Planned Parenthood?

Planned Parenthood?

Corey WilsonWednesday,12 August 2015

Did you guys get the title? ‘Cause — ’cause all the abortions.

I’m sure you’ve heard the rumours about Planned Parenthood (PP) pressuring women to have abortions so that PP can sell the body parts on… the Black Market or something. It’s not a new rumour, but video evidence has surfaced that suggests that it’s no longer just a rumour.

The video has done its rounds on many a conspiracy website, and I think you should watch it. However, be warned: this video is of top-secret, classified, top, super-duper spy clearance. If you proceed, you will have to burn your computer—your first born son as well.

Probably.

Anyway, the video is a joke. It stitched together clips to make it seem like high-ranking members of Planned Parenthood are saying that they sell baby parts. Quick tip for anyone who wants to know if a video is bullshit: if it’s an interview and they’re cutting the interviewee off every twelve seconds, it’s bullshit. Bonus tip: if the full interview isn’t available, it’s extra bullshit. (Editor’s update: the videos are posted in full on YouTube)

That’s the end of the commentary on the video; it is so brutally dishonest that I can’t force myself to watch it a second time.

The video seems to have come from Live Action News. I’d never heard of them, so I did some snooping. I wish I hadn’t. (Just kidding; I’d go hungry if it weren’t for idiots.)

As an aside, I really need to stop saying “this is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read,” because every week another article breaks the record. (Or maybe I’m just a super, you know, in-the-moment person, who lives life one day at—)

Since Live Action “News” likes quote-mining, I’ll do some of my own—to get you acquainted to their stupidity. Here’s the opening of “7 shocking quotes by Planned Parenthood’s founder.”

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. – Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, 1939”

I’m not even fucking with you. Here’s the link. (Editor’s note: the article at this link appears to have been edited after, and most likely because, The Snap Download published this piece)

If you read even the first paragraph it’s clear from the tone that this article isn’t what some may call “objective.”

So, with places like Info Wars hopping on the resurgence of Planned Parenthood attacks, it’s likely that all this information is about to be rehashed; it’s likely that Live Action News—a fervent pro-life website—is going to be getting a lot of traffic. And according to the comment section, people are still reading and commenting on this article. Let’s clear all this bologna up.

Quote One:

We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.

Sanger did say that; Becky Yeh even linked to the letter where she said it (thanks, Becky!). But hold on a second. I read the whole letter, and not once did Sanger say that she planned on “exterminating the Negro population.”

All she said was that she didn’t want people to think that’s what she wanted. I’m sure we can all understand why that would be a terrible thing for people to think, and why she’d want to avoid people thinking it.

Find me the quote where she said that she wanted to, and you’ll convince me. Until then, better luck with Quote Two.

Quote Two:

I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan.

Again, true. Very good, Becky. Though, you don’t really seem to have a point. I’ll infer your meaning to be that it’s bad to accept invitations from white supremacist groups. I disagree.

Sanger’s goal was to educate women on contraceptives and issues regarding their health. Just because people are associated with awful movements doesn’t mean you don’t educate them. That’s counter-productive.

In fact, if Sanger was as fervent a eugenicist as you purport, wouldn’t this be a good thing? If she wanted to “sterilize persons of less desirable qualities” (qualities like racism), wouldn’t we want her to tell white supremacists about birth control so that we can limit their numbers?

Anyway, I fail to see your point.

Quote Three: 

They are…human weeds, reckless breeders, spawning… human beings who never should have been born.” 

(Editor’s note: this third quote appears to have been removed from the article after, and most likely because, The Snap Download published this piece)

There are a lot of ellipses in that quote. What was it that I said about quote mining?

Doesn’t matter though because this quote has a bigger issue—one that makes me very disappointed, Becky; I really don’t like it when people do this.

I read Pivot of Civilization (alright, I CTRL-F’d Pivot of Civilization) and I have no idea where you got this quote. I guess my issue with your suspect use of ellipses was a non-issue.

What you’ve done (maybe [Hanlon’s razor and all that]) is provided a quote, and then linked to the source material (to feign honesty) knowing full well that your audience wouldn’t sift through hundreds of pages to prove you wrong.

Better luck with Quote—no, fuck you.

Quote Four:

Birth control is nothing more or less than…weeding out the unfit.

Yes. Why is this hard to understand? The fact is that those stricken by poverty or other socio-economic hardships have children at a much higher rate.

What Sanger means by this (which she fucking outlined in the Pivot of Civilization [Chapter VIII: Dangers of Cradle Competition, paragraph 14, lines two through four; fuck you, Becky]) is that those who don’t have the means to support their children are unfit.

The quote: “The publications of the Eugenics Laboratory all tend to show that a high rate of fertility is correlated with extreme poverty, recklessness, deficiency and delinquency; similarly, that among the more intelligent, this rate of fertility decreases.”

Therefore, birth control is nothing more than a way to prevent the monetarily-unfit from producing children that we all know they can’t afford to raise.

Quote Five:

We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.

This is the underlying issue with many people’s opposition for universal healthcare in the U.S., isn’t it? Why should people who work hard for their money, who can afford healthcare, have to pay more on their taxes so that lazy, poor people can get free health care?

That’s the issue, right? Well, that’s essentially Sanger’s issue. Why should we be allowing people—who, if humans weren’t exempt from the food chain, would be eaten within a day—to reproduce, and why are we paying for their: health care, food stamps, whatever.

Though I don’t agree with her, I do admit that her logic seems sound—from an evolutionary, I Stole Christmas sort of way.

I think this means you got one right; I hope you get the rest right too (spoiler alert: she doesn’t get any of the others right).

Quote Six:

I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world.

Damn, I thought maybe you’d righted yourself. The strangest part about Six is that you make a claim, and then post the whole quote which shows your claim is dishonest.

What you did was end the quote at the em dash. The whole quote which you—confusing—posted is as follows:

I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world – that have disease from their parents, that have no chance in the world to be a human being practically. Delinquents, prisoners, all sorts of things just marked when they’re born. That to me is the greatest sin – that people can – can commit.

So you’re wrong. Sanger did not say, “The greatest evil is a family that chooses to bring children into the world.”

But thanks, Becky, for doing my work for me… I guess.

Quote Seven:

But for [sic] my view, I believe that there should be no more babies.

YOU DID IT AGAIN. I’m dumbfounded right now. Do you not even expect your audience to read your whole article? How lazy do you think they are?

You’re not even good at bullshitting people.

Here’s what she actually said (which you posted):

Well I suppose a subject like that is really so personal that it is entirely left to the parent to decide, but from my view, I believe there should be no more babies in starving countries for the next 10 years.”

The bolding is my own, and it’s there for a reason. Am I to infer that you support the idea of babies being born in countries where we know they’re going to go hungry? You’d wittingly place a child in conditions where they’d struggle to find fucking food? I’m sorry, but that’s horrible. I have to ask, Becky: why do you hate babies?

Let’s wrap this crap up: you’re a liar, and perhaps a charlatan, Becky, and not even a good one.

Take Action!

Hat Tips:

Image Credit: Flickr



Subscribe to get updates delivered to your inbox