolerably long so I left it out.

    Consider the original United States Constitution written in 1787. It accepted and, in a sense, protected the existence of chattel slavery. Does that mean that our country, today, in the 21st century, is ipso facto morally illegitimate? Or consider the course of most of 19th century American history, when slavery really becomes the core moral-political issue facing the country. For the first half of the 19th century, most of the country (yes, the North included) was profoundly racist and accepted slavery. What does that reflect about us? I suspect everyone will be inclined to say, “Nothing at all.” Of course, we fought a Civil War, amended the Constitution, and so forth. But notice that in my example, we evaluate it on the basis of the present, the people in the present, and so on, not on the basis solely of what people long-since dead thought they were doing. Rightfully so. That’s why to see in the present Planned Parenthood only the bizarre racialist dreams of people who started it is, at best, misguided. Of course, everyone is perfectly correct to point out that regardless of what PP people conceive to be their motive for doing the work, what they actually do is a terrible evil. But then we’ve changed the subject from what we think their super-sekrit motives really are, to calling evil evil when we see it performed in the world today. The latter is a worthy project, indeed. The former is what concerns me as slightly unhinged.

    If you want another, less explosive (and, incidentally, clearer) case of how the intentions or views of people who started something not guiding the present, consider the academic discipline of anthropology. If you read any 19th century anthropology, you’ll quickly discover that a great many of its leading lights undertook it with an aim of showing the superiority of whites over others. It’s really quite sickening to read, and it was extremely common. But no one in their right mind would accuse 21st century anthropologists of being on a racialist mission.

  33. Klaire, you said:

    Yes, there are always a few fringe nut cases on both sides, but facts are facts, even uncomfortable ones. Your “every 21 minute” argument is a straw man, and contradicts pro life, as ALL life is sacred, evil or not. To not allow the “evil ones” in the world would be against not only the free will of God but probably his master plan of salvation of how it all comes together.

    I agree that the correct response is to say that all life is sacred. But that’s not the point of little slogans like “Every 21 minutes, our next possible leader is aborted.” The point, rather, is to say, “Think about how many leaders, artists, Great People in the world are being aborted every second!” It’s the same as those who say things like, “What if Beethoven [or Einstein or pick your favorite example to insert here] had been aborted?” They’re trying to appeal to our sense that the world would have lost something profound, something other than life itself.

    But the reason abortion is a grave evil is precisely because of its contravention of the sanctity of life. It has nothing to do with the world maybe, possibly losing great art or great leadership or great vision or great advancement or a great mind or a great heart. But the “every X seconds/minutes/hours” types of slogans appeal to the latter, not the former. And when you make it about the latter, you open yourself up to people pointing out that just as the world may be losing the next generation’s great leaders, so the world may equally be losing the next generation’s great madmen and psychopaths. You rightly point out that that’s not the point. So then stop making it part of the message by using “every X seconds/minutes/hours” slogans. That’s what I’m saying.

  34. Anonsters,

    Your analogy doesn’t hold up. Slavery has been ended for almost 150 years.

    Planned Parenthood operates 78% of its facilities in neighborhoods peopled by a demographic representing 12.5% of the total population, even today–45 years after Sanger’s death. This little demon is still alive and well, unlike slavery.

    There is a term in marketing to describe a billion dollar corporation operating 78% of its service centers in neighborhoods representing a demographic that constitutes 12.5% of the population:

    Targeting.

    I don’t think that you have systematically studied Sanger’s writings, or those of the other eugenists. If you had, you would see that their blueprint is being followed to the letter today.

  35. Comment deleted for being off-topic. — Ed.

  36. Planned Parenthood operates 78% of its facilities in neighborhoods peopled by a demographic representing 12.5% of the total population, even today–45 years after Sanger’s death. This little demon is still alive and well, unlike slavery.

    Once again, you’re apt to see present motive and intent, but the only evidence you adduce simply doesn’t address it. Until you can demonstrate that the people currently in charge of, and working for, PP, as a group, share whatever intentions you find in the writings of Sanger, your argument simply doesn’t hold up.

    After all, another explanation fits the data you cite: demand for their services is higher in those areas, therefore they concentrate their resources there. Notice that this explanation doesn’t turn on whether present-day PP is really a racialist cabal out to eliminate minorities.

  37. Anonsters,

    “demand for their services is higher in those areas”

    I’m afraid the numbers do not support your assertion. Planned Parenthood performs 1/3 of all abortions in the U.S. African Americans have 36.5% of all abortions, meaning that 63.5% of all other abortions are had elsewhere.

    The truth is that 2/3 of the demand for abortions in this nation occurs outside of the black community, as does the 80% of contraception practiced by non-African Americans.

    Yet PP operates 78% of their operations in the AA community. I have been working with a new group of Black Pastors in New York City called New York Clergy for Better Choices:

    http://www.clergyforbetterchoices.org/

    Contact them and walk the road with them. You are simply ill-informed, and no matter how you try to deny reality, the numbers are overwhelmingly at odds with your position.

    To return to your slavery analogy. If the Civil War were never fought and slavery never outlawed; if blacks were no longer enslaved on plantations but forced to work in factories and housed in camps, what would you say?

    If I contended that this isn’t slavery simply because the founders were dead, the plantations extinct, and all “workers” now living north of the Mason-Dixon Line, you would think me mad.

    If I further contended that the current captains of industry “employing” these “workers” had no relation to the plantation crowd, and that this situation was meeting a current need or demand, you would think me diabolical.

    Think about it.

  38. Anonsters

    “Until you can demonstrate that the people currently in charge of, and working for, PP, as a group, share whatever intentions you find in the writings of Sanger, your argument simply doesn’t hold up.”

    As many have carefully laid out the history of Sanger and her racist hateful views quite accurately, and have also shown a clear target market in African American neighborhoods up to 7 times their total population in this country, and the fact that PP each year gives out their top award called the Margaret Sangar award, it would seem there is a very strong tie between PP and the Sanger agenda. Only those in total denial would not be able to see the connection.

    But of course we have another connection which many do not like. The Democratic Party which supported slavery, lynching, KKK, and blocking of any civil rights legislation until the writing was on the wall and the train was leaving the station in 1965 is also the party of abortion in which a huge number of African American babies are slaughtered each year in the PP abortion mills. Many also do not want to see this close connection. As folks have laid out in comments here, Jesse Jackson and other black leaders have sold out to abortion because if they did not, they could not be democrats and be a part of the gravy train. When someone like Herman Cain comes along and points out their sell out, they go on the attack to protect their rear ends. They do not want to acknowledge that their party hero like FDR refused to back anti lynching laws during his entire presidency and never supported a single meaningful civil rights act. They do not like it when one points out the Woodrow Wilson, another democratic star brought segregation back to the federal government on a large scale even into the white house. And the democrats who bolted from Truman in 1948 were called the Dixiecrats, not the Dixiecans as some have tried to tie the racist democrats to the republicans. Until many in the party acknowledge the close connection between the racist policies of organizations they support like planned parenthood and the past history of the party, they will not find truth and accept the evil that runs rampant in that party of death. To try to say because of social security or medicare, two worthwhile but deeply flawed programs, that they can look the other way on that history and the close ties to 54 million dead babies is simply closing ones eyes to the truth.

  39. Gerard, you said:

    I’m afraid the numbers do not support your assertion. Planned Parenthood performs 1/3 of all abortions in the U.S. African Americans have 36.5% of all abortions, meaning that 63.5% of all other abortions are had elsewhere.

    The truth is that 2/3 of the demand for abortions in this nation occurs outside of the black community, as does the 80% of contraception practiced by non-African Americans.

    Yet PP operates 78% of their operations in the AA community.

    On the one hand, you’re conflating the demand for abortions, tout court, with the demand for services performed by Planned Parenthood, as though PP only = abortions. But by any measure, abortions only account for a small fraction of what they do.

    Then, consider that the poverty rate for African Americans is twice what it is for whites, and that African Americans are more likely to be uninsured than whites (the Census Bureau puts out a report with these numbers: Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States). Both poverty and lack of health insurance seem like they would contribute to a demand for low-cost reproductive services.

    Also, where do you get this 78% number (of their operations being in the AA community)? What’s the source? Also, and relatedly, I’d need to see statistics concerning use of the services by race, not simply location of buildings. After all, you could say that a rather large percentage (over 50, for sure) of professional sports teams have their operations in the African American community, because in most cities with professional sports franchises, the stadia are located in predominantly minority areas.

    Finally, I want to highlight again that I have no brief for Planned Parenthood. I don’t want to defend what they do. But again, no substantial evidence has been adduced to prove some racialist agenda. When pressed to provide evidence that doesn’t rely on a dead woman’s views, statistics are furnished. But statistics are notoriously easy to manipulate, for everyone. Not only that, but even when statistics aren’t fudged, we have to be very careful about the inferences we can draw from them, because they often leave out vital information (in order to facilitate measurement) that would present a different picture. So my purpose is not to defend PP. It is, though, to warn that such flimsily supported assertions about its underlying motives make people look a bit off the reservation.

  40. Anonsters,

    “Both poverty and lack of health insurance seem like they would contribute to a demand for low-cost reproductive services.”

    You obviously have no clue as to the reality of inner-city life. There are more federal health clinics, more city and state health clinics, more community-based health centers—all free of charge—than you can shake a stick at.

    Then there are the school nurses.

    If there is ONE argument that is entirely fallacious, it’s that PP NEEDS to be there. For years we were lied to, told that PP does free mammograms for low-income women. When Lila Rose, I, and a few others dug deep, here is what we found:

    PP admitted that they don’t do mammograms (even while they have Nancy Pelosi STILL insisting that they do). PP receives millions of dollars from Susan G. Komen because they do mammograms (Oops! Busted again!). Turns out that Komen founder Nancy Brinker served on the Board of PP in Texas.

    Then there are all of the many, many sting videos at PP showing their many, many, many lies; their coverups of child sex-trafficking, etc.

    There is no conflation on my part regarding their abortion and birth control centers. It’s all eugenics. Don’t believe me? Listen to Margaret Sanger herself:

    “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

    That’s not a new quote. It’s 90 years old.

    Keep apologizing for PP, but be careful at playing the devil’s advocate. You sound like you’re talking yourself into a job.

    What you really need is not to talk with me. You need to talk with a pro-life black minister. Get in touch with my friend, Pastor Walter Hoye, in California. He’ll walk you down the road from a black man’s perspective. He’ll give you the guided tour of the inner-city and just how devastating PP has been for the black community. Tell him I sent you:

    http://www.issues4life.org/

  41. Keep apologizing for PP, but be careful at playing the devil’s advocate. You sound like you’re talking yourself into a job.

    No, thanks. And again, I wasn’t apologizing for PP. I was pointing out that there are much better (at least, more persuasive) arguments for why PP is troublesome that don’t involve hand-waving about one of many, many Roaring Twenties eugenicists.

  42. Anonsters,

    You’re right. The systematic slaughter of 19 million African Americans in 38 years, mainly at the hands of a roaring 20′s (and 30′s, 40′s, 50′s and 60′s) eugenist and her disciples who give an annual award in her name, is simply a hand-waving argument.

    Of course you said “No, thanks” to walking the road with Pastor Hoye. It tells me all I need to know about you in light of your argumentation. No further discussion with you is necessary.

    God Bless.

  43. Gerard:

    My “no thanks” was in response to your “talking yourself into a job” comment.

    I will indeed look at the link you provided. No, you haven’t convinced me. But yes, I always remain open to being convinced. I tend to be one of those reality-based people who likes to see the evidence warrant the conclusions drawn, and I’m not keen on loose inferences. Plus, my experience with the pro-life community generally has taught me that it is much more willing to credit weak arguments based on tangential evidence than I think is creditable. That’s why I wrote my first comment (#21). As someone whose entire academic life after high school (9 years and counting) has been focused on arguments–assessing, evaluating, and making them, in philosophy and in law–it’s frustrating to see how unconvincing pro-lifers can be, given how very important the issue is.

    It tells me all I need to know about you in light of your argumentation. No further discussion with you is necessary.

    One word, brother: charity.

  44. Anonsters,

    You have yet again changed tack, which you do with every challenge. Now you are an empiricist. Good. I hope so. As one who also has spent a good deal of time in academia after high school (27 years and counting), I am loathe to publicly call someone’s argument “rhetorical crap” without having first evaluated the data that give rise to the statement. It kinda makes you look less empirical than you style yourself, and more of an ideological hack.

    Perhaps it’s my training as a biologist, but the evaluation of another’s conclusion requires an evaluation of the data before one can comment on the soundness of the conclusion. You have begun your approach to Cain’s assertions from a perspective of self-professed ignorance, as you admit only in your most recent comment that you need to investigate for yourself. Based on your ignorance, you called his commentary “rhetorical crap”. That’s pretty strong language from someone with a graduate level education who has simply branded all pro-lifers as unconvincing.

    Here’s a hint, Anonsters. In order to be convinced, you need to follow the argument and do your homework. As for your one word, “CHARITY”, that’s pretty rich, considering your blanket denunciation of a rather large and sophisticated movement that contains several medical societies.

    Physician, heal thyself.

  45. I don’t think I’ve changed tack at all. I began by rejecting this as rhetorical crap. You say: I am loathe to publicly call someone’s argument “rhetorical crap” without having first evaluated the data that give rise to the statement. But when people make statements that are totally unsupported, in the statement, by either facts or even reference to them, it’s hard to say it’s anything other than rhetorical. Notice, though, that when people finally started to produce what they regard as reasons to believe the conclusion, I addressed them. But those reasons should always be produced up front, from the beginning.

    …considering your blanket denunciation of a rather large and sophisticated movement that contains several medical societies.

    I don’t think I’ve denounced anyone, let alone in a blanket fashion. After re-reading my comments, I suppose I can see why it might be taken that way, but that wasn’t my intent. For example, I said: “Pro-life proponents seriously need to get a grip. . . . But loading up your rhetorical and argumentative cannons with all the crap you can find laying around isn’t a winning strategy. And there are a lot of really zany and bad arguments that pro-life people make.” I can see how that first sentence could be taken as condemning pro-lifers tout court, so I apologize for that. But on the other hand, in saying “there are a lot of really zany and bad arguments that pro-life people make,” I didn’t say (or mean), “All the arguments pro-life people make are really zany and bad.” Again, I don’t brand all pro-lifers are unconvincing. I think a lot of pro-lifers are, yes.

    Finally, you said: In order to be convinced, you need to follow the argument and do your homework. Unfortunately, I’m just not that in it to take the time to do so. So why bother commenting on this post? Because I think it’s useful to point out when something isn’t convincing. Because while my own interests are elsewhere, I do want pro-lifers to win the argument. More generally, by the way, it’s a losing proposition to suggest that the only way your argument will win is if everyone goes out and does their own research on it. That’s the tricky part of balancing rhetoric with argument, because you need rhetoric for effectiveness, but not so much rhetoric that your argument disappears.

Leave a Comment


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X