Wow!! a study showing they took donations to only be used for black babies???
that is horrible and they should receive some sort of condemnation for it

There needs to be a lot more information before this should be believed. There have been black doctors and staff members at Planned Parenthood offices for decades: were they duped or participants? I'd want to know more about the UCLA article - I had read about it elsewhere and had questions.
"King, who is also a pastoral associate for the conservative pro-life group Priests for Life"
She's speaking for a coalition of anti-abortion groups, so her agenda is just as suspicious as anyone she's accusing.

King does not say her agenda is solely that they took the donations
she says it is personal and she does want federal funding to stop
her agenda is pretty clear and not suspicious at all

I'm going to have to read up a bit more about this. I don't understand how 17 million out of 50 million is statistically significant enough to be disturbing.

ok, really now.. who is she and why should i really care what she thinks!

whatever!

PP has been a life line for plenty of women in more ways than one.

Who is she? Dr.King's niece!

This is a tough issue to comment on without being labeled as racist, but here are my thoughts. It looks like the 17 million out of 50 million is out of proportion with the general population. However, I think that is probably more because of economic status. I don't have stats on hand, but I believe that as a whole whites are more likely to have health insurance that would cover the procedure. So, the numbers could just be simple economics talking. As far as the donations, I think more information is needed on that.

From my own personal experience Planned Parenthood offers such tremendous services. I've gone there before for the Morning After Pill before it was available over the counter. They provide free reproductive health care to women who cannot afford it. If you don't have health insurance or can't afford contraception you can get it there for free! I think if more people took advantage of the services they offer before they get pregnant there would be fewer abortions.

I've read about this before...the founder or advocate *Margaret Sanger) for the pill really wanted to control minority population, it's out there it's just not talked about. Dr. Alveda King may have a point.

of course I could be wrong...

A friend emailed me a you tube video about this. There are two parts.It seems to be making the rounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eygv8qEkiFE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwif0VMW3c4

Oh, wait. Here's my proof:

Margaret Sanger was a proponent of eugenics, a social philosophy that gained strong support in the United States in the early 20th century. Sanger promoted the idea of "race hygiene" through "negative eugenics," an attempt to reduce the fertility of "dysgenic" groups. Sanger considered the unchecked multiplication of the "unfit" to be "the greatest present menace to civilization."

Sanger was born in Corning, New York. Her mother, Anne Purcell Higgins, was a devout Roman Catholic who went through 18 pregnancies (with 11 live births)[1] before dying of tuberculosis and cervical cancer. Sanger's father, Michael Hennessy Higgins, earned his living "chiseling tombstone angels and saints out of stone,"

Although Sanger was greatly influenced by her father, her mother's death left her with a deep sense of dissatisfaction concerning her own and society's understanding of women's health and childbirth. She also criticized the censorship of her message about sexuality and contraceptives by the civil and religious authorities as an effort by men to keep women in submission. An atheist, Sanger attacked Christian leaders opposed to her message, accusing them of Obscurantism and insensitivity to women's concerns. Sanger was particularly critical of the lack of awareness of the dangers of and the scarcity of treatment opportunities for venereal disease among women.

While Sanger's understanding of and practical approach to human physiology were progressive for her times, her thoughts on the psychology of human sexuality place her squarely in the pre-Freudian 19th century. Birth control, it would appear, was for her more a means to limit the undesirable side-effects of sex than a way of liberating men and women to enjoy it.

“'Civil rights' doesn't mean anything without a right to life!” declared Hunter. He and the other marchers were protesting the disproportionately high number of abortions in the black community. The high number is no accident. Many Americans—black and white—are unaware of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger's Negro Project. Sanger created this program in 1939, after the organization changed its name from the American Birth Control League (ABCL) to the Birth Control Federation of America (BCFA).1

The aim of the program was to restrict—many believe exterminate—the black population. Under the pretense of “better health” and “family planning,” Sanger cleverly implemented her plan. What's more shocking is Sanger's beguilement of black America's crème de la crème—those prominent, well educated and well-to-do—into executing her scheme. Some within the black elite saw birth control as a means to attain economic empowerment, elevate the race and garner the respect of whites.

The Negro Project has had lasting repercussions in the black community: “We have become victims of genocide by our own hands,” cried Hunter at the “Say So” march.

The last 2 or 3 paragraphs comes from a completely different source:

http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/special_issues/population/the_negro_p...

mlmoreno47

if your comment was in response to my facetious comment of "who is she and why should i really care what she thinks", i figured out that reading thing a long time ago and know that shes Dr Kings niece but that does not make her an authority on anything to me.

Margaret Sanger aligned herself with the eugenicists whose ideology prevailed in the early 20th century. Eugenicists strongly espoused racial supremacy and “purity,” particularly of the “Aryan” race. Eugenicists hoped to purify the bloodlines and improve the race by encouraging the “fit” to reproduce and the “unfit” to restrict their reproduction. They sought to contain the “inferior” races through segregation, sterilization, birth control and abortion.

Peachy, could you source that article? Here's what Gloria Steinem wrote about Sanger and the racist claims in Time magazine in 2006:
"What are mistakes in our era that parallel those of Sanger's? There is still an effort to distort her goal of giving women control over their bodies by attributing such quotes to Sanger as "More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief issue of birth control." Sanger didn't say those words; in fact, she condemned them as a eugenicist argument for "cradle competition." To her, poor mental development was largely the result of poverty, overpopulation and the lack of attention to children. She correctly foresaw racism as the nation's major challenge, conducted surveys that countered stereotypes regarding the black community and birth control, and established clinics in the rural South with the help of such African-American leaders as W.E.B. Du Bois and Mary McLeod Bethune."

The Harlem Clinic

In 1929, 10 years before Sanger created the Negro Project, the ABCL laid the groundwork for a clinic in Harlem, a largely black section of New York City. It was the dawn of the Great Depression, and for blacks that meant double the misery. Blacks faced harsher conditions of desperation and privation because of widespread racial prejudice and discrimination. From the ABCL's perspective, Harlem was the ideal place for this “experimental clinic,” which officially opened on November 21, 1930. Many blacks looked to escape their adverse circumstances and therefore did not recognize the eugenic undercurrent of the clinic. The clinic relied on the generosity of private foundations to remain in business.18 In addition to being thought of as “inferior” and disproportionately represented in the underclass, according to the clinic's own files used to justify its “work,” blacks in Harlem:

were segregated in an over-populated area (224,760 of 330,000 of greater New York's black population lived in Harlem during the late 1920s and 1930s);
comprised 12 percent of New York City's population, but accounted for 18.4 percent of New York City's unemployment;
had an infant mortality rate of 101 per 1000 births, compared to 56 among whites;
had a death rate from tuberculosis—237 per 100,000—that was highest in central Harlem, out of all of New York City.19
Although the clinic served whites as well as blacks, it “was established for the benefit of the colored people.” Sanger wrote this in a letter to Dr. W. E. Burghardt DuBois,20 one of the day's most influential blacks. A sociologist and author, he helped found the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in 1909 to improve the living conditions of black Americans.

That blacks endured extreme prejudice and discrimination, which contributed greatly to their plight, seemed to further justify restricting their numbers. Many believed the solution lay in reducing reproduction. Sanger suggested the answer to poverty and degradation lay in smaller numbers of blacks. She convinced black civic groups in Harlem of the “benefits” of birth control, under the cloak of “better health” (i.e., reduction of maternal and infant death; child spacing) and “family planning.” So with their cooperation, and the endorsement of The Amsterdam News (a prominent black newspaper), Sanger established the Harlem branch of the Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau.21 The ABCL told the community birth control was the answer to their predicament.

Sanger shrewdly used the influence of prominent blacks to reach the masses with this message. She invited DuBois and a host of Harlem's leading blacks, including physicians, social workers, ministers and journalists, to form an advisory council to help direct the clinic “so that our work in birth control will be a constructive force in the community.”22 She knew the importance of having black professionals on the advisory board and in the clinic; she knew blacks would instinctively suspect whites of wanting to decrease their numbers. She would later use this knowledge to implement the Negro Project.

I watched a bit of those YouTube videos. It is such blatant, outrageous propganda. Of course PP is located mostly where there are located. Rich people tend to not need PP. Unfortunately, many poor neighborhoods also have predominantly minority populations. Right or wrong, that's just how the ball rolls in America right now. And yes people make donations targeted at a specific group because they want to help that group. The caller at the beginning of the first video I'm sure was an exception since PP doesn't go wrangle up black people and force them to have abortions. Should we get up in arms over the United Negro College Fund since the money is used on black people? Give me a break.

There are so many instances of REAL racism in the world. I think these people are barking up the wrong tree in this case.

I would have to read more too. Maybe there are a lot of pp in black neighborhoods because so many young black girls in those neighborhoods are getting pregnant. They also do womens health, birthcontrol, education on womens health, education on birth control, counseling. I know this is a controversial issue. MM, your right it's hard to not sound racist. I hope I didn't.

I know a lot of people don't want their young daughters getting birth control. I hope to address that issue myself with my daughter. However, If all my advise and all my influence and talking does her no good. I would rather she had somewhere to go to get prevention.

To me, aside from if your a prolifer or pro choice, I think more attention needs to be put on education, and prevention of abortion rather than just abortion. Just my opinion.

**Bracing self** for beatings from my right wing constituents. Ahhh

Hi stephley,

I'm sorry about not sourcing that I tried to put up links but I get flagged for them. The first is from a wikipedia entry (I know not everyone likes to read from Wiki, but I don't think it's such a bad place for general info). I do believe that her work for women was a great accomplishments and I'm not sure what to make of any racist claims. I suppose it's possible, but not a black and white issue at all, and diff. resources shed different light on the matter. So, I guess I'm not sure what to make of Dr. Kin's niece's statement. Sorry for all my posts by the way.

I meant prevention of pregnancy--and not just by saying abstinence.

To me, aside from if your a prolifer or pro choice, I think more attention needs to be put on education, and prevention of abortion rather than just abortion. Just my opinion.

**Bracing self** for beatings from my right wing constituents. Ahhh

I wholeheartedly agree with you Hartsfull, education about birth control and abortion, whether someone is pro-choice or not, is something we don't focus enough on.

Your posts are good - if there's something you think we need to know to have an informed conversation, it's important to share it. Otherwise, it's all just so much gas!

Hmmm. The PP I go to because my insurance is asinine is in a white middle class suburb neighborhood right next to a university of average enrollment (whatever that means). Also not ALL PP's preform abortions, some actually help with...PLANNING PARENTING..

The "UCLA publication" has a pro-life mission statement which is fine, but it does mean that you have to approach their investigative reports knowing they have set themselves an agenda.

As a man, I feel as though legislating a woman's right to choose is something I should probably shut up about.

However, a woman's right to choose me is something I would very much like to debate.

Thanks Peachy! Phew so far.

Raci, I don't know if I'd agree with that. I see what the prochoice means about it's a womans body etc. On the other hand, it is a moral issue and that is where the right is on that, both sexes have morals. Also, men also use the arguement of that if it's their baby, I understand that point too.

I'm just playing a little devils advocate, thinking of all sides.

Ah, see I put that just before your second post Raci.

Ah, see I put that just before your second post Raci.

I only hit the button once!

I'd like to know the racial breakdown of the other 33mil... who else are we causing genocide against?

No it shouldn't be given more money. No it shouldn't be cut off. It should be reformed. No there isn't any racial bias in Planned Parent Hood. There is an abortion bias in Planned Parent Hood.

Planned Parent Hood needs to re calibrate and re focus their intent. Take some language out and put some language in and start again.

Proof that intelligence is not genetic. I love how she uses her Uncle's fame and identity to push her own agenda and seek fame. She out there is if the entire King family supports her outrageous statement and point of view.

PP does not force women to have abortions. It doesn't force black women or Latino women or Asian women to have abortions. PP provides reproductive education, information, medical services including free or low cost pre-natal care, adoption info, and pregnancy termination services to women and even men who enter their doors.

This women is so misinformed and blinded by her desire to have her name in the media that is has never bothered to learn what PP does or even look at their own statistics on who they serve. She'd probably be surprised that the majority of women seeking abortions via PP aren't black or minorities but are 23 YO plus white women.

You know, I never knew a thing about the woman who spawned Planned Parenthood.

Here are writings of Margaret Sanger herself sourced in Wikipedia.

http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/2575249?n=43&s=4&imagesize=1200&rota...

Kind of scary, but it really doesn't surprise me because the same was done to Puerto Rican women in the '40s and '50s when they were used to test birth control.

Here's a quote:
"In the late 1940s and 1950s, a sterilization program, l'operacion. . . was introduced into Puerto Rico by the International Federation of Planned Parenthood (IPPF). . ."
http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~epf/1999/gormley.html

Interesting, and sad.

at least the money wasn't earmarked for african-american sterilization procedures... that thought also makes me shudder

I posted a response with quotes from Sanger's book which pretty much lays out the original intent was to control the populations of non-white immigrants. I also noted that PP developed a similar program in Puerto Rico.

Hopefully Citizensugar will post it.

However, I do have to say that PP provides access to healthcare that many poor women who happen to be Black and Latina wouldn't receive.

I would like to see the eradication of any program promoting abortion to any group of women. I'd also like to see an acknowledgement by PP of the racism executed by some of their programs.

Riiiight, and 33 million of those 50 million are not black abortions. Sorry, but 17 million is only 1/3 all the reported abortion cases. There is not racist agenda going on considering the U.S. is mostly comprised of white, black, and hispanic populations.

Give me a break.

I agree with Mariner Mandy, hypnoticmix, and wackdoodle lol although that is hard to say and expect to be taken seriously (saying I agree with someone named wackdoodle, that is lol).

And while I'm not disagreeing with the fact of Sanger's agenda back then. It was after all, back then, and it was her own messed up views, unfortunately some people went along with her - kind of like Hitler but you don't hear German's blaming their current issues on Hitler's agenda still. It may have started as something awful but it's evolved into something better and not for the original intended purpose.

[b] t should be reformed. No there isn't any racial bias in Planned Parent Hood. There is an abortion bias in Planned Parent Hood.[/b]

well said

Kimpossible,

The same thing was done to Puerto Rican women in the 40's, 50's and 60's. This is a fact, not a myth.

It should be acknowledged.

I really don't think that Planned Parenthood has an agenda like that. They are a national organization, but because of different state laws, they are operated as franchises.

I think that they are in "black areas" because, unfortunately, we have a very large portion of black people living in poverty. Poor women NEED their services, like their cancer screenings and birth control pills.

I was incredibily poor for a few years, and I would not have been able to get a gyno check up with out Planned Parenthood, and I have cervical cancer in my family history. Planned Parenthood provides many medical services...not just abortion! They also help with adoption services.

Jillness,

I agree that PP has provided access to healthcare that poor women wouldn't receive had it not been for PP.

But can we not discuss Sanger? Why won't anyone acknowledge Puerto Rico?

PP should acknowledge this history and go out it's way to express it will never engage in such acts again.

It's an insult to people of color to turn such a blind eye to such a disgrace and no amount of good can erase that IMO.

"I think more attention needs to be put on education, and prevention of abortion rather than just abortion"

"No there isn't any racial bias in Planned Parent Hood. There is an abortion bias in Planned Parent Hood."

I am sorry, I have to STONGLY but respectfully disagree. They are about preventing unintended pregnancies. They do NOT have a "Pro-abortion" stance.

Planned Parenthood does not encourage women to get abortions. They encourage women to get pregnant only when they are ready to start a family. They encourage women to educate themselves about their options in regards to the MANY facets of reproductive health, and make decisions that will work the best for the individual woman based on facts.

I am not saying not to discuss Sanger. I know nothing about Sanger.

I do know about PP as they operate today, I know the policies that are listed on their website, and I know that they have defended the right to accurate reproductive information for years now. What happened in this investigation is a travesty, and should be investigated. But my experiences lead me to believe that it is not the organization as a whole that operates this way.

Lula, much of the history of birth control and reproductive rights is really messed up. It's because of that history that we don't sterilize criminals or stop women from having children even if they are drug addicts, homeless, etc. I don't see what PP appologizing for that history would do. This issue at hand is the accusations about things that have or have not taken place in this century. Using the example of Hitler from above, should Germany appologize for the Holocaust every time it wants to make a new law? Not a perfect comparison, but I think you reach a certain point where you have to just let it go. I think it's an insult to everyone to keep dredging up a past we can't correct instead of using that to fix the present.

I don't think we should forget about that past by any means, but to use it as justification for attacking PP now is ridiculous.

I would have to say that Miss Martin Luther King has a lot biased in her favor due to that history and the expressed stance of the founder. It's not a big leap to assume that an organization that once carried out such an agenda, wouldn't do the same today, especially since pretend as if it never happened.

What happened to Puerto Rican women is in the recent past, not something that happened centuries ago, which again goes to evidence that such an organization, which refuses to acknowledge or apologize for these tactics, might very well agree with them and continue to support them.

Lula I didn't say it was a myth. I think it should be acknowledged as well, not harped on and made into another current issue all over again. Slavery was a fact, we should acknowledge it as well, but not continue to use it as an excuse, same thing with this.

Stop living in the past. Take responsibility for your life. (that's a general "your" not directed at you personally).

"which refuses to acknowledge or apologize for these tactics, might very well agree with them and continue to support them."

I disagree with this. Just because people today don't apologize for past mistakes ie: this issue, slavery, stealing land from the Native American's etc. Does not mean that those people continue to support the ideas.

another point if you expect me to apologize for something I never did, who is being unreasonable? Should I blame you for the mistakes of others? Shoul I hold you accountable for the sins of the past? Or should we consider what we should do together in the future, or even today?