This particular Planned Parenthood should be shut down until they can prove that everyone giving information is accurately trained to give the correct information and IMO there should be some sort of sanctions or punishment for this clinic.

This particular Planned Parenthood should be shut down until they can prove that everyone giving information is accurately trained to give the correct information and IMO there should be some sort of sanctions or punishment for this clinic.

I submit that this particular PP is not all that different from dozens of other PP offices across the nation.

For the record PP's founder Margaret Sanger was a self described socialist and a devout believer in eugenics (selective breeding). She felt that certain minorities and the simple minded should be sterilized. She made numerous horrendous racist statements. Write it off if you choose, but I want no part of her organization.

That's a bit picky, but fair enough. My problem with it is she doesn't seem to give any real direction or guidance and she seems rater ill-informed herself.

I'm not sure why you think it's picky. It's not. It's these kinds of points that give people the wrong information for which to base an opinion. While the woman didn't directly answer the girl's question, she certainly didn't flat out lie. There is a difference. Forgive me for being picky, but the truth is picky. I agree she seems ill-informed. I'd be interested to know the training one receives before being put in such a position.

 

This particular Planned Parenthood should be shut down until they can prove that everyone giving information is accurately trained to give the correct information and IMO there should be some sort of sanctions or punishment for this clinic.

Agreed

 

I submit that this particular PP is not all that different from dozens of other PP offices across the nation.

Is this an assumption? How many Planned Parenthood clinics and offices have you experienced? Specifically, have you any idea of other services offered by Planned Parenthood, and have you actually ever been to one?

For the record PP's founder Margaret Sanger was a self described socialist and a devout believer in eugenics (selective breeding). She felt that certain minorities and the simple minded should be sterilized. She made numerous horrendous racist statements. Write it off if you choose, but I want no part of her organization.

 

I think you could do with some extensive research into both Margaret Sanger and the Planned Parenthood organization outside of google searches. I encourage you to potetntially read some of the works of Margaret Sanger in their entirety to get a true picture of what she stood for. You're taking quotes that are posted on the internet largely out of context. I won't deny she was a controversial figure. But she wasn't a simple socialist or believer in eugenics. I'm not writing anything off.

 

And if you want nothing to do with her organization, that's certainly your perogative. However, there are millions of low-income and poverty stricken women out there who depend on their services for the basic women's health needs that have absolutely nothing at all to do with abortion.

 

For that matter, there are many OB-GYN's who perform abortions. You just aren't aware of them. You're quick to condemn the work of an entire organization over a relative few incidents.

 

It reminds me of those who condemn Catholics and the Church, and spread distorted information about priesthood and dogma because of the actions of a relatively small number of priests/bishops in the Church.

Unless abortions are safer than carrying to term, then she flat out did lie.

Is this an assumption? How many Planned Parenthood clinics and offices have you experienced? Specifically, have you any idea of other services offered by Planned Parenthood, and have you actually ever been to one?.

 

I think you could do with some extensive research into both Margaret Sanger and the Planned Parenthood organization outside of google searches. I encourage you to potetntially read some of the works of Margaret Sanger in their entirety to get a true picture of what she stood for. You're taking quotes that are posted on the internet largely out of context. I won't deny she was a controversial figure. But she wasn't a simple socialist or believer in eugenics. I'm not writing anything off.

 

And if you want nothing to do with her organization, that's certainly your perogative. However, there are millions of low-income and poverty stricken women out there who depend on their services for the basic women's health needs that have absolutely nothing at all to do with abortion.

 

For that matter, there are many OB-GYN's who perform abortions. You just aren't aware of them. You're quick to condemn the work of an entire organization over a relative few incidents.

 

It reminds me of those who condemn Catholics and the Church, and spread distorted information about priesthood and dogma because of the actions of a relatively small number of priests/bishops in the Church.

I do not have to go to a Ku Klux Klan gathering, a skinhead mosh pit or a New Black Panthers cookout to have a very clear picture of why they were founded and what they are all about.

 

By God's grace, neither myself nor any female in my life have ever had need to seek the services of PP. I have done everything possible to live my life in such a way as to avoid putting myself or anyone I love in that position. Even if we had, PP would not be an acceptable option.

 

I have however interviewed PP workers, and heard the accounts of dozens of young women subjected to their "counseling" services. I have heard story after story by those actually affected that add to and amplify the example in this thread.

 

I have been aware of PP, their founding philosophy, operating tactics and their much more positive public spin for nearly 30 years. I am "intellectually curious"... as a result, I have over the years, read a well researched book (about 25 years ago, in a time before the internet... I do not recall the title but could probably find it if you need proof) that described in detail Ms. Sanger and her organization. I have since read numerous articles on her and PP.

 

I have worked closely with organizations set up by churches to offer a loving Christian alternative to PP.

 

I have spoken with numerous Christian counsellors who have labored patiently to restore women to what PP helped take away. I have heard the firsthand accounts from women who in a moment of desperation, need and weakness turned to the only alternative they knew; only to find that their problem was amplified and permanent. The stories abound of broken spirits, scarred souls and grief filled hearts who realized too late the horrendous emotional pain and guilt that follows an abortion.

 

It is not my job to judge the hearts, intentions and eternal destinies of fellow humans. It is my duty to understand and evaluate the worldviews and activities of people and organizations as to whether I should or should not support them.

 

Margaret Sanger believed in and forwarded some very ugly ideas. You may defend her as a champion who freed low income women from the perpetual cycle of pregnancy, childbirth and motherhood. The problem is, these ideas seldom stop at education and sensible prevention... they carry over into "final solutions" that are truly abominable.

 

You can cherry pick any life to find plusses and minuses. The minuses in Ms. Sanger's life have more in common with Adolph Hitler (He was a pretty decent artist by the way...) than Mother Teresa. In fact, I would submit that she and her organization have made old Adolph look like an underachiever... about 50 million to 10 million to date.

 

Ironically, I could love Margaret Sanger, offer her a good meal and civil conversation. I cannot in any way shape or form support a worldview that embraces eugenics, involuntary sterilization and abortion. Nor can I support the organization set up to carry this philosophy through.

 

I do not want to face my Creator and explain why I helped destroy his greatest creation... the One I am responsible for nailing to a cross is enough.

Edited July 21, 201016 yr by Fastbreak

Can we place a moratorium on comparing people to Hitler? It really does less to help your case than if you said nothing. NO ONE can be compared to Hitler. So let's just stop doing that. Sanger and PP aren't on a crusade to wipe all babies off the face of the planet. It's a lazy, misused and tired analogy. Godwin's Law in full effect in this thread! :lol:

 

And regardless of whether or not you agree with their mission, if a woman is going to get an abortion (it's going to happen- accept it), it's better do have it done in a safe manner with them than in an alleyway.

 

Now if they're misleading women on the facts of abortion, then that's another story.

Can we place a moratorium on comparing people to Hitler? It really does less to help your case than if you said nothing. NO ONE can be compared to Hitler. So let's just stop doing that. Sanger and PP aren't on a crusade to wipe all babies off the face of the planet. It's a lazy, misused and tired analogy. And regardless of whether or not you agree with their mission, if a woman is going to get an abortion (it's going to happen- accept it), it's better do have it done in a safe manner with them than in an alleyway.

 

Now if they're misleading women on the facts of abortion, then that's another story.

I can understand your overriding sentiment in light of every political figure being tarred and feathered with the Nazi/Hitler label... and for the most part share your irritation.

 

It is interesting however; that you would wait for this specific post to make this assertion. I can excuse it if you are genuinely ignorant about the life, beliefs and teachings of Margaret Sanger. Otherwise, this is not just lazy but disingenuous to the extreme.

 

I am not one who is in the habit of lobbing the "Hitler Grenade" and certainly not as an excuse for being lazy intellectually. While I've seen many over reaching ways the "Hitler Grenade" has been deployed, this instance is well reasoned and absolutely appropriate.

 

In this case, Margaret Sanger and Adolph Hitler were very much on the same page as proponents of Darwinian Evolution and the "science" of "eugenics" (selective breeding of the human race for a higher and higher level of "evolved" superiority.) They both proposed the sterilization of the feeble minded and imbecile to prevent further pollution of our collective gene pool. They both believed in "weeding out" the less "evolved" races. Clearly, Hitler went about it aggressively on an accelerated time scale... whereas, Ms. Sanger was more patient. It cannot however; be denied that they both believed in the same fundamental ethic.

 

To deny or obfuscate this is to avoid the facts. :thumb:

PP supports the murder of human babies period... I put them right along with the KKK, skinheads, black panthers and yes Hitler....

I can understand your overriding sentiment in light of every political figure being tarred and feathered with the Nazi/Hitler label... and for the most part share your irritation.

 

It is interesting however; that you would wait for this specific post to make this assertion. I can excuse it if you are genuinely ignorant about the life, beliefs and teachings of Margaret Sanger. Otherwise, this is not just lazy but disingenuous to the extreme.

 

I am not one who is in the habit of lobbing the "Hitler Grenade" and certainly not as an excuse for being lazy intellectually. While I've seen many over reaching ways the "Hitler Grenade" has been deployed, this instance is well reasoned and absolutely appropriate.

 

In this case, Margaret Sanger and Adolph Hitler were very much on the same page as proponents of Darwinian Evolution and the "science" of "eugenics" (selective breeding of the human race for a higher and higher level of "evolved" superiority.) They both proposed the sterilization of the feeble minded and imbecile to prevent further pollution of our collective gene pool. They both believed in "weeding out" the less "evolved" races. Clearly, Hitler went about it aggressively on an accelerated time scale... whereas, Ms. Sanger was more patient. It cannot however; be denied that they both believed in the same fundamental ethic.

 

To deny or obfuscate this is to avoid the facts. :thumb:

 

Then you better hang up your phone, because Alexander Graham Bell was a proponent of eugenics. You better not buy any Mobil Oil or bank at National City because Rockfeller was also an advocate. You should also think twice before you munch on cereal, because John Harvey Kellogg supported eugenics. Just because the founder of an organization believed in a reprehensible ideal, doesn't mean you should still be boycotting her organization today.

 

Here is a link for the PP mission statement. Read it and see if you find anything about "murdering babies" or "weeding out the weak". http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/vision-4837.htm

PP supports the murder of human babies period... I put them right along with the KKK, skinheads, black panthers and yes Hitler....

 

Answer this- is there a need in the US today for abortion clinics?

Then you better hang up your phone, because Alexander Graham Bell was a proponent of eugenics. You better not buy any Mobil Oil or bank at National City because Rockfeller was also an advocate. You should also think twice before you munch on cereal, because John Harvey Kellogg supported eugenics. Just because the founder of an organization believed in a reprehensible ideal, doesn't mean you should still be boycotting her organization today.

 

Here is a link for the PP mission statement. Read it and see if you find anything about "murdering babies" or "weeding out the weak". http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/vision-4837.htm

If Bell Telephone/AT&T actively promoted abortion as a key tenet of their business operations, you can bet I'd be using another service... even if it meant using smoke signals, carrier pigeons, tin cans and string, and the USPS.

 

The same goes for Kellogg, Mobil and National City (with obvious adjustments to the needed replacements of products and services.)

 

You have got to be kidding about providing a link to PP's Mission statement. That's like telling me to listen to Chris Angel or David Copperfield when they say, "Pay no attention to what's in my right hand, watch my left hand..." :lol:

 

I would not expect an organization in the business of evacuating "tissue growth" from women's womb's to state what's really going on...

 

At least most cancer clinics have the integrity to tell you they're going to try to kill and eliminate cancer cells.

^I'll ask you the same question. Is there a need in the US today for abortion clinics?

^I'll ask you the same question. Is there a need in the US today for abortion clinics?

...and I'll answer in my best Bill Clinton... "It all depends on how you define need."

 

I cannot deny that they have become and entrenched feature in our society. There are many who depend upon and expect them to be there. Do I think they are needed? No... but it would take a major spiritual revival and restructuring of our culture to reduce and ultimately eliminate them.

...and I'll answer in my best Bill Clinton... "It all depends on how you define need."

 

I cannot deny that they have become and entrenched feature in our society. There are many who depend upon and expect them to be there. Do I think they are needed? No... but it would take a major spiritual revival and restructuring of our culture to reduce and ultimately eliminate them.

 

On this we can agree. Can we agree that significant efforts by pro-life individuals within their communities would better serve the end goal eliminating the "need" for these clinics? Can we agree that overturning Roe v Wade should not be the end goal? Can we agree that Planned Parenthood and other organizations could still do greater good by providing gynecological services to low-income and impoverished women, despite what Ms. Sanger may have or have not believed?