Planned Parenthood’s Maggie Awards praises women who its organization believes emulates one of the most influential eugenicists in America, Margaret Sanger. Margaret Sanger saw Blacks and immigrants as weeds who should be sterilized. In a June 1932 edition of her Birth Control Review, an editorial, “The Negro Number,” said of Blacks:

“Shall they go in for quantity or quality in children? Shall they bring children into the world to enrich the undertakers, the physicians and furnish work for social workers and jailers, or shall they produce children who are going to be an asset to the group and American society?” Most [blacks], especially women, would choose quality … if they only knew how.”

During the Great Depression, bringing a Black child into a hostile world was considered “pathetic.” Sanger’s friend, Walter A. Terpenning, wrote in “God’s Chillun”:

The birth of a colored child, even to parents who can give it adequate support, is pathetic in view of the unchristian and undemocratic treatment likely to be accorded it at the hands of a predominantly white community, and the denial of choice in propagation to this unfortunate class is nothing less than barbarous.

Sanger asked Dr. Gamble of Procter and Gamble to use Southern ministers to teach blacks about the importance of preventing pregnancies under the guise of “family planning.” She wrote in 1939:

“The minister’s work is also important and he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

Black babies’ bodies are being suctioned apart by Planned Parenthood and sold to companies like Stem Express for “donations.” The only difference between Planned Parenthood and the Ku Klux Klan is that the “mastas” are white women earning millions from black women who don’t get paid for their child’s sold body parts.

Courtesy of the Vorthos Forum:

(Re-posted with permission “Planned Parenthood Praises Women Who Support Black Genocide” originally appeared HERE)

_______________________________________________________

Daily Beast’s Seven Errors (Maybe More) on Fiorina, Blankley and Islam

It’s obvious from a post yesterday by Dean Obeidallah, a Daily Beast blogger, that at least seven errors should be corrected to set the record straight about me, my recent column on (one of many reasons) why I won’t vote for Carly Fiorina, and Islam.

Error #1. No, I’m not in the GOP. I’m neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I’m among many women and Americans who believe neither party represents them.

Error #2. No, I don’t drink coffee. But, if Islamic civilization created coffee, wouldn’t that at least have increased, even ten years ago, the 57 Islamic-controlled countries’ combined contribution of only 5 percent to the world’s GDP?

Error #3. Yes, I’ve been to a hospital, but you’d have to take my parents’ word for it, or my non-forged, authentic birth certificate. And, if the Islamic civilization invented hospitals, who healed the sick and the lame during the first three centuries, or, later in convents, well before 622 AD?

Error #4. No, I’m not interested in running for Congress, but I do admire foster mothers like Michele Bachmann, and many others, who selflessly love and provide for children whose birth mothers could not.

Error #5. Mr. Obeidallah must be aware that news editors choose which hyperlinks to include when publishing columns. For whatever reason, what he cited excluded some hyperlinks viewable on other sites that published the same column.

One links to Carly Fiorina’s speech15 days after 911. Others link to columns and radio shows: Iran’s Heritage; America’s foreign policy towards Iran since 1953; the non-deal with Iran; treason here, here, and here; and Iranian women working (note paragraphs 13-17).

Error #6. If genuinely interested in discussing religious freedom, either in America, or elsewhere, I can easily identify every text in my Qur’an clearly revealing no such freedom exists.

The European Court on Human Rights has repeatedly ruled that Shari’a law is “incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy.”

Yet, Islamic organizations have spent millions to transform American courts to become Shari’a compliant. Even the majority of Muslims polled in America and worldwide prefer Shari’a law, not the Constitution.

Error #7. No one can rationally deny that Islam institutionalizes violence against women and girls.

To be “anti-Islam” is to be for protecting girls’ and woman’s rights — especially those living in Islamic-controlled countries.

To be “anti-Islam” is to advocate for powerless and voiceless women and children.

There is nothing bigoted, racist, “phobic,” or hateful about opposing and seeking to rescue women and children from the very ideology that rejects universally accepted human rights laws designed to protect them.

To defend Islam (and Shari’a law) is to endorse:

Female genital mutilation (genitals being cut and sewn shut),

Honor killings (fathers or brothers kill their daughters/sisters),

Child marriage (girls under age 12 are married to adult men),

Slavery (girls are sold for “protection” by their parents and/or kidnapped and sold at slave bazaars),

Shari’a Councils (Imams marry girls – even for one hour– to men, then divorce them only to marry them to another man and divorce them again),

Wife abuse and domestic violence (husbands are instructed to beat their wives as a form of punishment); husbands are permitted to rape their wives,

Non-legal status for women who are considered property (a wife’s legal rights equate to only half of her husband’s),

Discrimination, punishment, and death for everyone based on sexual and religious orientation, especially if they will not “convert” to Islam.

By defending Islam is Mr. Obeidallah suggesting that women and girls should be legally subjugated to these practices?

If Islamic civilization has contributed so greatly to the world, and to the fictional American “heritage” Carly Fiorina suggests, perhaps she and Mr. Obeidallah can explain why “refugees” and “asylum seekers” are increasingly entering America and Western Europe by the millions, every year— from Islamic-controlled countries.

As a woman, I would never vote for anyone—especially another woman—who believes America’s hope lies in the poorest people in the world of whom the majority is illiterate. I would argue the reverse. Their hope lies in the unalienable rights protected by the U.S. Constitution, and by those willing to defend these rights from threats both foreign and domestic.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.