Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, said this in one of her books Woman and the New Race, ch. 6: “The Wickedness of Creating Large Families”:
[We should] apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.
First of all, she sounds like a robot with no emotions whatsoever. Second of all, most Planned Parenthood advocates have no idea that this is what they are supporting—a modern day Holocaust.
Regrettably, this casual attitude towards eugenic abortions is widespread in America as Sanger would have wished. I read this in a facebook comment the other day and it sums up this attitude: “We were not sure about having another child, also because of the moral dilemma. Will you have a test? What if the foetus has CF? What will you tell the sibling with CF? Little sister is 13 now, no CF, only tested her for CF after she was born. Others thought I was crazy for not testing before. I could not stand the idea of having to tell my CFer that her sibling was aborted because he/she had CF. Luckily everyone of us is free to act according to their own conscience.”
That last line is chilling. The mother who wrote this comment made it clear that, according to her conscience, she would have aborted her healthy 13 year old if the pre-natal testing came back positive for CF, because she did not want to have 2 children with it.
To find whatever the opposite of this eugenics is, look no further than the Pruit clan. In our family of 7 kids, there are 3 with CF and 1 with Down’s Syndrome. Margaret Sanger would despise our family, and unfortunately, many Americans would, too, as this article shows.
Prenatal Diagnosis and Reproductive Justice | Americans United for Life | AUL.org: “In California, Kaiser Permanente offers prenatal testing for couples who carry cystic fibrosis mutations. From 2006 to 2008, of the 87 pregnant women who underwent testing, 23 were found to be carrying a child with cystic fibrosis. Of the 17 children projected to have the severest type, only one was not aborted. Of the six diagnosed with less severe cases, four were aborted…In the United States, the percentage of Down’s Syndrome babies carried to term is in the single digits.”
If Margaret Sanger had it her way, all 4 of us on the right would be exterminated because of our “objectionable traits”. That is 57% of the Pruit progeny, gone. If you support abortion and a “woman’s right to choose”, this is what you are advocating.
A recent article that exemplifies this utter contempt for “tainted progeny” can be found here: Our impossible parenting choice – Salon.com … It makes me want to vomit.
A great response to the article above can be found here: Open Letter to Mom Who Killed Her Unborn Baby Because She Had Cystic Fibrosis | LifeNews.com
Being pro-life means respecting the sacred human dignity of all persons from their conception to their natural death. Whether their genetic code is suitable should not determine if they get to live or not.
Speaking for the entire Pruit family, I say:
In your face, Margaret!