CPAC Panelist: Abortion ‘Worse Than the Slave Trade or Jim Crow’


Read more of our coverage on the 2014 Conservative Political Action Conference here.

“Abortion has been worse on the African-American community than the slave trade or Jim Crow,” said Robert Woodson, a panelist at a sparsely attended Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) panel on reaching out to more diverse voting populations.

Woodson, founder of the Center for Neighborhood Enterprise, said that social issues like abortion were a better strategy for reaching out than assuming low-income or minority voters pick Democrats because they want handouts.

Woodson pushed back after the white moderator, Revolvis Consulting partner Jason Roe, said, “Democrats, using nonprofits and going into these communities, have lots of goodies to offer. And our guys aren’t exactly in the offering goodies business.”

“It’s not ‘goodies,'” Woodson said. “It bothers me when people assume that lower-income people respond to gifts—food stamps, or things that are given to them. Nobody wants to be dependent. So let’s assume that people want a hand up, and not a handout.”

But Woodson and the other three speakers on the all-male panel (two panelists, including Woodson, were Black, and two were white), all said that Republicans should “renew our commitment to communicating how our policies will help,” as Roe put it, rather than “moderate our policies.”

Conservatives often invoke historical racism as an argument for ending safe, legal abortion care. Earlier this week, Alabama state Rep.Mary McClurkin (R-Indian Springs) came under fire from her Black colleagues after she compared a bill that would ban abortion before many women know they are pregnant to the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education case that ended legal segregation in the United States.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • P. McCoy

    These people are hiding behind their white hoods and kindling for their cross burnings. All they know of Jim Crow is by being participants in it.

    • anja

      CPAC is a mecca for the new Klan.

  • King Rat
    • expect_resistance

      I like the new name. :)

      • King Rat

        It is proof of my amorality, clearly:p

  • L-dan

    I just….*that* is their idea for reaching out to minority communities? To be utterly tone-deaf on history and grossly insulting to the women in those communities who have had abortions by implying that *they* have been part of something “worse than the slave trade or Jim Crow?”

    And that’s as coherent as I can manage right now. Every time I pick up my jaw and try to find the point to begin there, it drops again as I see another angle. I think the only way they could have made this more gobsmackingly insulting would be to roll in the Holocaust for good measure.

    • King Rat
      • L-dan

        Lacing their Wheaties. snrk.

        Growing up, we didn’t hear “well someone got up on the wrong side of the bed.” It was, “wow, who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?”

        So that immediately came to mind.

        • King Rat

          I still don’t understand how Democrats can keep themselves in office by handing out free stuff to black people, whilst simultaneously genociding them…

          http://jdwaggoner.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/thoughtful-cat.jpg

          • Shan

            Duh. The more of them you kill off, the fewer you have to give the goodies to.

          • King Rat

            But that means fewer black votes to keep the commies, I mean democrats, in power!

            Perhaps the dems plan to give each minority person 5 votes apiece, as long as they sign up for welfare and food stamps?

        • Renee Goodwin

          From an old underground comic “Who shit in your oatmeal” : )

          • Shan

            Oh, that’s harsh. Still it’s the same as where I come from, where we say “Who peed in your Cheerios?”

          • Renee Goodwin

            The sad part is I can almost see the comic in my head LOL

          • L-dan

            Ah colloquial English, how I love you. ^^

  • L-dan

    For good measure because it’s what my brain wants to say when I let it out of the “I’m at work censor”

    Fucking fuckers fucking shit the fuck up….gaah. Moderate your message by pulling your fucking heads out of your colons, clearing out that shit you’ve installed as brains, taking a remedial reasoning class, and spend a few months with your mouths taped shut *listening* to some actual people who aren’t millionaires and then—maybe—you’ll have something to say that isn’t so moronic my fucking dead, racist relatives wouldn’t be embarrassed to hear it at a party.

    OK, I’m better now.

    • expect_resistance

      Applause! Well said.

  • BJ Survivor

    Yep, just keep on going the way you are, Republicans. This strategy worked so well for you in the past, eh?

    I’d laugh, but too many people take these clowns seriously.

  • anilpetra

    You can disagree that it’s murder.

    But it’s clearly his view that it’s murder. More Americans believe it’s always murder than that it’s never murder — reflecting the consensus that partial birth abortion is infanticide. I take it you’re in the distinctly minority position?

    If you think it’s murder, it’s no stretch to say it’s worse than just about anything, right?

    Why the race baiting slight of hand chicanery? My goodness, there are comments here that talk about white robes. What is wrong with you people?

    • Shan

      Good grief. It’s a word salad of jumbled hot-button phrases with no actual substance or any relationship whatsoever to the article.

      • goatini

        All of s/h/it’s posts are exactly as you describe. Taking 5 minutes to research the BS claims s/h/it tries to peddle, is all that’s needed to debunk s/h/it’s lies.

    • King Rat

      What should the punishment be for women who procure abortion? Life in prison? Death?

      • five_by_five

        Having their tubes tied permanently because they are obviously too irresponsible to be a parent.

        • goatini

          I know you miss those days back when all a guy needed to do was (1) swear it wasn’t his and (2) get his friends to swear that they’d all “known the charms” of the young lady.

        • L-dan

          Are you telling us that all of those with children now who had abortions
          at some point should have their kids taken away because they’re
          irresponsible parents?

          • Shan

            You’re not going to get an answer to that. It involves math. And logic.

            Let’s make a start with 1.2M abortions in one year, 60% of them by women who already have at least one child…that’s 720,000 suddenly displaced children, at the very least. Hm. And that’s just one year.

        • Arekushieru

          Where’s the corollary for men? Hmm? Don’t have one, simply because men don’t become pregnant? Then you, sir, are a misogynist. Also, it’s harder for women to get their tubes precisely BECAUSE of misogynists like you. DERP.

          • five_by_five

            The corollary for men is vasectomy genius.

            But King Rat comment wasn’t about men, was it?

            Try actually reading the comments next time.

    • Arekushieru

      The person who thinks that there is white racism is not only wrong but also racist. Murder is a LEGAL, not a philosophical, term. Talk about sophistry, eh?

    • goatini

      “But it’s clearly his view that it’s murder.”

      We are under no obligation to take seriously the insane ramblings of a damaged mind.

  • Shan

    “Abortion has been worse on the African-American community than the slave trade or Jim Crow,” said Robert Woodson”

    This is so insulting on so many levels. Abortion is not something that is “done to” African-Americans the way slavery and Jim Crow laws were, no matter how many times conservatives squeal “Sanger!” and pull out-of-context quotes trying to prove she was out to “exterminate” minorities. Abortion is something women choose – no matter what color they are – when faced with an unintended or untenable pregnancy.

    It’s true that Black women account for a disproportionate number of abortions, but that’s the only figure conservatives can manage to latch onto when they start thumping on about “Black genocide” in America. They conveniently ignore the most relevant fact, which is that Black women (and women of color, in general) experience a disproportionate number of unintended pregnancies. This is due to a whole host of socio-economic factors, most pointedly the lack of access to affordable, long-lasting, and effective contraception.

    Woodson, with his purported background in “helping low-income people address the problems in their communities” and “neighborhood empowerment”, is failing at least half the members of these communities by denying the REAL problem and denying that women have their own agency in trying to solve it. So much for empowerment.

    • five_by_five

      You’re right, Sanger wasn’t a huge racist or anything.

      “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku
      Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and
      illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced,
      and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed
      I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar
      groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

      • goatini

        1. The Klan, in Sanger’s day, was in fact analogous to today’s Tea Party. Look it up.

        2. The conservative women of Sanger’s day were honestly interested in learning about using contraception.

        3. Sanger gave speeches to any interested group.

      • Shan

        Oh, look. Another out-of-context quote. With multiple dots of ellipses. How original.

        Here is the rest your sketchy sources deliberately omitted. It’s in mechano-voice so all you have to do is listen to it instead of trying to read and understand the actual words. So that should make things easier for you.

        http:// www . youtube. com/watch?v=6Fj-E-Yk78M

        In case that’s too much to process (sorry, there were also pictures involved), here’s a partial transcript of what she said after “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan, one of the weirdest experiences I had in lecturing…”

        “Never before had I looked into a sea of faces like these. I was sure that if I uttered one word, such as “abortion”, outside the usual vocabulary of these women, they would go off into hysteria. And so my address that night had to be in the most elementary terms, as though I were trying to make children understand.

        “In the end, through simple illustrations, I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered. The conversation went on and on. And when we were finally through, it was too late to return to New York. Under a curfew law, everything in Silver Lake shut at 9 o’clock. I could not even send a telegram to let my family know whether I had been thrown in the river or was being held incommunicado. It was nearly one before I reached Trenton and I spent the night in a hotel.”

        • five_by_five

          Keep defending Sanger the racist.

          Here’s another quote from your hero Sanger, ya know, when she wasn’t visiting her friends at the KKK:

          “The mass of ignorant Negroes still breed carelessly and disastrously, so that the increase among Negroes, even more than the increase among whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit, and least able to rear their children properly.”
          –Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood

          • Shan

            That was W.E.B Dubois, not Margaret Sanger.

          • five_by_five

            You’re right. The original quote was by WEB Dubois.

            And then it was repeated by Sanger in her proposal for the “Negro Project.”

            So, unless you’re argument was that she was not agreeing with DuBois, then Sanger was a racist piece of crap.

            Would you care for me to pull up the other statements of hers that were disparaging against minorities?

          • Arekushieru

            You cherry pickers really ARE coming out of the woods, tonight. I notice that you STILL ignore the REST of what Shan posted. SO typical.

          • five_by_five

            Sorry, but people with rational thought can clearly see that Sanger was a huge racist. It’s only people like Shan who let their cognitive dissonance erase part of her life that cannot see the truth.

            And why the pro-life crowd tries to defend her is beyond me. Is it really hard to say “Yes, she founded Planned Parenthood [even though she wasn’t really fond of abortion] AND that she was racist and eugenicist with thoughts not that much different than Adolf Hitler.”

            Do you work for Planned Parenthood? Why are you so defensive?

          • Shan

            Nope, I don’t restrict my sources to revisionist hate-monger writings, so no risk of cognitive dissonance here.

            2 + zebra ÷ glockenspiel = homeopathy works!

            Has been repeated over and over until people incapable of rational thought actually believe it’s rational. And I was going to give you props for using big-boy words but you blew it with the Hitler reference. Don’t you know by now that’s an automatic “F”?

          • lady_black

            She was definitely a racist. It was a part of the times. My great grandmother was a racist, and so was my grandmother, who raised my mother the same way. The problem? None of them had ever met a black person (up until the time my mother was a young adult). They didn’t really know any better. My mother raised me differently, and I grew up largely in an unsegregated nation and had the benefit of my own experiences as a teacher. Something my mother and foremothers lacked for a good bit of their lives. Don’t make the mistake of confusing the tone of the times for abject and unapologetic bigotry that exists today. Ignorance is curable.

          • Arekushieru

            Yup, which is how I differentiate between intentional and unintentional. In terms of the people it affects, racism is racism, and whether or not it is intentional, it affects all of its targets the same. In terms of who is perpetrating the racist acts, we cannot lump all people, together. Those who perpetuate racism simply out of ignorance can learn differently, which is why it is ESSENTIAL we (meaning white people, who typically benefit due to a lack of concentrated, targeted efforts towards racial profiling, stereotypes, labeling, negative perceptions, etc… that are often aimed at black people) are the ones who need to dismantle these oppressive behaviours from these peers of ours, otherwise we may end up with an even more racially harmful society.

          • goatini

            Not only is it “hard to say”, but it’s a vicious deliberately catapulted falsehood to even hint at such a thing. No sane, intelligent person would even broach such vile nonsense. Any person who would blatantly push such deliberate lies is trying to put the clock back 100 years for the women of the United States of America. Margaret Sanger abhorred Hitler, whose regime burned her books.

            The words of Margaret Sanger, 1939:

            “The first thing I want to say in relation to my attitude regarding the present War and World Peace is that before Hitler came into power in Germany I was one of the few Americans who joined the Anti-Nazi Committee and gave money, my name and any influence I had with writers and others, to combat Hitler’s rise to power in Germany.

            When Hitler got into the saddle and burned all books he considered …dangerous to the State, my three books were destroyed and have not been allowed to circulate in Germany. The publisher and translator were put into concentration camps and I have never heard of them since.

            In the very earliest days of Hitler’s power it was the women and men in the liberal and advanced thinking movements of which many were my friends whose work was destroyed, homes confiscated, they themselves either escaped, were put into concentration camps or met death. Women doctors at one time in the highest positions of medical science are today unknown and no one can account for what has happened to them. Germany has put the clock back 100 years for the women of Germany and perhaps to a certain extent for the women of Europe.”

          • five_by_five

            Sanger believed in eliminating “unfit” people through eugenics.

            And then she set up clinics in predominantly minority neighborhoods. But, if you want to ignore the obvious then go right ahead.

          • goatini

            I proved you wrong and you’re pissed off. Tough luck, deliberate disseminator of deliberately false misinformation.

          • Shan

            Dude, do your own research. Seriously, you’re so sad.

          • goatini

            This s/h/it, and the other s/h/it known variously as “anilpetra” and “Melinda Hampton”, have taken their vicious, deliberately deceptive falsehoods from the books written about Margaret Sanger by the little gestational slavery cottage industry (mostly comprised of regressionist fundamentalist Roman Catholics) that specializes in these fictional tomes. I’ve read them all, and it’s obvious that these trolls have never cracked an actual book by Ms Sanger and read it from cover to cover, contextually.

          • Shan

            I don’t attribute that much active negativity. They go to “google” and then all the revisionist Sanger “info” crap pops up that fits in with their predisposition so that’s what they think is the truth and they believe it.

            Because they’re just lazy.

          • goatini

            This “Hampton” sock for “anilpetra” seems to be reaching from the fake “biographies” catapulted by the likes of vicious regressionist theocratic misogynists who support gestational slavery for American women, like Angela Franks and George Grant.

          • Shan

            Also, Wikipedia fail.

          • Melinda Hampton

            I’d hardly consider myself lazy. I agree with you that when I went to google there were A LOT of anti-choice sites spouting lies about Sanger.

            So, I went to wikipedia which is usually fairly neutral. I even read the “talk” section which was plagued by anti-choice trolls. The article has been locked because they kept adding unsourced claims.

            Yet, nobody….and I mean NOBODY actually tries to deny that Sanger was a eugenicist. And, sorry, but that’s a deal breaker for me. I don’t support people who are eugenicists – regardless of the good work they’ve done in other areas of their lives.

          • goatini

            As I said before, it’s obvious that these trolls have never cracked an actual book by Ms Sanger and read it from cover to cover, contextually.

          • goatini

            Why don’t you explain to all of us what you think “eugenics” means, troll?

          • Melinda Hampton

            http://en . wikipedia . org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger#Eugenics

            You are truly amazing.

          • goatini

            So, if your daughter wanted to have a family with a mentally ill alcoholic drug addict, you’d be all down with that, right?

            Troll is completely ignorant of the entire history of the eugenics movement in the United States, and cites Wikipedia as the “academia” from which to posit s/h/it’s reductio ad absurdam nonsense.

          • Shan

            “So, I went to wikipedia which is usually fairly neutral”

            DERP

          • Melinda Hampton

            Are you saying the wiki article isn’t fairly neutral? Have you read it?

          • Shan

            Which, wiki article? Apparently I am being an a$$hole again for not considering wiki articles worth reading and also not actually trying here. Do you have a link?

          • Melinda Hampton

            I can’t tell if you’re being serious. You want a link to a wiki article??

            Go to google. Type Margaret Sanger wiki.

            The article about Sanger has hundreds of edits over the past 10 years, has 105 footnotes and has been locked from vandalizism so only wiki mods can make approved edits. It’s not pro-Sanger. It’s not anti-Sanger.

          • goatini

            I’ll bet this troll never read an actual assigned book in high school, and coasted through on Cliff’s Notes instead. S/h/it so intensely defends a Wiki, instead of actually having read any of the voluminous writings and speeches (all widely available) of Margaret Sanger.

          • King Rat

            Derp is ableist. If you are going to tone troll our allies, watch which words come out of your keyboard.

            And btw. I am rude. I am, often, purposely rude (and ableist, and sexist, and overall a terrible person). Flag my comments to your heart’s content. But please don’t lecture allies on how to behave.

          • Shan

            DERP is my reaction to citing wikipedia as a source, not lecturing or tone trolling, whatever the hell that is.

          • King Rat

            You will find that anti-abortionists such as five here love to tone troll. Which is what five is doing in order to avoid answering the tough questions. They always look for an excuse:

            A tone troll is someone who, in the course of a debate, dismisses an opponent’s argument based on perceived crassness, hysteria, or anger.[1] It’s a particularly slimy form of ad hominem attack beloved of Very Serious People, and its sliminess comes of it being quite commonly deployed against opponents lower on the privilege
            ladder. However, the phrase “tone trolling” itself can be used to
            excuse verbally abusing one’s opponents, so be careful who you accuse of
            doing it.

            As a debating technique, it can theoretically be employed honestly (in response to emotional appeal), but it’s not a very good argument because it focuses on style over substance.
            Rather than addressing the central claims of an argument, it focuses on superficial, “shrill” features of said argument, which inherently isn’t that logical. Tone trolling in practice is almost always dishonest and therefore kind of creates an “appearance of impropriety” situation. Ostentatiously picking their arguments apart in disturbingly calm Spock Speak is probably a more productive approach there.

            http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tone_troll

          • Arekushieru

            “and its sliminess comes of it being quite commonly deployed against opponents lower on the privilege
            ladder.” Which is exactly why I will stop using the word ‘derp’ as I have been because I now know it also attacks people who similarly occupy the lower rungs on the ladder of privilege. Because, when a person who occupies a higher rung on the privilege ladder, than the persons who are typically targets of the oppressive epithet, uses that epithet against someone else, its abusive nature isn’t isolated to that one person, it’s validated for the whole group that it is typically applied to.

          • fiona64

            He’s getting his information straight from LieSiteNews.

          • HeilMary1

            The Vatican ordered German Catholics to vote for gay-bashing, anti-family planning Catholic Hitler who promised to stiffen penalties for contraception and abortions (death sentences for second abortions).

          • goatini

            The liar just proved that s/h/it works for some gestational slavery advocacy group. The liars always accuse people of doing EXACTLY what evil they themselves are doing.

          • Shan

            “And then it was repeated by Sanger in her proposal for the “Negro Project.”

            And if you ever did any actual research instead of just cruising right-wing blog sites for anger material, you would know WHY. Also, if you would read the actual words in the quote, you’d notice that Dubois was also talking about white people.

          • goatini

            SO glad that my HS health ed classes happened way back before vicious disseminators of deliberately false misinformation like this asshat polluted scholarly records and data with idiotic nonsense. We were taught in health ed about Margaret Sanger, the great and noble humanitarian who worked tirelessly for all women, everywhere, selflessly risking her own freedom and rights to free speech, for better health and quality of life for countless women and their families.

          • Melinda Hampton

            Sanger was hardly a saint. She, no doubt, did great things for trying to overcome stigma of using birth control and fighting for women’s rights.

            But her views on eugenics and race were atrocious. I’d hardly call someone who believed in eliminated “unfit” people as noble or a humanitarian.

          • goatini

            Stuff it, anilpetra. I’ve already called BS on your new Nom De Troll. You obviously know zero about Ms Sanger’s “views on eugenics and race” and are actively and deliberately catapulting the intentionally deceptive misinformation of Ms Dianne Dew’s troll content garbage dump.

          • Melinda Hampton

            Huh? Sanger is a known eugenicist. Literally nobody denies this, so what in the world are you talking about?

            I haven’t seen anyone named Dianne Dew even comment about Sanger, so again, what are you talking about. Here. Do what I do. Support Planned Parenthood and ignore Sanger. It’s easier that way.

          • goatini

            Don’t give up your day job, you’re a terrible actor.

          • Melinda Hampton

            Whatever goatini. It’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it.

          • goatini

            “Sticking to” opinions that are blatant lies and deliberate misrepresentations simply show you as the forced-birther troll that you most assuredly are. Because if you took an hour or so out of your precious time trolling reproductive justice blogs under various personas to actually read Sanger, in context, you’d never post such deliberately disingenuous BS – that is, if you actually WERE a PP supporter, which you and I both know you are NOT.

          • Melinda Hampton

            How am I, who is unavowedly pro-choice a “forced-birther troll” because I don’t agree with Sanger on eugenics? That makes no sense whatsoever.

            And I got my info from wikipedia – which is heavily moderated against anti-choice people spewing untrue BS and is one of the few neutral articles about Sanger I could find on the web.

          • goatini

            “unavowedly pro-choice” !

            The first honest post s/h/it has made in the “Hampton” persona!

            Yep, this troll is most certainly “unavowedly pro-choice”, as in, NOT pro-choice. The troll already outed itself on the “We Won’t Forget” article – go check out what s/h/it thinks a credible pro-choice person would actually post, for a huge laugh. But get there before s/h/it edits &/or deletes it!

          • Melinda Hampton

            Sorry. I flubbed that up. I’m sorry I’m not as smart as you. I meant “avowedly” if that’s a word.

            Anyway, how is what I stated on the other article bad? I stated that rich hollywood types should donate more to Planned Parenthood. Please, spin that all you want.

            Here’s the link:

            http:// rhrealitycheck . org/article/2014/03/07/wont-forget-end-safe-legal-abortion-care-texas-rio-grande-valley-video/

            Why are you so angry? You’re killing this comments section and making it very inhospitable.

          • goatini

            Passive-aggressive troll is passive-aggressive.

            What makes this comment section inhospitable is trolls trying to commandeer it. Go back to your pal Stanek’s cesspool and whine.

          • Shan

            You didn’t look very hard.

          • fiona64

            “Unavowedly”? Really?

            Perhaps you meant unabashedly, but I don’t think so …

            If you want to learn about Sanger, you could start with reading her *actual papers.* They’re readily available via NYU.

            But I don’t think you really want to do that, do you?

          • goatini

            And my high school health ed teacher, at one of the top ranked high schools in the United States, provided facts and history about the great humanitarian Margaret Sanger. Unlike lying trolls like you.

          • lady_black

            In nursing school we learned a far different view of Margaret Sanger. She was influential in nursing and modern contraception as we know it. Maybe you’re getting your information from lying pro-life sites, and mine came from actual textbooks.

          • Melinda Hampton

            Of course she was influential in nursing and modern contraception. I don’t think anyone is denying that.

            That doesn’t change the fact that she was a eugenicist and I don’t have the same opinion as her about that.

          • Shan

            Really Did Sanger ever DO any eugenicist thing?

          • Melinda Hampton

            What? Like commit a Holocaust like Hitler? Of course not.

            But that doesn’t mean I can’t disagree with her eugenic beliefs, does it? I think we should embrace diversity – not pick the “best” out of the herd because we think some traits are more preferential than others. It might seem like a good idea at first, but can quickly become a ethically questionable practice when actually used.

          • Shan

            What eugenic beliefs did Sanger have that you disagree with?

          • Melinda Hampton

            negative eugenics

          • Shan

            What are those?

          • Melinda Hampton

            google it

          • Shan

            Okay, sure, that’s a shitty idea. But what did Sanger actually DO to promote that?

          • King Rat

            MLK loved her.

          • five_by_five

            MLK was a plagiarist and an adulterer. So….

          • King Rat

            Well clearly, black people should not honour him, at all!

          • L-dan

            So he was a worthless human being whose opinion counts for nothing, I guess.

            Or do you mean that people can be inspirational and achieve great things while not being complete saints? Because that’s more nuance than I really expect from you.

          • King Rat

            G. Washington owned slaves. As did Jefferson. You should stop using the American dollar right now, and ignore the constitution. Because bad racist evil men were behind it.

          • HeilMary1

            5×5 is probably clutching his pearly rosary.

          • L-dan

            Huh…because that’s so much worse than your assertion that women who have had abortions should be sterilized because they’re irresponsible.

            Or that poor people shouldn’t have sex at all because they’re not in a position to be breeding.

            That sort of “some people shouldn’t breed” thing hasn’t actually become *more* accepted since Sanger’s day you know. You may want to think of that before spewing the same ugly philosophy wrapped in a new coat.

            At least Sanger has some credible accomplishments to her name that have improved women’s lives regardless of Sanger’s beliefs. Planned Parenthood has provided health care to thousands (even if you eliminate their abortion services from the equation). You, on the other hand, have a broad work of trolldom to your name. On the scales of benefit to humanity, I think Sanger is way ahead of you there.

          • lady_black

            You realize you’re guilty of the same sin, right? Like how women who have abortions ought to be forcibly sterilized because you perceive them to be undesirable. Clean the trash out of your OWN front yard before commenting on the few weeds in your neighbor’s flower bed, hypocrite.

          • five_by_five

            So I finally got you to admit that Sanger is an immoral bitch.

            But I had to do it by comparing her to myself. Ha ha .

          • King Rat

            Republicans supported the RvW ruling because they were afraid that the poor would keep on breeding and vote democrat – thus draining the USA of tax dollars cuz welfare.

            The *only* reason the GOP switched to pro-life is because of 1) wedge politics 2) support from the religious right

      • anja

        Margaret Sanger is considered one of the most important and influential people of the 20th century. Do a little research and you’ll see that she wanted to bring the benefits of contraception to all women and drag society out of the church induced, destructive family practices of the 19th century.
        While Sanger was victim to racist attitudes of her time, she was not a proponent, nor she did not tolerate it among her staff, or refuse to work with interracial projects.
        Her projects to deliver the benefits of contraception to poor black communities are, unfortunately, often twisted by the anti-choice community to try to discredit her actions by relating them to Southern racist sterilization campaigns.

      • lady_black

        Yes, Margaret Sanger was a racist and a eugenicist. Many of the best and brightest minds of her time were racists and eugenicists. Margaret Sanger was well-meaning but misguided. She was also a Registered nurse. She was right about one thing. Poor black families were never going to escape poverty while being unable to control their fertility. The same is true of poor white families. That remains true today. Because of the conditions of the times, abortion was the primary method of fertility control, but it was also illegal and very dangerous. Sanger deplored illegal abortion, and the slaughter and hopelessness left in it’s wake. She sought to provide other ways to control fertility, and was partially responsible for the development of the birth control pill. In spite of all her forgivable flaws, she was a hero and advocate for the poor of all races. Don’t take something from her work out of context, and use it to smear her legacy.

        • Shan

          Actually, from what I’ve read, Sanger and the hard-core eugenicists didn’t get on very well because she didn’t believe that women who were considered to be of “superior stock” should be required to produce it, as a true proponent of eugenics would. She was quite outspoken against the idea of anyone other than individual women themselves being able decide whether or when they gave birth. I’m sure you already know that’s the REAL reason people are still, to this day, trying to smear her legacy.

          And, yes, she may very well have been a racist in her personal views, just as you said our grandmothers and great-grandmothers who lived then were or might have been.

          But whatever her personal views, what she DID wasn’t racist. And neither is her legacy.

          (Which I’m sure you know, LB…I’m just trying to add to your comment, not arguing against it.)

          • lady_black

            What you’re purporting as “true eugenicist” views sounds more like something out of 1930s Germany. Eugenicists (misguidedly) believe that “inferior” populations should be discouraged from reproducing. A companion belief of women as forced breeding stock is not part of that.

          • Shan

            Yes, exactly. The 1930s Germany eugenicist ideal was 1) force the undesirables to stop reproducing and 2) force the “superior stock” to breed whether they want to or not. That’s not what Sanger was about.

          • lady_black

            Well definitely not. And that isn’t a “true” eugenicist. That’s Nazi master race propaganda. Most eugenicists were actually very scholarly and brilliant people with misguided attitudes, not forced breeding fanatics.

          • Shan

            Right, but that’s why Sanger got sideways with the eugenicists. Because she insisted that individual women should have the right to decide to have as few or as many children as they wanted, no matter their race or class or IQ (or the equivalent).

          • L-dan

            Plus, you know…nobody should drive cars because Ford was tied up in some virulently anti-Semitic shit.

            We can never take what is useful and right from the work of people who held disgusting views. Which pretty much means all technology and science everywhere should be rolled back and started over, because somewhere along the line there were nasty ideas involved.

          • lady_black

            When it comes to Margaret Sanger, the brilliance of her contributions to women and the poor far outweigh any unsavory notions she had simply because she was the product of the time she lived in, and would not be considered p.c. today.

          • Shan

            Exactly.

          • L-dan

            Absolutely. Just pointing out how ridiculous it even is to go “Planned Parenthood is connected to Sanger and is therefore evil and perpetuating eugenicist plots!” If we really want to go that route, we’re back in the Middle Ages at best because we need to toss most discoveries and institutions.

            And that’s before even caring about whether Margaret Sanger was the devil or not. (I’m in the ‘not’ camp myself.)

            I’m currently doing some coursework in microbiology, and the instructor does a fantastic job bringing snippets of history into the lessons. A lot of the guys (mostly guys) making these discoveries were huge assholes at best. If we’re going to sneer at their work because they were racist, misogynist shitbags, most of us would be dead right now because we would have died of something contagious in childhood.

          • King Rat

            Stop using your computer right now because Bill Shockley invented the transistor and he was omg racist.

          • King Rat

            Ford wrote an essay praising Hitler. No one should ever drive a Ford car or truck. That would be to support Hitler.

          • L-dan

            Ah, but Ford’s techniques are what revolutionized auto manufacture. We shouldn’t drive *any* cars if we’re not willing to benefit from the advances of someone like that.

            That’s the equivalent of trying to demonize planned parenthood and birth control on account of Sanger.

          • King Rat

            You are correct. We should not use any technology or product that has benefited from his innovations.

      • fiona64

        Yeah, she was a huge racist. That’s why she helped open a doctor’s office in Harlem when no other doctors would practice there.

        You might want to educate yourself. Here’s a good place to start. https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=320905.xml

        • five_by_five

          Yeah, a doctor’s office to push contraception on the black community so that she could impose her eugenics of eliminate the unfit on a population of black people.

          Nobody is buying your bullshit fiona

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually, no one here is buying yours.

          • fiona64

            You are too stupid for words.

    • expect_resistance

      What they said is insulting and offensive. They need to listen to Loretta Ross, from Trust Black Women. Or read her article, “African-American Women and Abortion.”